www.byzcath.org Forums News & Events Church News Orthodox Church leader accuses Catholic Church of expansionist aims

[I am intrigued by your assertion that the civil authorities in Rome can do nothing about construction on Russian embassy grounds. I suspect that whatever is built must comply with local codes, and would certainly rely on taking delivery of materials and procuring labor through Roman channels;]

Why is it you find things when you stop looking?
Note that not only is the Church being built on Russian soil but the permission to build it was given by the authorities prior to the revolution.
The legalities seem to be on the Russian Orthodox side.

-----------

"Released by Itar-Tass, January 13, 2001 FM lays first stone in foundation of Russian Church in ROME, January 13, 2001 (Itar-Tass)

-- Russian Minister of Foreign Affairs Igor Ivanov on Saturday took part in the ceremony of laying the first stone in the foundation of a Russian Orthodox church in the Italian capital. The Russian church building will be erected in the premises of Villa Abamelech THAT BELONGS TO THE RUSSIAN EMBASSY, less than 500 metres from the main sacred place of all Catholics - the Cathedral of St Peter in Rome. When the project is completed, the dome of the Russian Orthodox church will rise high above the eternal city and rival the dome of the San-Pietro basilica. Italian Foreign Minister Lamberto Dini who said that the ceremony reflected the broadness and depth of friendly relations between Italy and Russia. Patriarch Alexy II of Moscow and All Russia sent a message to the participants in the ceremony, in which he noted the great contribution made by Russian diplomats to the construction of the church. "The Russian embassy and the Russian church are perhaps the two places where our compatriots will always be able to come to and get moral and spiritual support", he said. The patriarch expressed the hope that the new church "will become a centre of spiritual life where Orthodox people will hear the words of consolationand support". The history of building a Russian church in the centre of Catholicism dates back to the beginning of the 19th century. It was nearly 200 years ago that the Collegium of Foreign Affairs of Russia drafted and Emperor Alexander I signed the decree on the "Greek-Russian church" at the Roman mission. Originally, the church was to be consecrated in the name of Sts. Peter and Paul in token of the fact that Rome was in possession of the relics of the Holy Apostles. But the struggle against Napoleon drew the attention of Russian authorities away from the building of the Church which was only opened 20 years later, in 1823. It was given the name "the Church of St.Nicholas the Wonder Worker." In May 1913, the municipality of Rome issued permission for the building of a Russian church on the steep bank of the river Tiber. But the Great October Socialist Revolution that broke out in 1917 cut short the intent of the project. The new church to be consecrated to St. Catherine will sit on the top of a high hill. Its design has been devised at the ArchKhram architecture and art centre with A. Obolensky of Moscow as the chief architect."

-------------

I think the mistake you are making is in assuming that the Church will be built in the Russian style with an onion dome cupola and three bar Cross. The Church could very easily be built in the more 'byzantine style' which would blend with the architecture of Rome. Examples: The new 'Christ The Saviour Cathedral' in Moscow and/or St Isaac's in St Petersburgh.

------
Now, back into exile.

OrthoMan

I'm handling this issue privately.

Dan L

Orthoman:

I am not sure what aspect of post you were responding to. To clarify, while criticism is likely (when did Parisians get over the Eiffel tower) I am dubious about the "uproar" in general, and in particular the uproar of the Pope. Moreover, if there were a real uproar and a furious desire to halt this project, I think that legal means could be found to impede it. (Environmental impact litigation, anyone?) The fact that project is ongoing casts doubt IMO about the degree "uproar", and the effort to halt it.

djs

Shlomo Orthoman & Dan,
I do not know what conflict you two have, but your response to each other is quite shocking to say the least.

This is not to say that I am a saint, but I do try to be civil to people, and if I am not I do apologize.

It is because of post like the two that you both have done that strings get removed, and valuable information is either lost, or has to be reposted because of such behavior.

What truely suprises me is how harsh European Byzantines and their descendants are towards each other. Mor Ephrem and I hold different views of Christology, Church structure and the like, but you do not see us going at it "hammer and thong". Further, many Christians from the Middle East do not have this harsh hatred that seems to lay beneath the surface that many European Christians and their descendants (especially those from the East). I fully understand the issue of Uniaism, and many Churches in the Middle East have also experienced it too, but they do not behave like I have seen many on this and other boards do.

