Pope Asks Ukrainian Greek-Catholic Church to Be Patient

VATICAN CITY, JUNE 3, 2004 (Zenit.org).- John Paul II shares the hopes of the Ukrainian Greek-Catholic Church to be established as a patriarchate, but he asks for patience while the proposal is studied.

The Pope is also taking into account the "evaluations" of the Orthodox Churches.

He expressed this today when receiving in audience Cardinal Lubomyr Husar, archbishop major of Lviv of the Ukrainians, with the members of the Permanent Synod of the Ukrainian Greek-Catholic Church.

"I share your aspiration, well-founded in the canonical and conciliar discipline, to have full juridical and ecclesiastical configuration," the Holy Father told his guests.

"I share this aspiration in prayer and also in suffering, waiting for the day established by God in which I will be able to confirm the mature fruit of your ecclesial development as successor of the apostle Peter," he said.

"Meanwhile, as you well know, your request is being seriously studied, also in the light of the evaluations of other Christian Churches," the Pope added.

The Holy Father urged that this hope not be an obstacle "to your apostolic courage or a reason to turn off or dampen the joy of the Holy Spirit which drives and spurs on Cardinal Husar, together with his brother bishops and priests, religious and the lay faithful to greater abandonment to proclaiming the Gospel and in the consolidation of your ecclesial tradition."

John Paul II expressed his "deepest admiration for the vitality of this Church and for the faithfulness which has characterized it throughout the centuries."

"Rich with heroic witnesses, even in the recent past, your Church is involved in pastoral programs that enjoy generous collaboration and approval by the clergy and lay people for the effective work of evangelization, promoted by a climate of freedom that today is felt also in your country," he concluded.

In a letter dated last Nov. 29, Orthodox Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I of Constantinople asked John Paul II not to institute a Greek-Catholic patriarchate in Kiev, saying that there was a risk of breaking ecumenical relations.

Such a measure "would cause strong reactions on the part of all the Orthodox sister Churches and harm the attempts to continue the theological dialogue between the Catholic Church and the Orthodox Churches," the letter said.

In the July 2002 plenary assembly held in Kiev, the Ukrainian Greek-Catholic Synod requested the Pope to sanction this process by conferring on it a patriarchal title.

According to the conciliar decree "Orientalium Ecclesiarum" on the Catholic Eastern Churches, the Pope has the faculty to recognize on his own initiative the patriarchal rank of a Church without having to submit this recognition to the consensus of other ecclesial bodies.

The Ukrainian Greek-Catholic Church is the largest of the Eastern Catholic Churches "sui juris" (of its own right) with more than 5.5 million faithful. It maintains the Byzantine rite and is in full communion with the Bishop of Rome.

Asia news.

RUSSIA - VATICAN
Rome and Moscow: a willing separation?
by Vladimir Rozanskij

Proselytism is a trivial problem compared to necessity of evangelising the world. A Russian expert analyses the results obtained by the Orthodox-Catholic Group.

Moscow (AsiaNews) - Cardinal Walter Kasper's recent visit to Russia is beginning to be show its first fruits. Probably, the most important result of the trip is the organisation of the Joint (Orthodox-Catholic) Working Group. The Joint Group, which started its activity in May, is established to analyse the various existing controversies between the two Churches, and to suggest possible solutions.

Members of the group unofficially reported that the relationship between the Catholic and Orthodox participants was welcoming and friendly, despite the difficult issues that the Group had to discuss: the legitimacy of the "acts of proselytism" on the part of the catholic Church in the 15 years since the borders to the former Soviet countries opened.

The peaceful atmosphere that pervaded the Group's meetings does not spring from any great achievement, but from the spirit of diversity that animates the protagonists of this new season of ecumenical dialogue. Almost with a sense of freedom, in fact, the representatives of the two sister-Churches were asked neither to work for a re-unification, nor to organise improbable meetings between their highest ecclesial authorities. The task is not so difficult, and corresponds to the present reality: The Churches will take an inventory of the rights and wrongs of the relationship between the two ecclesiastical communities with a view to avoid 'stepping on each other's toes' in the future.

