The End of Hostility? (Russian Orthodox - Catholic)

The Moscow News ^ | 16.04.05 | Aleksandr Soldatov

[lizol]

I hope that the forthcoming new period in the life of the Roman Catholic Church will help renew the relations of mutual respect and brotherly Christian love between our churches," Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia Alexy II wrote in a letter of condolence to Rome several hours after John Paul II's death. It is difficult not to read into this condolence message a critical note in regard to the deceased: It turns out that he had hindered "mutual respect" and "brotherly love" between the two great churches.

Well, looks like some kind of invasion of "idijts" or what???. (sarcasm)

[lizol]

I hope that the forthcoming new period in the life of the Roman Catholic Church will help renew the relations of mutual respect and brotherly Christian love between our churches," Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia Alexy II wrote in a letter of condolence to Rome several hours after John Paul II's death. It is difficult not to read into this condolence message a critical note in regard to the deceased: It turns out that he had hindered "mutual respect" and "brotherly love" between the two great churches.

Well, looks like some kind of invasion of "idijts" or what???. (sarcasm)

[lizol]

Ping

[RobbyS]

Liberal, smiberal. The fact that the pope was a Pole was the problem. The western Ukraine was once part of Poland That is why Moscow could not accept the reversion of the western Ukraine to Catholicism as inevitable.

[lizol]

The fact that the pope was a Pole was the problem.

Oh, it definitely was, for some people.

RUSSIA, THE VATICAN AND THE POLISH FACTOR

[kellynla]

BTTT

[GSlob]

In a [fiction] book "Moscow 2042" by Vladimir Voinovich there was "Major General of religion branch Father Zvezdonius" [figurative translation of the name "Hammersicklius"]. The book is a fiction, the underlying reality is not.
Orthodox church in Russia has been brownnosing to the state since at least 14th century, when Muscovite prince invited the Metropolitan to move to Moscow (and the Metropolitan happily obliged). Thus it is to be considered as firstly national-statist, and only secondly religious institution.
From here one could see the link from civilizational inferiority complex (nationalist, secular) to the behavior of what is essentially a state church.

[Destro]

Funny attitude when the West ignores the fact that they not the Orthodox are the greatest violaters of state and church comingling.

In England the Church head is also the state head and the Pope was once (and still) a temporal ruler of a nation as well as a spiritual head of the Church and in German regions after the Reformation, cities were ruled by Church councils holding temporal and spiritual powers.

No Orthodox Bishop ever held out as prince of an estate. The Orthodox way of dealing with the the historic way the Church after Pentacost dealt with the State right up till Constantine.

The West was the greatest violator of Church and State relationship.

[lizol]

Sure it was.
It's just obvious for everyone, that Russian Orthodox Church has always been fully independent from the state. (sarcasm)

"Idijts", nothing but "idijts" everywhere around.

[Destro]

The Orthodox Church is in a symphonic relationship with the state - the traditional role of the true historic Church as seen since Constantine - it is the true Roman Christian model. In the West is where you saw Church and State become one and the same.

[AmericanArchConservative]

bump for later

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

Plain fact is, that the people who settled North America's eastern seaboard included many who could find no place in Europe which would tolerate their versions of Christianity. And when they got here, they didn't all see any reason to tolerate other versions than the one they made a difficult and hazardous journey here in order to be able to practice. Basically they thought, "If you want to belong to one of the established churches of one of the European states, why didn't you go there?"

Came the Revolution, and the Bill of Rights, and they didn't simply say in the First Amendment that there wouldn't be any established churches. They said rather, that Congress would keep its nose out of the business of the states as regards established churches in the several states. There were still established churches in various states well into the ninteenth century.

From an American POV - at least a protestant American POV - neither the RO church nor the RC church has historically been happy not being the establishment in any given state. In post-Civil War America, no choice has had that luxury - and churches have ironically prospered more here than where they are the establishment and, for that very reason, are not voluntarily respected.

[Destro]

you are correct in a way - All I argue is that before you call the Orthodox Church statist - look to Western Europe where in many cases the Church was the state - a condition never found or would be found in Orthodoxy. Yes, im the modern Western world post American Revolution we have now the condition of seperation of Church and State (Jefferson's words) so the Orthodox are examined under that condition - but before Jefferson it was the Orthodox tradition that was probably the best kind of Church and state relationship. While in the West you had Church and State in many cases become one and the same - theocracies where temporal and spiritual authprity were joined.

Today in Europe we the relics only of what is left of that relationship - The Anglican Church head is still King or Queen - not the Bishop and The Vatican is all that is left of the Papal States. The Churches that once ruled Protestant city-states in Germany and Switzerland as theocracies are of course now gone.

So it is a littke hypocritical or maybe an act of self denial or ignorance to attack the Orthodox as "statists" when the real historical "statists" were found in the West until the American/French-Napoleonic Revolutions.

[Destro]

Excuse my typoes...

[NYer]

The greatest regret Pope John Paul II had was to be denied by the Patriarch of the ROC, an opportunity to visit Russia.

God willing, the next pope will make that visit for him.

Catholic Ping
Please freepmail me if you want on/off this list

[american colleen]

A bit off topic but I noticed neither Putin or Bishop Alexi attended the funeral Mass of John Paul II. I wondered why?

[franksolich]

Now, wait a minute, wait a minute, wait a minute.

I have no dog in this fight, but I must disagree, respectfully, with you, sir.

It is my impression, from the long span of history that while western churches have usually been a "counterweight" to secular rule (Henry II and Thomas Becket, for example), the Orthodox Churches have had this tendency to be an instrument of the state, a tool of the government, an annex of the state.....rather than an opposing "counterweight" to temporal political rule.

[Destro]

It is my impression, from the long span of history that while western churches have usually been a "counterweight" to secular rule (Henry II and Thomas Becket, for example), the Orthodox Churches have had this tendency to be an instrument of the state, a tool of the government, an annex of the state.....rather than an opposing "counterweight" to temporal political rule.

Ain't it cool that I come along to burst bubbles and provide out of the box thinking?

What counterweight existed in England when the King was both head of State and Church? Why is that not ever brought up? What about the Pope being both a religous leader and a national leader - the Papal States at their height of power was not a small little nation. Both these conditions exist today, do they not? Also, we had the Protestant Churches ruling city-states during the Reformation, no? Also inside the Holy Roman Empire you had Catholic holdings whose bishops (if I remember) ruled as princes and so on as well as being men of the cloth. So it is in the West (until the American/French-Napoleonic Revolutions like I said) where we found examples of the Church BEING the state.

Orthodoxy has a reltionship where it does not challenge the authority of the state for power but tries to live with the state, within Christian values and limits of course.

This is the authentic and historic relationship that Christianity should have. Name me one Christian Father that advocated war of revolution against the Roman Empire to over throw it? In fact the Orthodox were stunned and disgusted when they saw Latin clergy serving as kinghts during the First Crusade. (The reason the Eastern Roman empire requested aid from the Pope was because he viewed him as a temporal ruler of the Papal states like himself not just a religous one). The conflicts you speak of were mostly between the wordly pretentions of the Pope over other kings.

The Orthodox live by the words of Christ: "So give to Caesar what is Caesars, and to God what is Gods."

[lainde]

bttt