www.byzcath.org Forums News & Events Church News VATICAN TO CREATE NEW DIOCESES IN RUSSIA

[QUOTE]Originally posted by DTBrown:
[QB]

Your comparison of Florence: the Ecumenical Patriarch and the Bishops did attend and most signed (even if many later recanted).

Brest-Litovsk: these were the actual Bishops (not to deny some political influence in their appointment).

Again, no comparison. Even Bishop KALLISTOS recognizes the problem. Of course, he's just an "Ecumenist."

No comparison? Unless one is Orthodox.

Bishop Kallistos Ware on Brest-Litovsk:

"The continuing Orthodox in Polish Ukraine suffered severe repression from the Roman Catholic authorities, and there is no doubt that the Union of Brest has embittered relations between Orthodoxy and Rome from 1596 until the present day."--The Orthodox Church by Bishop Kallistos.

Again, as in the case of the aftermath of Florence, it was the laity and lower clergy who preserved Orthodoxy, even (in this case) under Polish Catholic persecution.


FG

I'll break my rule about ignoring our anonymous friend in Tampa.

I don't dispute persecution from an era where both sides equated membership in the State Church with citizenship. This happened on both sides.

Selective quoting of Bishop KALLISTOS will not work. His conclusion about the MP and the so-called "Sobor" of 1944 are just as candid as our friend Serge's. I've mentioned this elsewhere but it bears repeating here. A good commentary on some of these historical issues can be found in the lecture given by Fr Robert Taft:

http://www.utoronto.ca/stmikes/theology/taft-kelly2000.htm

Dave Ignatius DTBrown@aol.com

OK, ignoring the other stuff, because I'm not comfortable enough with the history to say anything productive, what's the comment above about? How was he "slandering" the Mother of God, "Our Lady of Holy Russia"? In the same way, wouldn't your comments regarding the Roman Church be slandering the Mother of God, "Salus Populi Romani"?

Errr... WRONG! Hitler was a believer in Germanic paganism... watch the video "Hitler and the Occult" to get that one straight--look at all the runic figures, swastikas, ancient Tetonic imagery, etc. that he used... recent evidence shows how Hitler planned on destroying the Catholic Church, anyway.

Since Hitlerism came from Catholicism, can we assume that communism is the product of Orthodoxy? Of course not! FG, no one really takes you seriously because your views are off the wall. Read some history books.

Get over your hatred of Catholicism. It is people like you that hold me back from joining the Orthodox Church (which I have several times contemplated, but rejected ultimately becuase of people like you).

Remember, Stalin studied to be an Orthodox priest at one time!

Remember, Alexy II was a KGB agent!

Remember???

anastasios

I'm surprised to find that folks are knocked over to discover 'evil' in one or another community, even those that are Christian communities.

Evil is as evil does. We must expect to find this phenomenon throughout all of humanity.

But, on the other hand, we must find the good that exists also.

For this reason, I get upset when folks do the 'jurisdictional' stuff. It seems to indicate that some folks have 'justification' while others are condemned to the shadows. As Free Greek said to me one time, when he gave me the ultimate compliment of saying that Greeks rely upon family as the touchstone of what is important, I would hope that we could all just look at the good that people do, forgive their failings (and admministrative doo-doo), and move forward. Greeks have learned an incredibly important lesson: it is the 'koinotis' (community) that is critical to survival on this earth. Greeks just KNOW that it is important to hang together in the Gospel and in the understanding that no matter one's politics (political, ecclesiastical or whatever) that by hanging together, we ensure our communal survival. After centuries of T-people hegemony and persecution, we've learned the lesson.

Any Greek (or Ukrainian for that matter -- they too KNOW what is to be done) would go and purchase an AK-47 to defend our people. And willingly go whereever it is necessary to go. Although there are some who would hope that we could be pacifist at all times, any Greek worth his salt will do whaever is necessary to save the 'koinotis'. And questions of 'jurisdiction'? Spare me. It's the blood.

The 'faith' is important; but so too is the sense of the community -- as the Jews say: "qahal Adonai", the 'community of the saved'.

Blessings!

