POPE'S DEATH AND CATHOLICISM'S PROSPECTS IN RUSSIA

MOSCOW, April 4. (RIA Novosti political commentator Pyotr Romanov) - It seems the only place the pope wanted but could not visit was Moscow. His patience was boundless, but he did not live long enough to see changes in the Russian Orthodox Church.

He, however, was open to the whole world, including Russians. It turned out that establishing contacts with the secular authorities of the new Russia was much easier than with the hierarchs of the Russian Church. The pontiff received Gorbachev, Yeltsin and Putin, the latter of whom has sent the Vatican an unusual letter of condolences. More than a matter of protocol, it was warm and sincere, evidently expressing the President's respect for John Paul II.

Polish-born Karol Wojtyla was the first pope since the Apostles to enter a synagogue. He called Jews the elder brothers of Christians and prayed at the Wailing Wall. As the head of the Catholic Church, he visited a mosque and almost every country, including Orthodox ones, but was not allowed to pray in only one place, Moscow. The pope respected the Christian canons and waited for the Russian Church to change its mind. He has been waiting until his death.

It is not for me to reach a conclusion on the reasons behind the inflexibility of the Church leaders, but their formal explanations about Catholics seizing Orthodox houses of worship are not particularly convincing. In fact, the Vatican could make similar claims in many cases, as in the 20th century and even earlier many temples changed their terrestrial owners several times, all the while serving the same celestial Father. A papal visit to Moscow could have resolved half the contradictions.

I am almost certain that the first Slavic pope was not allowed to the Russian Church's congregation for the same reason that earlier had driven the Communist Party to cover up Western voices: the fear of comparison.

The point is that the Catholic Church was lucky: a man of the greatest moral authority andcharisma occupied its throne, whose personal influence was far greater than that of the Church itself. No matter how much the sick Russian Orthodox Church might have wanted, it could not find his equal, as it had still not made a full recovery after the decades of persecution under the Soviet authorities. Orthodox hierarchs could not bear the thought of the pope in a crowded Moscow square or, even worse, in the Christ the Savior Cathedral. After all, they are only human.

It also explains the unhealthy, not so much religious, as human, response to any movement of the Catholic Church in Russia, even though this competition is not about oil or aluminum, but human souls, which in a democratic country are expected to choose freely. The words "shepherd" and "flock" are just images, because people are obviously not sheep. People that have a right to choose, i.e., to enter the church they want.

I believe that Russia has missed a historic opportunity for rapprochement with the Catholics and, consequently, with much of Western culture. The last man of power in Russia who seriously preached ecumenism and rapprochement with the Catholics was Emperor Paul I of Russia. The last pontiff who perceived Russia, its contradictions and spiritual trials so shrewdly was John Paul II. It was not coincidence that he prayed before a Russian icon as well others.

There are few chances that an equal to the late pontiff will succeed him. After all, when he was a student, some jokers put a sign "beginner saint" - and it seems justly - on his door.

An ordinary archbishop will most probably succeed this rock of a person, who was not afraid to voice words of apology for the Catholic Church's previous sins. A person educated and worthy, but without the traits Karol Wojtyla had. There are people who cannot be replaced.

Certainly, the new pontiff will not be a Slav, and the relations between Moscow and the Roman throne will enter the usual bureaucratic dimension. Delegations will visit each other, agree on something, sign something and mark time.

In other words, a person of the 21st century, the late John Paul II, will be replaced by a person of the 20th century, who will hardly bring about any breakthrough in the future.

As a result, everyone will lose: the Vatican, whose authority will decline inevitably and quickly, Catholicism on the whole, Catholics in Russia and, naturally, the Russian Orthodox Church, which has lost a huge incentive for self-improvement. This is regrettable, as even many Orthodox priests admit that complete recovery is still a distant possibility.

Once John Paul II was asked whether he ever cried, and he said, "Never outside."

Today, a significant part of humanity, regardless of religion, is crying both inside and outside. Everyone in his or her own manner. Together and on their own. Karol Wojtyla deserved this.

There is an interesting Web Site on Orthodoxy in America--the Site of Orthodox Church in America . There you can have a number of questions about Orthodoxy answered. I believe OCA became the first Non-Ethnic Orthodox Church in America back in 1970's. It has roots with Russian Settlers in Alaska in late 18th Century as well as a number of other previously Ethnic Churches that united to have multi-Ethnic Orthodox Church. OCA is not under Moscow Patriarchate and their high-ranking delegation will be at the Pope's Funeral.