More than to 'reunite the family', as it were, this step is more like asking lawyers to divide assets and define the terms of the mutual, willing separation between two parties. Despite the doctrine of marriage (which in the Orthodox Church is not as strict as in Catholicism), nowadays even Catholics seem to appreciate the advantages of a peaceful "separation".

Before Vatican II the Catholic Church referred to Christians of other denominations as "dissidents". After the Council they became "brothers" (even if affected by some minor imperfections), to be welcomed back home. Now, it looks like they are turning into "willing divorcees".

"Microscopic" proselytism

Therefore, the Group discussed 'concrete things', listing the names and surnames of those who have offended and betrayed the mission of the Churches. In truth, it would have been better if the Group had considered some important statistics as well, to give the true dimensions of the problem of 'Catholic proselytism'. In Russia there are officially 500,000 Catholics, but only 50,000 of them actually go to church. Most important, there are only 5,000 Russians who turned to the Church of Rome without having any kind of Catholic tradition in their families (ie. A German or Polish grandmother). Among them, only 2,000 had some link with the Orthodox Church in their past. In Russia live 150 million people…

Truthfully, the Group considered some statistics. An orthodox representative quoted the "offensive" words spoken by Verbist Fr. Jerzy Jagodzinski, who questioned the Orthodox nature of the Russian population observing that, "only 1.2% of people in Moscow participated to the Easter celebrations", 120,000 out of 10 million. Actually, Jagodzinski was being generous with the Orthodox church: Moscow's authorities confirmed that "for Easter less than 1% of the population attended any kind of religious service". In the last ten years, there are twenty times more churches than there was under communism, with building being built or re-opened. Yet in relation to the immediate post-communism years, only one third of people now attend the services.

Ultimately, it seems that the practical things discussed by the Group concern only "those provincial reports of strategic activities to convert people of Orthodox roots to another faith and another culture." According to Vsevolod Chaplin, the head of the Orthodox delegation.. These kind of 'provincial reports' is a constant in Russian history, which prefers 'informing' and secret accusations to flagrant crimes. The Group was informed of supposed grave violations that happened in remote locations, above all in the Siberian city of Novosibirsk. Here Catholics are believed to be have been incited in various sectors, especially within schools, hospitals, universities and through TV programs. It is important to notice that Novosibirsk, which is 4.000 km away from Moscow, was the place of deportation of those considered dangerous by the Communist regime- free-thinkers and undesirable ethnicities. German Catholics built their church there in Soviet times. The Catholic activities, therefore, must be explained in context of the Catholic roots of many living there.

In truth, the real reason behind the reports is something else. Novosibirsk in fact is a city were Jesuits have concentrated their efforts, the "Catholic devils" of Russian literature, an expression of the inferiority complex of the Orthodox towards Western culture. The local bishop, Mons. Jozif Werth, (a Russian German) is a Jesuit himself and has called many in his Community to collaborate with him, excluding the invitation, however, to Jesuits of the eastern rites, in order not to provoke the distrust of Orthodox authorities. It is as if the Orthodox Church would say, 'They have tried again to convert us, this time starting from the extreme peripheries. But again, we have unmasked them!'

Targeting children's activities

Another point of attack of the Orthodox Inquisition are "activities for children". Here and there, (in fact, always in the most inaccessible places: Murmansk, Angarsk, Sakhalin) Catholics have been accused of using schools and orphanages "for profit", to take the souls of those who would be the future sons of Orthodoxy. The fathers of the Work Don Calabria would be the worst ones. According to Orthodox authorities, these priests used to meet in a secret place not far from Moscow airport, in order to organise their plots against the local church. Actually, the fathers (from Verona) invested a large amount of money, more than all the money from their Brazilian and African missions combined, to buy and restore a completely abandoned tourist center. They wanted to transform it into a modern school, with independent heating. After 10 years, they have not still not obtained the permission to open the school. They wanted was to show the Russian people that Christians can propose an educational method which is absolutely "secular" in its nature and appreciated in the world. Paradoxically, they ended up in becoming the symbol of Catholic proselytism, without even having begun their work. Today the Rodnichock Center, run by the Fathers, is used only by groups of children who are always escorted by their lay tutors. The Fathers entirely pay for their vacations, but not even a single one of these children has become Catholic.

