www.byzcath.org Forums News & Events Church News Russian Catholic church

Dear Memo,

Well, I think a distinction certainly can be drawn.

The Orthodox outside Orthodox jurisdictions have ALWAYS behaved themselves as guests and visitors.

That RC's in RC countries seek out Orthodoxy is something that is done voluntarily, no one is holding a gun to their head.

The fact that they do so says more about the state of RC evangelism and catechetical outreach, than Orthodoxy, I would say.

The Spanish and Portuguese Orthodox parishes in the Iberian peninsula that petitioned the EP to be received into communion with him had their petition denied when Rome asked the EP to leave it alone. Proselytism? Hardly!

That Latin Catholic parishes have existed in Russia for centuries is a fact. But they were there to serve the needs of non-Russian nationals.

And let's not pretend that Western Catholic countries don't consider Roman Catholicism as their "state" religion and as the religion of their national culture - with all that that implies.

The situation has changed in Russia and the Russian elites - government, Church,national intelligentsia - are alarmed at the influx of Russians into Western churches, including RCism.

I think there is nothing more ridiculous than a "Russian Roman Catholic."

But if Russians don't know any better, the Latin Church should. It should understand current sensitivities - rooted as they are in national cultural considerations that are integrally bound to religious issues - and act accordingly.

"Preaching the Gospel" is fine, but Russia already has a 1,000 year old Christian tradition and culture.

Unless Rome wants to support that - the ultimate in true ecumenism - it should leave the Russians alone.

If not, the Russians will tell, and are telling, the RC's to go "home to Rome."

Alex

Let's not forget that 'Russian America' was in the Russian Orthodox Churches canonical territory and that the first Russian Orthodox presence on American soil was to serve the needs of the Russian-American Company ON ITS OWN SOVEREIGN TERRITORY. The Russian Orthodox presence in the States was a natural presence owing to the purchase of Alaska and the fate of California. It was hardly a Slavic invasion.

Also, the Russian Orthodox Church was multi-ethnic and inclusive. Things only started getting messy when the future Patriarch Meletios(Metaxakis) set up a Greek hierarchy. Then everyone else followed suit.

Spasi Khristos -
Mark, monk and sinner.

Yes, I have great respect for the Christian Socialist tradition that is allied with Labour in Britain and it did make me happy to see you mention it
Well, an Orthodox catechumen, so keep in your prayers, dear Alex and all!!!

Bless me a sinner, Father Mark!

Excellent points!

Yes, the Orthodoxy of North America is rooted in the original Orthodoxy of Alaska which was once an integral part of the Russian Empire. St Herman, St Innocent, St Juvenal, St Joasaph etc. weren't travelling to another country when they went to Alaska to missionize the Aleutians and others. They were travelling to the far reaches of the then Russian Empire, just as St Innocent Kulchitsky, St John Maximovitch, St Joasaph Horlenko, St Paul Koniuskevich et al. travelled to Siberia to do the same before them.

If anything, it was the RC missionaries who followed the Spaniards into California who were the "invaders" and who imposed RCism on the Orthodox Aleuts. St Peter the Aleut refused to be baptized again, and showed the Spaniards his Cross in testimony thereof.

The Orthodox Church of Kyivan Rus and the later Muscovite Church were truly multiethnic - and even multiritual, if you also count the Yedinovertsy .

A Russian missionary introduced the Assyrian Rite in the ROC. Russian theologians and missionaries also spoke with Tibetan Buddhists and studied them, noting the many similarities in outward practice etc.

The Ukrainian Siberian Missionaries, Sts. Theophilus Leschinsky and St Paul Koniuskevich actually brought to Kyiv the cult of the Siberian St Basil of Mangazea and has his icon disseminated in Kyiv where it can still be found in several churches and cathedrals.

The Saints of Rus' number Lithuanians, Hungarians, Germans, Siberians, Rumanians and even some Russians I believe . . .

Alex

Don't forget the English new-martyr Nicholas (I think) Johnson, who converted to Orthodoxy and was martyred in the turmoil of the revolution.

Spasi Khristos -
Mark monk and sinner

Which clearly illustrates the point that the Ruthenian Church in the U.S. must return to its glorious Slavic Christian roots. We share in the heritage of these Saints and should do our best to emulate their example by continuing to embrace Eastern custom and tradition.

Dmitri

Bless me a sinner, Father Mark!

I won't forget - in future.

May I ask you what are the rubrics for praying the Psalter over a reposed Priest? Or just praying for him?

May we all receive great inspiration from the vibrant tradition of the Old Believers!!