Anastasios,

The Orthodox are not in the business of recruiting you. If I can help you remain and grow where you are, more power to me.

Marx wasn't Orthodox, and he is the father of "modern" Communism; not even the megalomaniacal Stalin could legitimately claim to be the ideological "brain child" of Communism.

However, the same cannot be said for Hitlerism: Hitler was the inventor of the psychosis of Nazism.

You know you have made your case--based on facts--when others are forced to attack the messenger and not the message.

The Orthodox faithful have both the right and duty to be suspicious of the intentions of Rome. Our history is replete with multiple examples of the duplicity of Rome vis a vis her "relationships" with the Orthodox Churches of the East.

Certainly, Catholics are upset when confronted with the facts, just as I am when I must face the unpleasant facts about my own Orthodox faith.

But we--the laos of Orthodoxy--are the guardians of the faith and we are obligated to preserve it at all costs.

Can we trust Rome? That is the question.


Bishop Kallistos is a Greek Orthodox hierarch. He has nothing but contempt for the Treaty of Brest and the Council of Florence as well as the false union council of 1942? or 1944?

Bottom line: Considering the history of Roman Catholicism and Orthodoxy, can the Orthodox truly trust Rome?

It makes no difference to me whether you take me seriously or not. What does make a difference to me is that my priests (who are our teachers and share the same suspicions of Rome), and the parishioners of the parishes I am associated with do, because we (unlike you) share the same history. You can't expect us to interpret history through the prism of American Byzantine Catholicism.

Parading a bishop or two--like Kallistos Ware--and putting them on display as "our kind of a guy" types, is hilarious from our point of view.


This whole rhetorical 'rastlin' match isn't about hate; its about trust.

Can we trust Rome?

Within our community, we are very skeptical. If you feel the emotional need to morph that into an issue of hate, so be it.

By God, if this hysteria doesn't make an Old Calendarist out of me, nothing will!

FG

[ 02-10-2002: Message edited by: Free Greek ]

Although it may seem a minor point, I'd like to point out that up until Paul VI, the Vatican (and its massive bureaucracy) was for all intents and purposes: Italian. And the Vatican policies went hand in glove with Italian agendas.

Now, under John Paul II (NOT an Italian), the bureaucratic structures are more internationalized. There are Cardinals from all over the world, and the perspective is not just "what is good for the Italian good-old-boys network".

As a result, there are substantial changes in the way that Vatican "diplomacy" (if you will) is being conducted. We are now dealing with "Europe Unie" and the Euro since the Europeans realize that they have to work together to survive economically. All of this is changing the face of how we deal with each other in society, including Church society.

Our families in Greece have clamored to be recognized as part of the united Europe and not as some Balkan appendage. Where the young folks can stay and be assured of opportunities, without having to move to France, Germany or the US and Canada.

The Church too, as an integral part of the lives of the Greek nation, has got to recognize that there are new relationships in the world and that the old antipathies (especially against the Italians) have got to take a back seat to the new realities. The 'history' is history; it is past. If we persist in living there, then we miss out on all the God-given opportunities that are in the 'here and now'. Forgive the Venetians who blew up the Akropolis; they're dead and God has dealt with them. Recognize "Oxhi Day" and be proud of what the nation was then; but move on. Same for the cursed Pashas.

There are some Westerns who "come East" for spiritual reasons. This is fine; they should be welcomed and educated and supported. And they should also realize that the faith community they have joined is intimately and inextricably linked to an ethnos. And that ethnos has more to do than just be a "Church". It has to feed its people; ensure the public health; make the streets safe; secure the environment and ensure that there is clean water and air; etc.

I think it best if we remember that life is not just "Church"; it is everything that God's peoples need to do to ensure the collective well-being of everyone. Athens is drowning in sulphur-dioxide air pollution and the monuments are being eaten away every day; Ukraine has a massive needle-drug problem (heroin), and people are getting infected with HIV and Hepatitis C in large numbers; Russia has a serious alcohol and drug epidemic, and people are being starved because criminal elements are setting up their own "corporations" to control the black markets in food and clothing. And we're worrying about dioceses? And "my territory" - "your territory"? I'm sure that the Lord finds THAT very amusing.