FYI, Current Moscow Patriarchate is largely the Extension of Kremlin. Contrary to popular opinion, Religion was not completely banned in USSR. Russian Orthodox Church was allowed to function if Soviet Authorities could fully control its business, like approving priests, etc. Russian Orthodox Church under Soviet Regime became actually a Religious Extension of Communist Party--quite a strange, but not unusual animal in Communist Societies. There is also Russian Orthodox Church Abroad that broke away from Moscow Patriarchate in 1920's after Moscow Top Clerics proclaimed their loyalty to the Bolshevik Regime.

Just a brief answer for now, because I have to go.

Differences in our theology have been discussed at great length and in greater detail than you can imagine and by people much better versed in on the issue. If they could find a common language they would have.

I will refer you to www.orthodoxinfo.com as a good searchable source.

The Orthodox hold Theotokos, Ever-Blessed Virgin, Mother of God, in the highest among all saints. Orthodoxy mariology is parallel if not greater than Roman Catholic. We teach that she died and was taken to heaven body and soul. We certainly hold her to be Immaculate, but not the way you believe from Apocryphal sources.

The issues are clearly stated. You did not invent them and neither did I. We don't teach the same faith, which is why Orthodox can not participate in your Mass although your priests and our priests draw the same authority from Apostolic succession and are valid clergy, and although (superficially at least) our Mysteries (Sacraments) are the same in name and number.

Thanks for that great link,

www.orthodoxinfo.com

I have downloaded a large document there about a man's conversion from Anglican recently. It looks very interesting. I'll read it when I have time, later.

These are quite exciting times to live in. With the things happening right now there are a lot of changes coming, so I hope Christians can find a safe refuge to weather the storm.

You blithering idiot, Kievan princes were ALLIED with the Mongols.

Why thank you for the grown up respoonse: now begins your lessson: read and learn. The only Russ city that was not burned or conquered by the Mongols was Novograd. Kiev was burned to the ground, every last wall was destroyed, all men were butchered and the women and younger children sold off as slaves in Peking. This, because the prince of Kiev stood and fought. Novograd was spared (as it was the original target before Kiev) because the swamps unexpectedly melted and the Mongol horde turned southwest. Novograd then asked for help from her Christian western neighbors. For that she got a Lithuanian invasion which Alexander Nevsky defeated on the Neva River (thus his name) and then another Teutonic Invasion which he defeated on the Battle of the Lake (on the frozen lakes). After this we volunteered to be a vassal of the Khan, who by then was demanding only tribute in exchange for defense against the western "christian" brothers.

Now, feel free to feel like a no nothing idjit.

Actually the First Amongst Equals position has moved a long time ago to the Ecomunical Patriarch, when the capitol moved to Constantinople.

You lie again. The First amongst Equals position NEVER moved to the Russian Patriarch.

Cronos, usually you're rational but not now. Where pray tell did I say anything about Russia in that statement?

The only Russ city that was not burned or conquered by the Mongols was Novograd. Kiev was burned to the ground, every last wall was destroyed, all men were butchered and the women and younger children sold off as slaves in Peking.

And yet Russian princes allied themselves with the Mongols anyway. But I bet you have an explanation for that.

Kiev was burned to the ground, every last wall was destroyed, all men were butchered and the women and younger children sold off as slaves in Peking.

In 1241 the Mongols also sacked Poland, invaded Silesia and Hungary. But despite this the Russians prefered to ally themselves with the Mongols anyway. I bet you have a superb explanation for that.

After this we volunteered to be a vassal of the Khan,

Nevsky began collaborating with the Mongols immediately when they invaded Russia from the East. His father Yaroslav was also a collaborator and was murdered for it in 1246. Do you have an explanation for that? I bet you do. I'm sure it's a silly one, though.

who by then was demanding only tribute in exchange for defense against the western "christian" brothers.

Well, thanks for conceding the truth, that Kievan princes were allied with the Mongols. Nevsky was appointed as Grand Prince of Kyiv by the Khan in 1246. Nevsky proceeded to crush any trace of rebellion against the Mongols. In fact, when Nevsky learned that his own brother was conspiring against the Mongols, he reported him to the Khan and had him deposed. But I bet you have some kind of ridiculous explanation for that too.

FYI, Current Moscow Patriarchate is largely the Extension of Kremlin

Let's assume the best. It crosses my mind that the opposition to the Pope's visit might have extraneous to the faith reasons, but we cannot throw the accusation lightly. There is plenty of expression of opposition on this thread coming from non-Russian sources.

