www.byzcath.org Forums News & Events Church News "Church, State and the Proselytism Controversy in Russia"

Just some comments.

Most of the Catholic Missions in Russia come from the Charismatic Movement (Pentecostalism within the Catholic Church).
This movement is an exagerated interpretations of some doctrines of Vatican II (just like the Liberation Theology).
They are very active, like the protestants, they use preachers and massive prayers and dances in order to reach a state of Ecstasy so they can receive the Holy Spirit.
I recently knew an Argentinian man who works in this missions, he is in Russia right now, I think.
Their success is based on an "inclusive" liturgy, very vibrant and "wonderful".
I asked him if they were proselitizing among Orthodox (he rejected the word proselitism, but said "we bring the Holy Spirit to all people").
I was right, he didn't know anything about the Orthodox Church, the Byzantine Rite and the jurisdictions.
Most of the troubles with Moscow could be avoided if the Catholic Church makes an effort to educate their missionaries (Specially about the country where they are going to work)

Because, traditionally, our bishops have been wussies.

[Because, traditionally, our bishops have been wussies.]

Stuart: Your reply completely invalidates the claims both you and others constantly make here. If your churches are sui juris (independent) and 'In Communion With' rather under 'Romes authority' what is there left for your Bishops to be wussies about? If your church is so free and independent..what's there to be afraid of or wussie about?
Don't you realize how you come off to both Orthodox Catholic and Latin Rite Roman Catholics?
Not to long ago on an Orthodox discussion group a Latin Rite Roman Catholic(not an Orthodox) made the statement that there are no Byzantine Rites within the Roman Catholic Church. According to him they should all be called the Byzantine wrongs because they are the most confused Christians in all of Christiandom.
Thats how you all comes off when you claim sui juris independence in one sentence and then blame everything on your Bishops being wussies rather than admit that you are under Romes authority and always will be until or unless you come home and once again be real Orthodox than pretend Orthodox.
From various posts of yours I've read elsewhere, you look to the Orthodox Catholic Bishops, the same Bishops you've turned your backs on, to fight your battles with Rome for you.
Do you really think the Pope or the Vatican in general will let you have Bishops that have a pair of 'you know whats'?

OrthoMan

Here we go again.

I find Eastern Catholocism much less confusing than trying to sift through the ever-increasing number of Orthodox jurisdictions in the USA and trying to figure out which Orthodox jurisdiction is in communion with whom.

Our local Antiochian Orthodox priest just went over to the "Bulgarian Diocese of the OCA" under Archbishop Kyrill, which is separate from the Bulgarian Orthodox Church under the leadership of Metropolitan Yosef of the US, Canada and Australia. Two competing jurisdictions for about 6,000 faithful. It's ironic because he gave me a lecture less than a year ago about the need for unified jurisdiction in the US and how the Antiochian Archdiocese was to be the spearhead for a united American Orthodoxy. Whatever.

In the UGCC we commemorate our Patriarch as Patriarch. Our Synod has confirmed him as Patriarch, regardless of what everyone else says. Our bishops ordain married men. We are getting closer to across the board elimination of the Filioque. Not to say that we don't have a long way to go, but we have come a long way in the last 30 years.

Unlike the Orthodox, all of the Eastern Catholics in the USA are in visible and complete communion with each other.

Even Afanasiev and Schmemann wrote about the need for a primacy in the Orthodox church which has been discused at great lengths on this forum.

Some of us are not confused, but are very clear in our vision and direction. As clear and focused as we have ever been since the Orthodox Metropolitan of Kyiv accepted union with the Catholic Church. We are Orthodox in communion with Rome, we believe in it, and will work until our last breath to make this a full reality. We choose to do it within the framework of communion with Rome. It certainly isn't the easy way.

As for the 80-90% of unchurched persons in Russia, they are all "fair game" for missions as they have no official church affiliation. They are not Orthodox, they are not Catholic, they are simply unchurched.

Any religious group can set up a storefront church in the US and noone gets too upset. The Catholic Church in the USA has been the constant target of especially Protestant proselytization since the 18th century but it survives and flourishes. That is certainly not to say that the Catholic Church hasn't attempted some inappropriate proselytization in her history.

But perhaps we also should keep in mind the preface of the 1898 English translation of the Catechism of St. Peter Moghila, "...how the common fight of the Greek and Latin Churches against the inroad of Protestantism into the East and West could but welcome the points of contact between the two Churches".