I know that I am on this board to learn more about the Byzantine Tradition (both Catholic and Orthodox), as well as share my Tradition and the knowledge that I have pertaining to other Apostolic Churches. I hope that both of you (and those others who from time to time enjoy "flaming" the oposition), will find it in your hearts to forgive each other, or if not that at least be civil to each other on public forma.

Poosh BaShlomo (Stay in Peace),
Yuhannon

I have little disagreement with Orthoman regarding Christology or even Ecclesiology. I ask forgiveness of the board for any misunderstanding to the contrary. Orthoman can be a real pain in the behind sometimes in the way he makes snide remarks about people. His snideness toward me on this occasion was the first time he tried it with me. However, I've read his many snide comments to others on this and other boards. I'm frankly sick of it. He knows a great deal about a few things but somewhat less than he pretends. I suppose that it true of all of us. But at least most people don't stoop to his level of personal insult.

I'll say nothing more about it. If he apologizes I will be quick to forgive. Or I will simply ignore him. Whichever he desires.

Dan Lauffer

Dear Orthoman,

Please do not be in exile from here because of me a sinner.

I don't know what else to say other than to ask your forgiveness and to assure you I've grown up a bit since last we conversed.

Alex

Dan, what you write is idealistic, but I think you seem to be forgetting the fact that we are human. :-) I mean, even Sts. Peter and Paul had deals with each other to stay out of each others' jurisdictions (unless of course by invitation etc...) - and the Spirit was very actively working then (as He is now). Every Apostle's jurisdictions were honoured. In fact, even at Nicea, each churches jurisdictions were confirmed. For example, Nubia, Ethiopia, Eritrea, the Pentapolis among others at that time, were the jurisdiction of Alexandria - and not Jerusalem (even though Jerusalem was closer to the Pentapolis)... I'm not saying whose jurisdiction belongs to whom in this case or anything, I just think that yes, we have to leave the Holy Spirit to work, and yes God can sort these out (since he can do anything!) - but people have to deal with respect and accordance to the rules set out for us and use tact. If a Coptic Orthodox priest stood in the middle of St. Peter's in Rome and tried to convert everyone because he truly felt that he was bringing them to the truth, he could also say, "Let God sort out the Theological differences", but that would not appease the Catholics who are annoyed at his preaching there - nor would it make his method correct - and I think, if I am not mistaken, it is the method that is really bothering the Russians.

The problem with many ministries, is that because people are human, many of them leave the spirit of Christianity, and still think that they are being Christian. Many ministries sometimes become a matter of who has more money to offer - many people will go to the church who will give them the biggest allowance, which bothers the poorer ministries who believe they are teaching them what they believe is the truth and offering what they have. People end up getting money, but no faith. I am not saying, per se, that this is what the Roman Catholics are doing, but I am just trying to emphasize that while what you wrote is true, one still has to be much more tactful and take into account human weakness. My thoughts are coming out jumbled, but do you kind of see what I am trying to say?

Peace and grace.
Agape,
W-W
Amen, maranatha!

Dear Mina,

Yes, Dan is an idealist!

There is "Methodism in his (ecumenical) madness" which could explain it .

I remember a Chaldean priest who served the Qurbono at our Ukrainian Catholic school chapel to which he frequently invited Assyrian priests.

He was so ecumenical and said there was "no longer" any differences between Catholics and Assyrians . . .

When I asked him if veneration of "Sts. Nestorius, Theodore and Diodore" was O.K., he coughed for a moment and then said, "Well, Alex, I think you are going too far."

Can you imagine? Me - too far?

What does "Wak-Wak" mean?

Alex

Alex,

"There is "Methodism in his (ecumenical) madness" which could explain it."

You are onto something here, dear brother. I just figure that eventually truth always wills out. As a teacher of Comparative Religions I'd better believe that, or my critics will have a field day.

Dan Lauffer

Dear Professor Dan,

I appreciate you enduring my PUNishment . . .

My only regret is that I cannot take one of your classes!

How are you with long-distance education?

Alex