The communist party had its fingers in all the churches everywhere because the church was intriniscally the enemy. How could the Orthodox Church avoid being observed and infiltrated? And why is it held against Her as if she did it willingly? Christianity teaches that authority comes from God and that we are to submit to secular authority. It says nothing about "just" authority on earth because none of us is righteous; we are all sinners. no regime can conquer the Spirit. God does not need us to protect Him. The Church is the Church no matter what the politicial environment is -- it is there for spiritual guidance, not politicial manifestations.

Speaking of communist sympathizers -- President Roosevelt's own Vice President Henry Agard Wallace ran on the presidential ticket in 1948 of the pro-Stalinist Progressive Party, chock-full with communist workers and endorsed by the Communist Party USA. Just think, if Roosevelt had died while Wallace was still the No. 2 man , we would have had a President that was endorsed by the communists!

As Saint Paul reminds us: no one is righteous! Not one!

And why is it held against Her as if she did it willingly?

Oh, I doubt the Orthodox Church in Russia did so willingly. I guess the Church had no church, but tried to survive as best she could. I doubt that the entire church was infiltrated -- remember that the OC was heavily persecuted under the communist regime.

Kosta, do you have any details on the underground Russian church during communist times?

FDR was a Democrat Party functionary. If he gave in to Communism, it is to be expected of a worldly, power-hungry politician.

But the Russian Orthodox hierarchy sold out the faithful to the Bolsheviks in order to save their own cowardly skins. Their great predecessors had chosen martyrdom before betraying the church. They chose compromise.

The two cases are not similar - I expect no honor from Democrats, but it is disappointing when a bishop becomes an informer.

I was later convinced that the Orthodox understanding of the Holy Trinity differs substantially.

I disagree. The Orthodox do NOT differ from us on the basic understanding of the Holy Trinity -- the question of the filioque is not that the Orthodox church considers Christ to be a 'junior partner' in the Trinity, nor that the Catholic Church considers Christ and the Father to BOTH be the sources for the Holy Spirit. No, both churchs understand the same idea: that of a triune God, but there is substantial misunderstanding in what the Western Church means by 'We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of Life, who proceeds from the Father, AND THE SON' (of course, the portion in caps is not accepted by the OC as they think it means a dual origin of the Holy Spirit, while the Catholic Church will hasten to say it does not.

Do note that ALL the rites of the Catholic church do not add the filioque -- AFAIK, it is only the Latin rite that does so

Very true, there are 1.2 billion Catholics, but do you consider that 300 million are in Latin America, 200 million in Africa and some 100 million more in se Asia? As for post Christian catholic lands, southern Germany, France, Spain and Portugal, do those count? How about that nice big Mosque in Rome, right near the Vatican, biggest Mosque in all of Europe?

The 300 million in South America + those in Africa and Asia etc are all part of the Western Church. Southern Germany, France, Spain, Italy and Portugal -- have you been there lately? Except for France, the church is still vibrant in the other places. Even IN France, it is vibrant in the countryside.

The Mosque is not IN Rome, it is outside the precincts of Rome -- the Pope's influence on the civil government of Italy only extended so far. And the largest mosque in Europe was, until recently, the Hagia Sophia and now it is the London Mosque near the London zoo.

Kosta, do you have any details on the underground Russian church during communist times?

I don't Cronos. maybe your other two pings may. But many clergy died under the godless regime immediately after the Revolution. Stalin revived the Church when Hitler attacked Soviet Russia. After the war, the Church naturally gravitated towards the free world and was suspect.

Aseparate mMetropoly was founded for the Serbian Orthodox Archiocese of America and Canada that was polticially set apart from patriarchate in Belgrade for the same reason the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia (ROCOR) was formed: Serbian Patriarch German was uspected of having "collaborated" with the communists, and many priests were suspected of being infiltrated UDBA (KGB-like) service employees.

I think german's name was cleared and now the Serbian Church in America is fully reunited with the Patriarchate in Belgrade, just as ROCOR and the ROC have come to an agreement for reunification.

PS haven't heard from you in a while. Good to have you back.

How unkind of you! Many a Russian Orthodox priest and bishbop was killed because of his faith. Many thousands were martyred. The Church has a duty to lead the flock. If all the clergy are killed what will that accomplish? Easier said than done my friend. I wonder what you would have done in Russia in 1917 as an Orthodox priest?

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.