As Christians, we've got to get our noses out of the history books, recognize what is going on in the world today, and ACT for the benefit of all God's people. If we don't, then our churches will just be amusing little museums populated by anachronistic folks living in their own imaginary historical world. That's not Christianity.

Blessings!

Dear Friends,

I understand Free Greek's and Reader Sergius' concerns here and I agree with them.

By and large, I don't think Rome has handled itself well in Eastern Europe.

On the one hand, there is the way Rome has treated Eastern Catholics there, sometimes pretending to ignore they even exist for the sake of the "greater good" of ecumenical relations with the Orthodox.

On the other, Rome feels it is all right to create new diocese in Russia, assuming, quite wrongly, that the Russian Orthodox will feel less threatened by RC dioceses than Byzantine ones.

One could argue, of course, the point of general religious rights in Russia and elsewhere.

But it is Rome that has made this a point with Eastern Catholics in the way it has.

Rome's move is offensive to both the Orthodox and Eastern Catholics, from an historical perspective anyway.

After all we've been through for the sake of ecumenism, this just doesn't make any sense.

The points made regarding Nazism and Catholicism are really unnecessary and untrue, in fact.

One of the greatest enemies of Nazism and benefactor of the Jewish People was Pope Pius XII.

This has been well written up in "The Last Three Popes and the Jews" by Pinchas Lapide, an American scholar and eye-witness to this during the war. He died as a great friend of the Catholic Church and an Orthodox Rabbi.

Another witness to the work of the Catholic Church on behalf of the Jewish People is the former Chief Rabbi of Rome, Israel Zolli, who became a Catholic after the war and a Franciscan Tertiary.

Alex

[ 02-11-2002: Message edited by: Orthodox Catholic ]

OFFICIAL: VATICAN CREATES RUSSIAN DIOCESES

VATICAN, Feb 11, 02 (CWNews.com) -- The Vatican has formally announced the creation of an archdiocese and three dioceses in Russia, replacing the four apostolic administrations there. The move to establish a more permanent Catholic structure in Russia is certain to create new tensions between the Holy See and the Russian Orthodox patriarchate of Moscow.

Vatican spokesman Joaquin Navarro-Valls said that the creation of the Russian dioceses was a "normal administrative act," which was motivated by "pastoral concerns identical to those that prompt the Russian Orthodox to create dioceses outside their own traditional territory."

The Vatican announcement, however, was not a "normal" one from the perspective of publicity. While the Holy See establishes new dioceses on a regular basis, with little fanfare, this announcement came with a thorough public explanation. The Vatican press office provided reporters with a profile and history of the Catholic Church in Russia, an answer to Orthodox complaints that Catholics have engaged in "proselytism" there, and an appeal for unity among Christians.

The new hierarchical structure for Russia will have an archdiocese in Moscow as the metropolitan see, with the three dioceses in Saratov (in southern European Russia), Novosibirsk (in western Siberia), and Irkutsk (in eastern Siberia). The new dioceses-- which correspond to the four apostolic administrations previously in place-- will be led by their current heads: Archbishop Tadeusz Kondrusiewicz in Moscow, and Bishops Clement Pickel in Saratov, Joseph Werth in Novosibirsk, and Jerzy Mazur in Irkutsk.

One important nuance in the Vatican announcement involved the naming of the new entities. The Moscow see will be named not the Archdiocese of Moscow, but the Archdiocese of the Mother of God at Moscow. The other dioceses are similarly named: the Diocese of St. Clement at Saratov, of the Transfiguration at Novosibirsk, and of St. Joseph at Irkutsk. Thus the Vatican has avoided a direct conflict with the Russian Orthodox Church regarding who is the "Archbishop of Moscow," and perhaps lowered one potential obstacle to an eventual reunion of the two ecclesial bodies.