Kissing your right hand, I again implore your blessing,

Alex

Dear Dmitri,

Right on!

You have to watch it with your screen name, when you are close to Fr. Mark.

St Dmitri Rostovski did not have too many kind things to say about the Old Believers . . . nor they about him . . .

Alex

Thanks Alex,

I'll be careful. Actually, good St. Dmitri wasn't too kind to uniates either. Yet, I still feel he intercedes for me. In Heaven I guess there are not jursidictional lines.

Dmitri

Dear Dmitri,

Yes, however, St Dmitri was just as Latinized as the Uniates!

He was very much for the Orthodox Church nevertheless, as was St Yuri Konissky (locally glorified in Belarus), but very open to the West as well.

I think ultimately they didn't like the terms of the Unia agreement more than anything.

Even Prince Constantine Ostrozhky, who was very Westernized, opposed the Unia primarily because the Uniate bishops broke protocol and didn't inform the aristocracy with respect to their actions.

St Peter Mohyla of Kyiv tried to unite both the Greek and Old Believer traditions and, to this day, as his Catechism bears out, the Kyivan Orthodox way to make the Sign of the Cross is to invoke the Trinity three times and then to end with the Jesus Prayer - something no other Orthodox Church prescribes.

Alex

(I think there is nothing more ridiculous than a "Russian Roman Catholic.")alex,what is wrong with that?and what do you mean ridiculous?Grab a paper and see how far the seventh day adventists have come along in russia.Mexico has had more than 600 years of catholicism,do we need the OCA there?is that their canonical territory?If we want to play fair,Romans leave russia,and Orthodox leave latin america.

CORRECTION,Mexico has had 500 years of catholicim,not the 600 like I said before.typo

yeah I cant understand why catholics and orthodox are so focused in their canonical territory stuff while the protestants sects are proselitizing in our nations, and our leaders even have prayer meetings with them.

Well the problem is that Catholicism as brought by the missionaries (from Spain, but also from other catholic empires) looks quite different if compared with the Mexican Catholicism of nowadays. It's probable that a 18th Century mexican catholic would feel more confortable in the Orthodox parish.

Im still old-fashioned. I still think that the care of the "barbarian lands" and therefore the new world originally corresponded to the EP.
The problem is complex. The OCA defines itself in its statements as the Orthodox Autocephalous Church of Canada, the United States and Mexico (the problem is old as they received a tomos of autocephaly by the MP and not by the EP).
It was very sad that no representative of the Greek Diocese of Mexico, was there to receive Metropolitan Herman (while the Antiochian Bishop, Anthony, did concelebrate the Liturgy that day).

I don't think that's playing fair. I believe that the Roman Catholic Church has the right to be present in Russia and that the people of Russia have the right to approach to Catholicism if they want. It would be ridiculous to state that the Roman Church must close its doors to the Russians who want to be catholics by their own free will. At the same time I think it is good and healthy for the Mexican people to have the Orthodox Church as an option for so many unchurched for whatever reason (no matter iif they were baptized Roman or not).

Remie,the roman catholicism would look different today compared to that of the past centuries in mexico,especially with "vatican 2".I am sure that even the orthodox russian liturgies have undergone some form of reformed or shortened liturgies.nevertheless the Rc church in mexico still looks far 'better" than what we have here in the states.that I can atest to.Many of their churches were built by spanirds and with a lovely fasad,beautifully decorated and you can still feel the reverence inside the church.their churches still held onto some of the old ways.You can't compare them to our RC churches here in the states.
p.s they still have communion rails(wink wink)

Dear Alex,

I agree with you that those Orthodox who wish to join Communion with Rome should be accepted by the Catholic Church. However, we must face the reality that the Russian Orthodox Church is more fearful of expansion of the "uniates" than of the Romans. Although they are scared of both.

I do think that you should be more respectful of Archbishop Kondrusiewicz, aka Metropolitan Tadeusz. To call him "the RC Administrator" is simply shabby.

Whatever you think of him and his mission, the Holy Father has appointed him to walk a difficult tightrope. His authority seems to be only within the Latin Rite.

Patriarch Lubomyr, as sucessor to Andrew Sheptytsky, would seem to be the logical leader of the Eastern Catholics, but has his own balancing act to carry out in Ukraine. He has been on a pastoral visit to Kazachstan, but I suspect he would not be welcomed in Russia.

Maybe Lubomyr needs to act like a Patriarch, and go ahead and appoint a Bishop in Russia. Perhaps the "Eparchy of St. Peter in St. Petersburg?".

That ought to really rile the Muscovites. Eh? :p

John
Pilgrim and Odd Duck