Patriarch Kirill strengths his position within the Orthodox Church and casts his eye towards Rome

[OrthodoxJosh]

Thats fine. But they shouldn’t put their nose in Catholic affairs such as the Patriarchate in Kyiv for the UGCC. If they are not interested in union at this time, then they shouldn’t be taking interest in other Catholic affairs as well.

I think you have to take a step back and look at it from Moscow’s point of view. For hundreds of years the Moscow Patriarchate has been the Head of the Russian Church, and this has included, until relatively recent events, the Ukranian church. To Moscow, this really isn’t “Catholic Affairs”, this looks to them like Rome making moves toward strengthening Vatican ties in an area, which up until the fall of communism, the Vatican wasn’t able to touch. Now, since the communist government has fallen the Vatican has again begun redoubling its efforts in this area. The Russian Church sees this as Rome trying to get its foot in the door with another “Uniate Model”. Kyrill may be doing the political dance by saying that if Rome continues what it sees as a threat to its own Church, then the Russian Church will pull out of talks with Rome. Kyrill has yet to even have direct contact with the Pope, as I understand it. Recently a Russian Bishop, I can’t remember his name at the moment, who is head of external church relations in the Moscow Patriarchate, visited Rome. But, I would again say that this is a delicate political move. Basically, the region is still reeling from communist collapse and capitolism taking over like a rush of blood to the brain. Try to see things from the other perspective, and it may help your understanding of why Moscow is doing what its doing.

The Sinner,
Josh
Most Holy Mother of God save us!

 

[ConstantineTG]

I think you have to take a step back and look at it from Moscow’s point of view. For hundreds of years the Moscow Patriarchate has been the Head of the Russian Church, and this has included, until relatively recent events, the Ukranian church. To Moscow, this really isn’t “Catholic Affairs”, this looks to them like Rome making moves toward strengthening Vatican ties in an area, which up until the fall of communism, the Vatican wasn’t able to touch. Now, since the communist government has fallen the Vatican has again begun redoubling its efforts in this area. The Russian Church sees this as Rome trying to get its foot in the door with another “Uniate Model”. Kyrill may be doing the political dance by saying that if Rome continues what it sees as a threat to its own Church, then the Russian Church will pull out of talks with Rome. Kyrill has yet to even have direct contact with the Pope, as I understand it. Recently a Russian Bishop, I can’t remember his name at the moment, who is head of external church relations in the Moscow Patriarchate, visited Rome. But, I would again say that this is a delicate political move. Basically, the region is still reeling from communist collapse and capitolism taking over like a rush of blood to the brain. Try to see things from the other perspective, and it may help your understanding of why Moscow is doing what its doing.

The Sinner,
Josh
Most Holy Mother of God save us!

But every other Orthodox Patriarchate has a Catholic Patriarchate. If Kyivian Rus definitely has a Patriarchate, then until reunion occurs, there should be an Orthodox Patriarch and Catholic Patriarch.

 

[dvdjs]

I think you have to take a step back and look at it from Moscow’s point of view. For hundreds of years the Moscow Patriarchate has been the Head of the Russian Church, and this has included, until relatively recent events, the Ukranian church. To Moscow, this really isn’t “Catholic Affairs”, this looks to them like Rome making moves toward strengthening Vatican ties in an area, which up until the fall of communism, the Vatican wasn’t able to touch. Now, since the communist government has fallen the Vatican has again begun redoubling its efforts in this area. The Russian Church sees this as Rome trying to get its foot in the door with another “Uniate Model”. Kyrill may be doing the political dance by saying that if Rome continues what it sees as a threat to its own Church, then the Russian Church will pull out of talks with Rome. Kyrill has yet to even have direct contact with the Pope, as I understand it. Recently a Russian Bishop, I can’t remember his name at the moment, who is head of external church relations in the Moscow Patriarchate, visited Rome. But, I would again say that this is a delicate political move. Basically, the region is still reeling from communist collapse and capitolism taking over like a rush of blood to the brain. Try to see things from the other perspective, and it may help your understanding of why Moscow is doing what its doing.