Clearly anticipating a loud negative reaction from the Moscow patriarchate, the Vatican accompanied today's announcement by a call for unity among Christians, and a reminder that the Holy See hopes that the new, more permanent structure of the Russian Catholic Church might even help to advance ecumenical dialogue. Navarro-Valls also reminded reporters that in the past decade Catholic groups such as Aid to the Church in Need have provided more than $17 million in direct aid to the Russian Orthodox Church.

The Vatican pointed out that the Catholic population of Russia grew substantially during the 20th century, in large part because of the mass deportations ordered by the Soviet regime. Also, Catholic priests and laymen have had some success in attracting new believers from among the Russian people who have not been active in any church. Thus the growth of the Catholic Church in Russia has not come at the expense of neighboring Orthodox parishes, the Vatican insists.

In his public announcement, Navarro-Valls said that the political leaders of the Russian Federation "have no problems" with the Vatican's decision. Pointing out that the Russian Federation should benefit from the presence of a Catholic populace which is "numerically modest but religiously motivated," the Vatican announcement stressed that the Catholics now living in Russia have "absolutely no intention" of changing the cultural identity of Russia as a traditionally Orthodox nation.

That's like the fox "promising" not to violate the "sanctity" of the hen house.

Thanks for the post! (Tongue 'n cheek, right?)

I needed a good laugh.

That is hilarious.

FG

The ROC is not a hen, its a lapdog to Stalin.

But it's perfectly OK to establish a (Russian) Orthodox Church in America, right?

(The Greeks would have had the 'primacy' in North America by virtue of their numbers, the number of churches and the resources available; but, of course, whoever "got here" first gets to sit on the big chair. But wait!! The Romans were here first. "Oh. Well, right now, we're not considering them a Church."

I find it contradictory that Moscow has self-nomintated itself as the "Third Rome" because it was the largest and strongest of the Orthodox nations. But now, the largest and strongest is bemoaning its fortunes if a few Roman Catholics are allowed to say Mass "in holy mother Russia".

Funny how the definitions slip and slide depending on what people want.

(What I would love to do is hit the National Archives and scour the ships' passenger lists and find some poor Ukrainian priest from Austria-Hungary who landed on North American shores before everyone else. And then watch the fur fly!!!)

Blessings!

"But it's perfectly OK to establish a (Russian) Orthodox Church in America, right?"

Yup. America is a melting pot nation, and, as such is not acknowlegded by Orthodoxy as being part of the "Patriarchate of the West" -- that term referred to the "western Oikumene" of the imperial period -- not the "contemporary western world".

"(The Greeks would have had the 'primacy' in North America by virtue of their numbers, the number of churches and the resources available;"

Here we go with the Greek-Russian thing again. Why is it that Constantinopolitan Greeks always get so defensive about the fact that their numerous Greek parishes and Greek priests in pre-1917 America received their antimensia from the Russian Bishop? As Fr. Schmemann, pointed out, there is a sentiment among many Greeks that they always, per se, *must* have the primacy everywhere. Well, before the Russian Revolution, they surely didn't *act* that way here in the USA. And, besides, today it's openly acknowledged that the Greeks have the precious "primacy" among the SCOBA churches here .. the Greeks are always given pride of place and the seat at the head of the table, so I don't know what the issue is, to be honest.

"but, of course, whoever "got here" first gets to sit on the big chair."

The other way of looking at it ("when in doubt, Constantinople has jurisdiction") -- which is, in effect, what we have seen by way of reaction since 1917 -- is not based on the presence of Greeks but is rather based on the idea that Constantinople has jurisdiction over the "lands of the barbarians" -- I guess that America in the early 1920s was canonically a "barbarian land".

"But wait!! The Romans were here first. "Oh. Well, right now, we're not considering them a Church."

Well, you understand the ecclesiology involved.

Brendan

Dear Brother Kurt,

Your statement on the ROC and Stalin was unfortunate.

I, for one, wish you'd withdraw it.

I apologise to the Orthodox here and distance myself from that ill-advised statement.

Alex

Dear Brendan,

Perhaps it's just me.

But why is it that you sometimes ignore the cultural factor in religious relations (Kyiv/Moscow) and at others, affirm it like you're shouting from the rooftops (Greek-Russian thing).

Again, perhaps it's just me . . .

Alex