No End to the Schism?

There was optimism in the Russian Orthodox Church that a new Roman Catholic pontiff would bring a warming in relations between the two churches, but, although the message from Rome might be clearer than in the past, it still holds little hope for a swift rapprochement.

In late June, the Vatican's chief ecumenical official, Cardinal Walter Kasper, came to Moscow for the first visit here since the election of Pope Benedict XVI -- an event that was accompanied by an unprecedented series of optimistic statements from the leadership of the Moscow Patriarchate.

Russian Orthodox Church officials praised Pope Benedict as an outstanding theologian, intellectual luminary and guardian of traditional Christianity in what the two churches largely see as a relativistic world undermining Christianity's religious and moral foundations. The former Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger's orthodoxy appeals to many Orthodox Russians and fits well into the international agenda that the Moscow Patriarchate had begun to build over the past several years: to consolidate traditional Christians against secularism and moral relativism.

Patriarch Alexy II resisted Pope John Paul II's desire to visit Russia for 10 years, citing two issues: the expansion of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church, which has caused many Orthodox Christians in western Ukraine to feel their rights have been violated, and the expansion of the Roman Catholic Church in Russia, which is perceived by the Russian Orthodox Church as proselytizing.

Yet the patriarch addressed Benedict XVI in a completely different tone. "I sincerely hope that Your Holiness' pontificate will be marked by the development of good relations between our churches and a fruitful Orthodox-Catholic dialogue," he wrote in his congratulatory message to the newly elected pope. "Our authoritative and influential churches must join their efforts in preaching Christian values to modern humankind."

The atmosphere in Moscow church circles was such that it would have been enough for the Vatican to have made a couple of friendly gestures toward the Russian church for the Moscow Patriarchate to have dropped its objections and invited the new pope for just such a first historical visit. The question that remained on people's minds was whether such gestures would follow.

Against this background, Cardinal Kasper's visit was to reveal the Vatican's new policy. And what did we see?

According to high-level sources in the Moscow Patriarchate, the gist of the cardinal's message was that the Holy See had decided to concede to the wishes of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church -- a church that uses the Eastern liturgy but is in full communion with the Vatican -- and grant its head, Cardinal Lubomir Husar, the title of metropolitan of Kiev and Galicia. It would also bless his move from Lviv, in the once Polish-dominated Western, traditionally Greek Catholic part of Ukraine, to Kiev. This title has historically belonged to the Orthodox bishops of Ukraine, and many Russians, as well as Orthodox Ukrainians, see Kiev as the cradle of their Christian tradition.

Thus, the Vatican's decision could be seen as endorsing the claims of Greek Catholics, who make up about 10 percent of Ukrainians, to be a national church. This may feel like another slap in the face for the Orthodox, who are weakened today in Ukraine by an internal political schism. Furthermore, the strong pro-Western stance of the current Ukrainian administration and the desire among some in the Ukrainian government to form a united Church of Ukraine, which Ukrainian nation-builders see as a missing foundation of an independent Ukraine, could serve to aggravate the negative reaction of the Ukrainian and Russian Orthodox.

Ukrainian Catholics have been asking the Vatican for more than the changes Kasper discussed on his visit. They have been requesting the title of patriarch for the head of their church, and some church officials are already using this title internally. The Vatican has so far resisted going any further. But granting the title of metropolitan of Kiev would inevitably generate a new shouting match between Moscow and the Vatican.

Despite expressing their strong displeasure in private conversations and saying in an official statement that mentioning Kiev in the Greek Catholic cardinal's title and moving the see is "unacceptable" to the Orthodox Church and would "create obstacles" in the relationship between Moscow and the Vatican, Russian Orthodox officials continue to follow a positive tack. Speaking on Russian television after Kasper's visit, Metropolitan Kirill repeated praise for the pope and said there were plans for a large-scale conference in Vienna, which would present "our joint witness on Christian values in Europe and globally."

The current situation reveals a fundamental contradiction in Orthodox-Catholic politics. The friends of the Orthodox Church within the Roman Catholic Church tend largely to be the ecumenists and liberals who bank on the "spirit of Vatican II" and do not share the Orthodox conservative stance on the secular world. At the same time, those orthodox Catholics who are closest to the Orthodox Church in their desire to keep strictly to Christian tradition tend to view the Orthodox Church in a traditional Roman Catholic way, or in other words as schismatics who need to be proselytized or reunited with the Holy See.

Will Pope Benedict fall into the second category? Contrary to many early optimistic expectations from Moscow, he might. He may also be a lot less interested in Russia than his predecessor was.

But while the major objection from the Russian Orthodox toward the previous papacy was that it used a lot of reconciliatory rhetoric while pursuing de facto aggressive policies in the East, at least that contradiction may be a thing of the past.

With Pope Benedict's past history of insisting that Rome cannot be a "sister" but only the "mother church" to all other Christian bodies, his deeds may be more in line with his words. In that sense, harsh truths are certainly more productive than illusions.

It's an interesting perspective, certainly if Vatican is looking to become head honco with Moscow playing a second fiddle there's no chance for an end to the schism, on the matter of Ukraine though at some point Russia has to give up. There are now both a group of sepratists Orthodox Ukranians, backed by the Ukraine president, who want a separete Orthodox church, and there is the Ukranian/Greek Catholics who are also becoming more and more popular there, certainly the moving to Ukraine and expandd recognition within the Catholic church will help them continue that trend. The Russian government lost major face trying to keep control of Ukraine, but in the end, the Soros backed Yushenko won out, the Moscow Patriarchate should see the writing on the wall that wherever Ukraine IS headed it's not toward Moscow. Still even should they concede Ukraine, there is no rationale for them to become subject to the rule of Rome, and even in the unlikely event they did agree, it would create other schisms. It appears neither side still knows the word compromise, which in the realm of faith perhaps they should not; generally with regard to faith giving up rarely signifies the answer in line with faith has been upheld, rather that it's been abandoned for Earthly or Human reasons.