I am not sure that what you write is Moscow’s perspective. If it is, then Moscow should review history and come up with a story that is not so obviously a myth. Moscow may long for complete hegemony over Ukraine, but there is no not much historical backing for any such claim. Plenty of murder and mayhem to force the issue, but no historical claim.

 

[OrthodoxJosh]

But every other Orthodox Patriarchate has a Catholic Patriarchate. If Kyivian Rus definitely has a Patriarchate, then until reunion occurs, there should be an Orthodox Patriarch and Catholic Patriarch.

As far as the Orthodox Church is considered, there isn’t a Patriarchate in Ukraine/Kyiv. There is a Ukranian Orthodox Church under the Patriarch of Constantinople, and then the Russian Church. (This, I think, must not help the strain between Russia and Constantinople). And, why is it definite that every Orthodox Patriarchate should have a Catholic Patriarchate as a rival church? There is no Catholic Patriarchate of Georgia or Moscow is there? Is there a Catholic Patriarch in Romania or Constantinople?

 

[kotim]

The problem for the Russian Orthodox Church is its history in relation to the Government during communism As Orthodox Josh put it, the Orthodox Church (at least some of its leaders/hierarchy) in many ways due to implants, spying etc seemed in many ways to become an arm of the government. Those membes of the Church that were collaborating with communists in ways they should not have been are in many cases still involved within their church hierarchy.

Now in terms of the the Russian Orthdox Church, the Patriarch clearly believes that he is the HEAD of the Orthdox communion and does in fact have some sort of authority as described. I say this from an outsider looking in at what has been going on.

The relations between the Russians and Constantinople is very strained and it I believe you will see in time a bitter dispute amonst the Orthodox as Constantinople and Rome move closer towards communion, which of course the Russians won’t likley accept or like.

One of the Aces up the sleeve of the Catholic Church is the fact that it has its own state. This puts it in an enviable position as regards preventing/reducing interference by Other Governments. This ace would be very attractive for any Church coming into communion.

Do not doubt that in the coming couple of decades many countries both east and west will attempt to crush Christianity. It is clear where I live in Australia for example, that the only faith that is free game to attack is Christianity. Christians are being oppressed more and more in relation to their faith and practices, so it will in decades to come be that much more important for Christianity t present a more united front.

 

[Vico]

As far as the Orthodox Church is considered, there isn’t a Patriarchate in Ukraine/Kyiv. There is a Ukranian Orthodox Church under the Patriarch of Constantinople, and then the Russian Church. (This, I think, must not help the strain between Russia and Constantinople). And, why is it definite that every Orthodox Patriarchate should have a Catholic Patriarchate as a rival church? There is no Catholic Patriarchate of Georgia or Moscow is there? Is there a Catholic Patriarch in Romania or Constantinople?

The Eastern Catholic Churches have an organization that is codified in canon laws, which are stated to be in effect until such time as unification occurs with the Orthodox (Eastern, Oriental, and Assyrian). The purpose is to preserve the traditions of each distinctive peoples. My pastor (Byzantine) told me that in the event that full communion occurs the Byzantine Church will fall under the Patriarch of Constantinople, and similarly for the other Eastern Catholic Churches, with their corresponding Patriarch.

 

[OrthodoxJosh]

The Eastern Catholic Churches have an organization that is codified in canon laws, which are stated to be in effect until such time as unification occurs with the Orthodox (Eastern, Oriental, and Assyrian). The purpose is to preserve the traditions of each distinctive peoples. My pastor (Byzantine) told me that in the event that full communion occurs the Byzantine Church will fall under the Patriarch of Constantinople, and similarly for the other Eastern Catholic Churches, with their corresponding Patriarch.