[ 09-01-2002: Message edited by: Diak ]

I think darn few Orthodox are scandalized or even aware of the adminsitrative relationship between the Vatican and the Eastern Catholic Churches and that darn few Catholics are scandalized or even aware of the adminstrative relationships between various Orthodox jurisdiction.

This is a matter for arm-chair eclesiologists, not the faithful.

Axios

Of course what is called "wussy" on this thread has nothing to do with Rome, it has to do with pastoral wisdom versus foolishness, as StuartK so thoughtfully posted on another thread:


djs

Since the topic was originally related to proselytism, perhaps we should return to that.

Since the majority of persons in Russia are unchurched, they belong to no denomination or confession. And it seems that this a large portion of the population. Three to four generations have been raised without religion. What they were before those generations is meaningless now as they have long ago lost any meaningful link to that. Anyone who can motivate these masses to conversion, more power to them.

There are those, even with the governmental limitations on access of other denominations, who can see the collusion of the MP with the regime, Soviet or post-Soviet and will not choose the MP.

If the Catholic Church or any church in the US coerced and used governmental resources to limit the expression or access of any other religious group, such actions would be met with outrage.

Axios, when it comes to lawsuits over parish property, and physical violence regarding interjurisdictional squabbling, it does involve the faithful and goes way beyond the limits of "armchair ecclesiology". There are multiple examples of either both in the diaspora and in Orthodox countries. We can go into those case by case but that won't accomplish too much constructively.

The point is not to "throw stones in a glass house" or anything of the sort, but to be realistic and fair to Orthoman's joust. I would also like to mention that as Eastern Catholics we don't take too much stock in what a Latin Catholic says about us as Eastern Catholics on an Orthodox thread, and the fact that Orthoman would take that as "ammunition" to show us as "confused" or whatever is rather lame.

It's like reading a literary criticism from someone who never read the book they are commenting on. I could go ask an Episcopalian about his or her problems with Orthodoxy and make a thread based on that. And I know Orthodox who are as lapsdaisical about their ecclesiological identity as those Eastern Catholics he portrays through the intermediary of a Latin.

Diak,

Yes. My comment was not to Europe or to the past in this country.

I notice alot of folks (not all of them Eastern Catholic) have a particular vision of how they want the Eastern Catholic Churches. Often their vision appears to have great merit.

I think they go off the boat however, when they claim this or that must be done because the Orthodox are scandalized by the contrary or that, in turn, Catholics can't strive for ecumenism because of this or that feature of Orthodox which scandalizes Catholics.

Particularly, I would say those who have strong opinions about the relationship betwen the Roman and the Eastern Catholic Churches, you often have a misimpression as to how concerned or prone to meddle Orhthdoxy is. I would say, we wish you well, but little beyond that.

I will give an illustration: "Orthodoxy is scandalized because we have stations of the cross in our church". No, we are not. The thought has likely never passed the mind of almost all of us. It has never been raised in any ecumencial dialogue. Don't put false barriers in the path of ecumenism.

Axios

[ 09-02-2002: Message edited by: Axios ]

Axios, I am in agreement with your last post but am unsure what "false barriers" you refer to? We have only discussed reality.

We are all humans prone to passions and must continually strive to overcome those weaknesses to foster unity. I just don't think any polemical attempts at justification of position really accomplish much constructively and will only be responded to with more polemic. I admit I have fallen into this crevasse myself on more than one occasion.

But we must be realistic. If there is not interior consensus ecclesiologically, as there is not with Orthodoxy, attempts at Catholic-Orthodox ecumenical dialogue will only continue to be piecemeal as other jurisdictions within Orthodoxy will simply not agree with ecumenical decisions or advances of other jurisdictions. Often times not because of valid theological points, but simply because they are a different jurisdiction. That is unfortunately a real "barrier". I have been involved in ecumenical dialogue and have seen this happen. It is unfortunate.

And yes, there are ideologoues on both sides who can poison the waters. Faith and religion often gets at very personal convictions which can raise the emotional level. Regardless of the "barriers", I will continue to have relationship with and worship with my Orthodox brethren with whom I am not yet in full ecclesial communion. By the way, I have already been offered priestly ordination in two different Orthodox jurisdictions!

Sometimes I think we can do far more at the local level with ecumenical dialogue than those wearing the miters. In spite of the speedbumps, we have to keep on driving.

[ 09-02-2002: Message edited by: Diak ]