This article is lamenting the life of Catholicism in Ukraine which continues to grow. Moscow in seeking its hegemony over Ukraine views this Church as a direct threat to its political power. The split in Ukraine on the Orthodox side is another thorn revealed to Moscow that it can not reign in.

Why is it westerners always assume everything in Russia is aout political power? For quite some time the Russian Orthodox church had 100% of Ukraine, after the fall of communism many returned to the Byzantine Catholic rite. I do not expect that were, for instance, the Russian church to begin stealing faithful from the Catholic parishes of Poland that the pope would rejoice either. That doesn't make it political.

The Russian Orthodox Church has a long history of siding with the powers against the people of Ukraine. The idea that they are merely seeking some positive signal from the Vatican is unfounded. They continually refused to allow Pope John Paul II to visit Russia.

It is not about a postive signal it's about a calling off of the dogs.

Of all the nations in the world Pope John Paul visited with his message of peace and good will, even Fidel's totalitarian Cuba permitted his visit. But not Russia. The Orthodox would not permit it.

Which is specifically because it's about fatih NOT political, if it were political they could stall just as easily while staging a visit to gain international attention. The problem is not political, that is western propaganda trying to deny the rights of Russians to practice orthodoxy. If Europe and America had there way they'd bulldoze St Basils and put a great big Catholic Cathedral on the spot, no doubt with the only icon being a great big painting of the pope.

It is really the Ukranian Yushenko-Soros backed church acting politically, posibly even to reassert the KGB-like control the Ukranian secret service had over the church. Why else would a western favoring ruler give the western Catholic church the cold shoulder in favor of growing their own at home?

The Russians are not likely to gain control over the Ukranian church, even given the historical center of Slavic Orthodoxy being centered in Moscow, however the pope should dispense with thinking the Catholic church will either.

Interesting aside with regard to the forces pushing for a new separate Ukranian Orthodox Church (The article is prety biased however):
Special agent blesses the opposition

In Kiev, Patriarch Filaret, the former secret KGB agent and present-day head of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, has blessed the opposition leader Viktor Yushenko and the hundreds of thousands of demonstrators on Independence Square.
In earlier times Filaret, real name Denisenko, eulogised the communist party’s First Secretary Leonid Brezhnev, was on friendly terms with the First Secretary of the Ukrainian Communist Party, Vladimir Sherbitsky, and served the presidents of Ukraine Leonid Kravchuk and Leonid Kuchma. And now he forces Viktor Yushenko to obediently kneel before him.

Filaret was recruited by the KGB in the 1960’s, and was known under the pseudonym Antonov. From the 1960’s through to the 1980’s he was in charge of the Ukrainian Metropolitan, which was under the jurisdiction of the Russian Orthodox Church. For his diligence he received various Soviet awards. His loyal friend Vladimir Sherbitsky threw several hundred dissidents into prisons and psychiatric clinics. But the Lord forgave his sins, and in exchange Sherbitsky was able to help the informer hide the fact of his secret cohabitation with Evgeniya Rodionova, and the existence of Filaret’s three illegitimate children.

After the collapse of the Soviet Union, Filaret did not repent before the Church and the people for his informing. There was a lawsuit with another KGB agent, the Patriarch of All Russia Alexei 2nd (real name Rediger, agent pseudonym Drozdov). The scandal between them led to the division of church funds: as a result Filaret, having appropriated several million rubles, left the Moscow Patriarchy. In Kiev he held grandiose Christmas parties, to which were invited amongst others the speaker of the Verkhovna Rada, the prime minister, other ministers and the president of the Academy of Sciences. Soon there came under his wing former dissidents including Levko Lukyanenko, Stepan Hmara, Mikhailo Goryn, Oles Shevchenko, Gleb Yakunin and others. The former political convict Ivan Gel even called the secret informer “your eminence”…

Filaret generously distributed church honours to the officials and the brains behind repression. Even the strangler of free speech, professor and literary critic from Kiev State University Nikolai Dubina, was awarded with a church trinket for his “contribution to spiritual development”.

The first rapprochement with current opposition leaders occured in 1999. They were hounding the chairman of the Narodny Rukh, former political prisoner Vyacheslav Chornovil. He subsequently died in a car crash. At the funeral of Chornovil, his opponents arrived, accompanied by Filaret. The KGB agent performed his requiem over the ex-political prisoner’s coffin.

The leader of the opposition, Viktor Yushenko, has slowly but surely gravitated towards the ambitious Patriarch. In 1977, when dissidents were being incarcerated, Yushenko entered the communist party. His associates in the past were communists, party activists and Komsomol leaders. Some of them held important posts in the governments of Leonid Kravchuk and Leonid Kuchma.

The Ukrainian opposition hatched from Komsomol and party cells. It struggles with its post-communist metamorphosis. The opposition activists are unmoved by a spy becoming the mentor of Yushenko and hundreds of thousands of demonstrators. Filaret has not only hypnotized the opposition, but got them to say after him the prayer Our Father. Now the spiritual deceiver will lead the participants in the Orange Revolution into their Bright Future

Viktor BARANOV, Ukraine

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.