Well, now I see why Athenagoras, and now Bartholomew were/are so eager to work towards this union. If Rome is promising Constantinople the power to be Patriarch over all Byzantine Churches, despite the Byzantine Churches being headed in Alexandria, Antioch, Cyprus, Greece etc. along with Constantinople, why wouldn’t they go for it? Maybe this is one reason that Constantinople is trying to get more power in the Church in America, even though the OCA is already the Autocephalous Church here. But I am still skeptical as to whether this union of full communion will ever come. It has been centuries in the making, and has never yet gotten a real foothold among the faithful. Just my thoughts…

The sinner,
Josh
Most Holy Mother of God save us!

 

[Formosus]

I believe that Vico meant that +Vartholomew would become patriarch of the byzantine catholic (ruthenian) church. Not over all the byzantine churches.

 

[ConstantineTG]

I believe that Vico meant that +Vartholomew would become patriarch of the byzantine catholic (ruthenian) church. Not over all the byzantine churches.

There are several Eastern Catholic Churches without a Patriarch. would everyone without a Patriarch or a Major Archbishop be assigned to another Patriarch?

 

[Formosus]

Imo yes. That is how it was in the time of the seven councils. It was only later when easterners went back into communion with Rome, that Rome decided that all sui iuris churches focus on it as the focal point of the church, in the sense that now Rome is the patriarch of all the non semi-autocephalus eastern catholic churches.

It would depend on the church as far as which patriarchate or autocephalus church imo. Russian Catholics would go under Moscow. Italo-Greeks under Constantinople. Bulgarians under their respective patriarchate. Serbs under there’s.The greek Catholics in Greece under Athens. Etc etc

The ruthenians would be under Constantinople because that is who they were under before they became Catholic. In some way (in an ideal world) I think even our (ugcc) should be considered an autonomous church under Constantinople until granted autocephaly by it. Not because Constantinople is first among the east, but because of the traditions of canonical territory.since this isn’t the ideal world and our spiritual forebears cheated the system and removed themselves from New Rome (for good and bad reasons), the approval of New Rome for our patriarchate doesn’t really matter unless old Rome and Constantinople decided to enter into communion again. The current structure of all eastern catholic churches ultimately answering to Rome is not how it worked in the pre schism church and the way that the Orthodox do it( a patriarchate holding primacy over his own church and the daughter church which came from his see ) ,imo , is much more Patristic.

Edit: by under I mean under the primacy of honor of a particular patriarch. I do not mean in the legalistic western sense.

 

[OrthodoxJosh]

I could not get any of the links to work …
and I don’t understand the connection between The Holy Synod erecting new dioceses and this assertion that Moscow and Rome might be getting closer.

Catholic media is very fond of publishing these stories about the church’s latest and greatest friends in Orthodoxy, but I think that they are only playing to the audience.

From where I sit one question is, what is the price of this ‘unity’ everyone is praying for? What does anyone expect from it? What are you willing to accept?

And finally, do people here think that any single patriarch can bring this about by fiat within his own church?

Hesychios,
I think we both know what the price would ultimately be, abandoning the Orthodox Catholic faith. And, we also both know that no one Patriarch can make that decision. Remember John Bekkos! It will cause a fallout the likes of which haven’t been seen since the robber council of florence. If Moscow holds fast to Orthodoxy, and continues to keep the Patristic Calendar then it might just end up living up to the title of the Third Rome. God alone has to guide this union, lest we lose all that is dear to us!

The sinner,
Josh
Most Holy Theotokos save us!

 

[Vico]

I believe that Vico meant that +Vartholomew would become patriarch of the byzantine catholic (ruthenian) church. Not over all the byzantine churches.

Yes.

I believe he said other eastern Catholic Churches would be with other Patriarchs, for example Moscow. Oriental Orthodox and Assyrian with their Sees. We know from the dialogs that have been occuring since 1980, and especially since 2006, that authority is not a point of agreement even between Moscow and Constantinople. So the role of the Bishop of Rome has become, once again, the main topic since 2006, in the Catholic-Orthodox dialogs.