Fr. Igor Kovalevskij (head of the Catholic delegation of the Group) has held the role of the peacemaker. He acknowledged that "there are some cases that have generated misunderstandings, as they could be interpreted as acts of proselytism". Patriarch Aleksij II has taken advantage of Fr. Kovalevskij's words by declaring, in the presence of Pierferdinando Casini (the President of the Italian Congress) that "for the first time their was official recognition of the existence of the problem of proselytism in the territory of the Patriarchy of Moscow, above all on the part of religious orders". We don't know how much MP Casini has appreciated these updates of the Joint Working Group. What is certain is that Orthodox authorities have always been suspicious about religious orders. Probably, they cannot fully understand either the independence of the orders from the dioceses (such thing does not exist in the East), or their missionary nature (and almost all the Orders have the word 'missionary' in their name). It is not a coincidence that in the past someone accused even the Indian nuns of Mother Theresa- who were called to Armenia by the government after the earthquake of 1998- or proselytising.

Evangelisation

In truth, Kovalevskij emphasised that the Catholic Church rejects proselytism at every level. He added that the Catholic Church has no intention to proselytise in Russia, as this is a country where it is not necessary to spread the Gospel. After all, Russia has a long Christian tradition. It is not the situation of New Guinea or an African country where it is necessary to preach the Gospel. These affirmations seem to be not in line with the real situation of the country. Kovalevskij concluded by saying that "our relationships with the Orthodox church are cold, but it is not winter yet", echoing Patriarch Aleksij who declared that "there are some clouds" over our relationship. In this way, with the use of these weather metaphors, the ecumenical dialogue has taken a new direction, to divide itself peacefully rather than to unite. Perhaps one can see also the design of Divine Providence, useful, not only to define new connections between Christians, but also into affect conflicts on an international level. Psychological and spiritual confines, more than geographical and political ones, show the urgency of proclaiming the Gospel of unity and peace in a world upset by conflicts and accusations for so long. Only in this Gospel will we be able to find our proper "ecclesial territories".

A couple of observations:

The Ukraininans may have 5.5 million members, but the Russian Orthodox is a bigger "catch."
The Latin Church may say it is against proseltyzing in a Christian country but the actions speak differently. This is once agian speaking with both sides of the mouth -- like in the case of the Filioque when popes between the 6th adn the 11th century officially disallowed it but privately tolerated it until it became official.

Perhaps the working Group's basis is "hands off" but we all know that the Latin Church wants all Christians under its umbrella and that the ulitmate goal of ecumenism is just that.

There is no other reason why the Orthodox could not be considered the same Church save for the fact that we don't bow to the Bishop of Rome and accept his juridical authority over other bishops.

The fact that the so-called "Greek-Catholic" churches are "fully Catholic" while being fully Orthodox in the manner of worship and theology points to the fact that the only condition for the so-called "unity" is accepting the pope as the de facto ruler of the church. In other words, the "true Church" is defined by a mere mortal!

I have suggested on numerous occasions that the Latin Church return to the post Seventh Ecumenical Countil and place all its innovations on the table and defend them, ready to either win or lose, but that will never happen.

The Vatican Catholics are adamant about their prince in white robes as being more than he ever was when the Church was undivided. Papcy in this present form has no historical basis, it is an invention and is contrary to the organization of the Church that was given to us by Jesus Christ.

Historical documents show, prove, that Old Rome popes had primacy of honor and respect, but not of juridical power. The opinions of the pope were not bidning, nor did he rule over other bishops. The Synod would pass judgments over his objections.

Present day papacy is the cause of our continued split. In 1870, the Vatican I divided the Church more than any singular event in her life. If Rome can live with different theology of the East in its "Greek-Catholic" churches, then it must mean that Orthodoxy is not an issue. The pope is, and only the pope.

Finally, who can argue with success. The Orthodox Church finds it possible to live in plurality, as the original Church did, despite differences, and finds little incentive to radically change every so often. The problems in the Church are mainly in the schismatic West. Why should the East look up to the West for guidance or be its model? It should be the other way around. We didn't change. They did.

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.