The Pope wants a “Holy Alliance” with the Patriarch of Moscow


East & West

I had to read that article several times, as the English was terrible. The headline seems misleading, does it not? There was little content aligned with the headline as I read it.

I've read this before somewhere. It doesn't talk about unification, but rather working together for the interest of both Churches, like fighting secularism and declining morality in society. I think its a good step that could lead to unity and communion in the future. But this is not that yet.

The headline was more "attention getting" than accurate, but it was an interesting article.

This link in the article http://vaticaninsider.lastampa.it/en/hom...-ortodossa-273/ included this interesting statement:

Behind the initiative was archpriest Vsevolod Chaplin, head of the Moscow Patriarchate Synod for Church and Society Affairs, who proposed the idea of a Russian “dress code”. In January the prelate had won praise from the press by saying that Russian women dressed like striptease dancers, and wore makeup like clowns. «There is a problem....with people who confuse the street with striptease» wrote Vsevolod Chaplin in an open letter published by the Interfax Agency. «A woman who is skimpily dressed or painted like a clown....will certainly not find a man to share her life, a man who has a modicum of intelligence and self-respect

Could it be that we have so much divorce, wife abuse, and PFA's because the USA has the same trend?

In theory that's nice but unlikely. I ain't got no trust in the possibility of our collaboration with a Church that STILL thinks the Pseudo-Synod of Lviv in 1946 was legitimate. People in hell want ice water.

Rome doesn't even have a "Holy Alliance", within it's own Roman Rite Church, let alone having one with Orthodox christianity. They need to focus on cleaning up their own house first.

I agree. I think this experiment with two forms of Liturgy that is exclusive from one another has proven to be a failure. No matter how much the Pope says that adherents to the traditional Mass should not be hostile to the current Ordinary Form, more often than not, they are.

This is important in any relationship between Moscow and Rome.

Before there can be better cooperation or "alliance" I think two things need to happen.

1.) The Russian Orthodox Church asks forgiveness for its cooperation with the godless Soviets in destroying the Greek Catholic Church and the so-called Synod of 1946.

2.) That the Russian Orthodox Church recognizes the Greek Catholic Churches right to have those Churches taken from her during the Soviet area.

Without these two steps as a start I am not hopeful for an "alliance"

True, but I will always stand behind those who defend tradition, even in their liturgies. The traditional Mass, is just as important to traditional Roman Catholics, as the Divine Liturgies, are to Byzantine Christians. Imagine if the Divine Liturgies were stripped of icons. chant, incense, and replaced with modern music and priests had to face the people. I doubt Byzantine Christians would like this very much. Just remember the iconoclast controversy. Byzantine Christians went ballistic. Just be grateful the Divine Liturgies are intact, and think about what traditional Catholics, have lost for 40 years.

I think bkovacs is spot-on.

Been there, done that. In some Eastern Catholic Churches, you find the people defending these "traditional" practices and opposing attempts to restore the authentic liturgy. For many people, "Tradition is what we were doing on the day I was baptized".

Why? Traditionally, the Western Church has had numerous liturgies. The idea that there can be only one is something of an innovation. Instead of seeking liturgical uniformity, why not restore all of the traditional liturgies that were suppressed?

Let's not drink our own bathwater, OK? Some Byzantine Christians opposed the iconoclasm, others supported it, most tried to keep their heads down and out of trouble. The iconoclasm would not have lasted as long as it did if it did not have a relatively broad base of popular support.

Same applies to us Orthodox as well!

Why does it have to be either/or? Why can't one clean one's own house while also reaching out to others?

The irony about mentioning the minor disputes among the minority members of the Novus Ordo and Tridentine communities, as a reason to not venture outside the Roman Church (while the Anglican Use is now flourishing, the Ambrosian and Mozarabic are stably functioning within the Roman Church) - is that, had the Russian Orthodox had followed that principle, waiting until the reconciliation between pre and post-Nokian communities before venturing out, there would be no OCA, ROCOR, or MP (quite possibly no Eastern Orthodox communities at all) in North or South America.

Well its been 400 years. It will create more confusion at this point. I don't think the problem is the amount of Liturgies but rather the exclusivity. And I'm talking about the Liturgy for the laity. The religious orders have their own Liturgy which expresses their spirituality and charism and they should get to keep that. But whats happening obviously with the RC lay today is the "mine is better than yours" attitude.

I was just wondering that myself. I have heard this often in relation to the ecumenical dialogue. It seems like a convenient excuse not to seek unity. There have always been problems in the churches, going back to the apostolic times, so if we must wait till all have their "houses in order," then our wait will only last forever.

That's a weak argument, just as bad as Gregory VII Hidebrand's statement that "Diversity is the mother of heresy". Vatican II talks about the inculturation of the liturgy, but rather than going back to the sources of the culturally organic ancient liturgies, we get faux inculturation in the form of Polka Masses, Mariachi Masses, Folk Masses, Rap Masses. . . need I go on?



Maybe a little competition will improve the abysmal state of liturgy on all sides?