Blessed Pope Paul II said, in Apostolic Constitution Sacri Canones John Paul II 1990, that the eastern canons would only be in place until the eventual reunion. So we know reorganization will occur.
But what pertains to the universal ecumenical movement, stirred up by the Holy Spirit to perfect the unity of the whole Church of Christ, the new Code is in no way the least obstacle but rather greatly advances it. For the Code guards this fundamental right of the human persons, namely that the faith be professed in whatever their rite, for the most part derived by them in their mothers’ wombs, which is the rule of all ecumenism. Nor is it in any way neglected that the Eastern Catholic Churches, content in the tranquility of order desired by the Second Vatican Council, “may flourish and execute with a new apostolic vigor the task entrusted to them” (OE 1). Thus it happens that it is necessary that the canons of the Code of the Eastern Catholic Churches have the same firmness as the laws of the Code of Canon Law of the Latin Church; that is, that they be in force until abrogated or changed by the supreme authority of the Church for a just cause, of which causes full communion of all of the Eastern Churches with the Catholic Church is indeed the most serious, besides being especially in accord with the desire of Our Savior Jesus Christ himself.
archive.org/details/ApostolicConstitutionSacriCanonesJohnPaulIi1990

 

[Marcarios]

yea I think for the sake of Bishops who are too much in the world and think of power and prestige, is why they were under the heavy hand of an Emperor or Czar. God has a reason for everything . Not to long ago I read an article by St Seraphim Rose concerning the last days . In my mind I was wondering how the Orthodox Church views the End of Days . He discussed what the Russian Saints said concerning the subject. St Seraphim of Sarov and St John of Krondstat believed that through much suffering and repentence Russia would be saved and become the standard bearer in the last days to Christ Second Coming. That the West would be saved by the new fervor of Faith in Russia . Christ will come from the East but before coming a daughter of the East would open the way before all nations so that we can Behold His Glory.

Here is the link

deathtotheworld.com/seraphimrose/articles/futureofrussia.html

God Bless , the sinner Marc

 

[Hesychios]

Hesychios,
I think we both know what the price would ultimately be, abandoning the Orthodox Catholic faith. And, we also both know that no one Patriarch can make that decision. …

I agree with you, IF we accept the present Papal definition of ‘unity’.

But my point is, most people here who cry out “pray for unity” do not even know what they are asking. For all they know ‘unity’ is defined by being members of the same institution.

This is not now, and never has been necessary. All that is required of us is to believe alike, and our bishops can visit one another and concelebrate, our faithful can approach one another’s altars (if properly disposed). Once this happens we have unity in Christ, but it requires a common Faith, not necessarily a common institution.

In summary, this is not a question of organization, but one of Faith. If we believe alike, we are either:
1] already all united in Christ, or …
2] already all apostates from the Truth.

However, we (Orthodox Catholics and the Papacy) presently are not of one mind in matters of theology. We are really and truly divided in Faith. I recall Patriarch Bartholomew has publicly stated (in a speech given at the Jesuit run Georgetown University) that our differences are so significant that the two belief systems [Papal Catholic and Orthodox Catholic] are now ontologically different!

From my perspective the Orthodox churches have not changed their belief system in any significant way since well before the Great Separation instigated by Cardinal Humbertus.

The Papacy (and most of it’s subordinate churches) cannot say the same, in fact they tend to be rather fond of their new developments.

The Orthodox cannot change, and will not change. The Papacy cannot change our Faith, it cannot make us change (it has already been tried … and failed).

Orthodox cannot make the Papacy change it’s own beliefs, and Orthodox will not try to force change upon them. But the Papacy can change it’s teachings.

It has already demonstrated this ability. If the Papacy is willing and true unity is important to it, it can change it’s teachings to match it’s own past.

However, when Western Catholics cry “pray for unity”, I don’t think they realize this is what they are praying for.

 

[Vico]

…

However, we (Orthodox Catholics and the Papacy) presently are not of one mind in matters of theology. We are really and truly divided in Faith. I recall Patriarch Bartholomew has publicly stated (in a speech given at the Jesuit run Georgetown University) that our differences are so significant that the two belief systems [Papal Catholic and Orthodox Catholic] are now ontologically different!

