Posted on 10/30/2005 7:33:05 PM PST by jb6
MOSCOW, October 28 (Itar-Tass) – The Moscow Patriarchate was astonished by a remark on the concepts of proselytism that a high-rank cleric in the Vatican made earlier this week, said a Patriarchate spokesman.
In an exclusive interview with Itar-Tass Friday Priest Igor Vyzhanov, secretary for Inter-Christian Communications at the Patriarchate’s Department for External Church Relations, said the basic interpretation of proselytism was universal and commonly accepted.
“That notion doesn’t have different readings and means a practice where activists of one or another denomination of Christianity recruit new followers among the believers belonging to other denominations of the Christian faith,” the Revered Vyzhanov said.
“As we meet with Roman Catholic clerics at various conferences, we don’t have any misunderstandings as to what we mean by saying ‘proselytism’,” he said.
He made the comment in connection with a remark by Cardinal Walter Kasper, head of the Vatican’s department for Christian unity, that the Vatican and the Moscow Patriarchate differed in their definition of what proselytizing is.
“It’s clear that no traditional Church wants to proselytize, but they have a concept that is different and a bit larger,” Cardinal Kasper said October 24 as he addressed correspondents at the Italian Foreign Press association.
He indicated, however, the Vatican was working “to overcome these impediments” in relations with the Russian Church.
“When we speak about Roman Catholic proselytism, we mean in the first place the activity of missionaries who seek to win over to their side the traditional Orthodox believers,” the Rev Vyzhanov said.
He criticized a viewpoint existing in some Christian quarters that seven decades of Soviet government-sponsored atheism had turned Russia into a wasteland in terms denominational identity of the people. The vast majority of Christians in Russia continue associating themselves with Russian Orthodoxy even in spite of decades of obtrusive propaganda against the Church, he said.
“It’s true that the degree of religious devotion here isn’t probably as great as it could be, but the Russians do feel strong bonds with Orthodoxy,” the Rev Vyzhanov said.
“The attempts ‘to Christianize’ Russia, a country where an authentic Christian tradition was established a millennium ago, are humiliating for us,” he indicated.
Roman Catholics themselves have grievances against attempts on the part of Protestants or Penticostal Christians to recruit new believers in the traditional Catholic communities in Latin America, especially in Brazil, the Rev Vyzhanov indicated.
“I think it would be much more worthwhile for the Roman Catholic community to focus missionary activities on their own countries,” he said, adding that the rates of religious devotion in many parts of the Catholic world were also dwindling.
Replying to a Tass query about the activity of four dioceses that the Vatican had established on Russian territory, the Rev Vyzhanov said the dioceses were functioning and the Holy See disregarded the strong opposition to their emergence in this country, voiced three years ago by Moscow Patriarchate and a big number of public organizations and officials.
“The Russian Church believed that the Vatican’s move to raise the status of former Apostolic Administratures and to turn them into dioceses was quite unacceptable, especially considering the fact that the number of followers of Roman Catholicism on the territory of nowadays Russia isn’t big at all,” the Rev Vyzhanov said.
The creation of dioceses and the establishing of a metropolitan see in Moscow meant, in fact, that the Vatican had set up a national Catholic church in Russia against all objections, he said.
On the whole, it would be highly desirable for the Vatican to take a more cautious approach to its activity in Russia and to give more attention to the concerns brought on by the Russian Church, he said.
Roman Catholics themselves have grievances against attempts on the part of Protestants or Penticostal Christians to recruit new believers in the traditional Catholic communities in Latin America, especially in Brazil, the Rev Vyzhanov indicated.
“I think it would be much more worthwhile for the Roman Catholic community to focus missionary activities on their own countries,” he said, adding that the rates of religious devotion in many parts of the Catholic world were also dwindling.
How about we get over this whole notion that they're are protestant, catholic, or orthodox countries.
bah, they're = there are
No problem, there are 1 billion plus Islamics in needing of some good conversion work. Not to mention, every Islamic converted to Christ is one less potential jihadist.
ping
Stalin placed his puppet bishops all over the churches in Russia, after he had the real ones murdered or ousted. The official Russian "Orthodox" church became nothing more than an arm of the communist dictatorship, and in fact is still the official 'state' church of Russia, to the exclusion or the oppression of all other Christian churches. It's not just the Catholic Church that Russia doesn't want in its midst, they also try to repel the Protestant evangelicals, any denomination not authorized by the 'state'.
From what I've read and heard, the Russian 'orthodox' church is similar to the official, state sanctioned Roman Catholic Church in communist China. As everyone knows, it's just an arm of the government, the real Catholic Church in China is underground.
ROC wasn't an offcial Church. The official ideology of USSR was Communism which is atheistic.
Open Christians suffered from the Communist authirities, they were never promoted, were laughed at.
This is hardly an official position.
the exclusion or the oppression of all other Christian churches.It's not just the Catholic Church that Russia doesn't want in its midst, they also try to repel the Protestant evangelicals, any denomination not authorized by the 'state'.
Most of those numerous churches are scoundrels of special type who seek to misappropriate the belongings of their newly recruited naive followers.
I remember the time when streets were full with hanging around religious fanatics who harassed passers-by with questions if they knew who Christ was or if they had read the Bible.
It was difficult to shake them off, they didn'y usually understand any polite ways.
But the necessary measures were taken.
How did the Bolsehviks treat the Russian Church any differently than the way the Romanovs treated the Church? Bishops were essentially approved by the Czars and anyone who spoke out about the problems of Russia disappeared. One of the Czars, Peter III I believe, was actually from Germany and forced the clergy to wear Lutheran vestments.
The only problem is certain work hazard not covered by any insurance. (such as being stoned to death).
Spain is an example. Where there is no longer an official state church, which is/was the norm in all Catholic nations, its because the majority of the population is no longer Christian. The Catholics are loosing all their own nations but feel they must piss the Orthodox off at every opportunity. Why not tend to your own weed infested, atheist, homosexual garden?
You mean John. Paul was beheaded, since he was a Roman citizen.
Oh, but the benefits are great!
The Emperor of Russia (since Peter I) was the head of Russian Orthodox Church like British king is the head of Anglican Church.
Romanovs were Christians themselves. Orthodoxy was the official religion of Russia.
They didn't execute, jail clergy, didn't seize churches and other buildings, church plates.
They didn't have atheistic propaganda.
So, there was a huge difference!
I'm sure some of the Romanovs or their predecessors may have been strong believers, but most were about as devoted to Christian principals as the Bourbons of France. Like the Bourbons, they used the Church to justify their power and then used their power to live lives of luxury while their people struggled in squalor. When the deluge came to France as Louis XV had predicted ("Apre moi le deluge"), the Church was not spared because it was seen by the masses not as an institution of Truth and Salvation, but as a tool of oppression. The same thing happened in Russia.
Sure, Stalin oppressed the Russian Church. But at least he didn't use it to justify his murderous regime (as Ivan IV did), nor did he use it as a tool of oppression.
Can you say what assures you in that?
Like the Bourbons, they used the Church to justify their power and then used their power to live lives of luxury while their people struggled in squalor.
Some consider the life of a sovereign to be a difficult and demanding job. I think that opinion is well-grounded.
When the deluge came to France as Louis XV had predicted ("Apre moi le deluge"), the Church was not spared because it was seen by the masses not as an institution of Truth and Salvation, but as a tool of oppression. The same thing happened in Russia.
The masses didn't overwhelmingly deny church, neither in Russia, nor in France. The Cult of Reason evaporated very quickly in France and the people turned to traditional Catholicism.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.