…

1991: “The manner in which we exist has become ontologically different,”

highbeam.com/doc/1G1-58544671.html

More encouraging statements were made later:

vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/speeches/2004/july/documents/hf_jp-ii_spe_20040701_jp-ii-bartholomew-i_en.html

vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/speeches/2006/november/documents/hf_ben-xvi_spe_20061130_dichiarazione-comune_en.html

 

[Cavaradossi]

1991: “The manner in which we exist has become ontologically different,”

highbeam.com/doc/1G1-58544671.html

More encouraging statements were made later:

vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/speeches/2004/july/documents/hf_jp-ii_spe_20040701_jp-ii-bartholomew-i_en.html

vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/speeches/2006/november/documents/hf_ben-xvi_spe_20061130_dichiarazione-comune_en.html

That speech is actually from 1997, not 1991. Patriarch Bartholomew, despite his openness to dialogue and willingness to engage in ecumenism seems to be personally quite pessimistic when it comes to the prospects for achieving any union.

 

[OrthodoxJosh]

We are all pessimistic about unity. As hesychios put it, unity can only be acheived if we share the same beliefs. The Orthodox will never give up our beliefs in favor of doctrines that have been promulgated since the schism, especially since our doctrines have been preserved since the time of the apostles. Rome must look back and find the faith of the early church and make some major changes in that light. It all comes down to this, the Orthodox Church doesnt need Rome to have the fullness of the Catholic Faith, but Rome does need us.

 

[GaryTaylor]

Or visa-versa. Perhaps it depends where you sit.

I keep hearing about the meeting between Pope Benedict and Partiarch Kirill being a priority. Whats the issue that its actually not happening?

I watched Assisi and Pope Benedict and Partriarch Barth. I didn’t see Patriarch Kirill their. How free is he to move about the world? I’ve never seen such issues with Red-Tape in history.

Peace

 

[jam070406]

I agree with you, IF we accept the present Papal definition of ‘unity’.

But my point is, most people here who cry out “pray for unity” do not even know what they are asking. For all they know ‘unity’ is defined by being members of the same institution.

This is not now, and never has been necessary. All that is required of us is to believe alike, and our bishops can visit one another and concelebrate, our faithful can approach one another’s altars (if properly disposed). Once this happens we have unity in Christ, but it requires a common Faith, not necessarily a common institution.

In summary, this is not a question of organization, but one of Faith. If we believe alike, we are either:
1] already all united in Christ, or …
2] already all apostates from the Truth.

However, we (Orthodox Catholics and the Papacy) presently are not of one mind in matters of theology. We are really and truly divided in Faith. I recall Patriarch Bartholomew has publicly stated (in a speech given at the Jesuit run Georgetown University) that our differences are so significant that the two belief systems [Papal Catholic and Orthodox Catholic] are now ontologically different!

From my perspective the Orthodox churches have not changed their belief system in any significant way since well before the Great Separation instigated by Cardinal Humbertus.

The Papacy (and most of it’s subordinate churches) cannot say the same, in fact they tend to be rather fond of their new developments.

The Orthodox cannot change, and will not change. The Papacy cannot change our Faith, it cannot make us change (it has already been tried … and failed).

Orthodox cannot make the Papacy change it’s own beliefs, and Orthodox will not try to force change upon them. But the Papacy can change it’s teachings.

It has already demonstrated this ability. If the Papacy is willing and true unity is important to it, it can change it’s teachings to match it’s own past.

However, when Western Catholics cry “pray for unity”, I don’t think they realize this is what they are praying for.

Well, this was rather insulting. I know when I pray for unity I’m asking that His will be done.

 

[DadDave]

1991: “The manner in which we exist has become ontologically different,”

highbeam.com/doc/1G1-58544671.html

More encouraging statements were made later:

vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/speeches/2004/july/documents/hf_jp-ii_spe_20040701_jp-ii-bartholomew-i_en.html

vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/speeches/2006/november/documents/hf_ben-xvi_spe_20061130_dichiarazione-comune_en.html

The article from 1997 required a subscription to view it. Is there another link with the text?