www.byzcath.org Forums News & Events Church News Orthodox "proselytizing" in Catholic Countries?

While this had been briefly addressed in other threads recently, I'd like to get specific reaction to the points raised about Orthodox activity in countries that have been traditionally considered Catholic countries.

It's been pointed out that there exists a Metropolitan See under the Ecumenical Patriarchate in Italy (established in 1991) which not only serves cradle Orthodox but is growing to reach the unchurched (and presumably lapsed Catholics--perhaps even converts from Catholicism). Is there any concern by the Orthodox there not to "proselytize" among Catholics?

It was also pointed out that one can easily find webpages explaining Russian Orthodoxy to Italians in Italian with criticism of Catholic doctrine. I do not find that objectionable but have to question what would happen if Catholics operated webpages in Russian with direct critiques of Orthodoxy?

Is there ANY Orthodox parish in a traditionally Catholic country which discourages Catholics from converting to it?

Dave Ignatius DTBrown@aol.com

[ 02-12-2002: Message edited by: DTBrown ]

Dave, as you have been public about your time spent as an Orthodox Christian, I think you know the answers in advance and are asking these questions for discussion's sake.

In my bones, I don't like proselytism in any traditional apostolic turf, even by another Church. America is a free-for-all, however. It is not Catholic Europe any more than I am my own father.

Having said that, let's look at this based on what Orthodoxy teaches, dogmatically.

While this had been briefly addressed in other threads recently, I'd like to get specific reaction to the points raised about Orthodox activity in countries that have been traditionally considered Catholic countries.
It's been pointed out that there exists a Metropolitan See under the Ecumenical Patriarchate in Italy (established in 1991) which not only serves cradle Orthodox but is growing to reach the unchurched (and presumably lapsed Catholics--perhaps even converts from Catholicism). Is there any concern by the Orthodox there not to "proselytize" among Catholics?

There may also be a longstanding Italian Orthodox community of Greek descent served by this metropolia.

Knowing Orthodox ecclesiology ( "this is the Church — we don't know about anyone else' ) as I imagine you do, I think the answer to your question is evident. No.

It was also pointed out that one can easily find webpages explaining Russian Orthodoxy to Italians in Italian with criticism of Catholic doctrine. I do not find that objectionable but have to question what would happen if Catholics operated webpages in Russian with direct critiques of Orthodoxy?

There would be an uproar, because 1) the Orthodox would be defending the only thing they know for sure (by faith) is the one, true Church and 2) such anti-Orthodox action would be hypocritical based on Catholicism's own terms (like the ones it agreed to at Balamand).

Is there ANY Orthodox parish in a traditionally Catholic country which discourages Catholics from converting to it?

In theory, same answer as above. No.

http://oldworldrus.com

[ 02-12-2002: Message edited by: Serge ]

Dear Dave,

There is a tradition of the Italo-Greek Orthodox Church in Italy, descendants of the Greek colonists there.

Today, they constitute one of the three main Rites of Italy, including the Latin and Milanese Rites.

There are both Eastern Catholics and Orthodox members of this tradition in Italy and North America. One of our priests in Toronto was of this tradition as well.

Orthodox Churches in the West do in fact preach Orthodoxy to western peoples and obtain converts through such preaching and outreach.

It doesn't go door to door and Orthodox mission-activity is of a decidedly different character than Western activity. People come to the Orthodox Church and ask to be let in. That's basically it.

As for the issues of jurisdiction and home turf, here and in Russia, I don't (want to) know . . .

Alex

I believe proselytizing is wrong for any Apostolic Church to proselytize any other Apostolic Church. I believe the Vatican is wrong to set up shop in Russia. However, there are the Orientale Rite Catholic Churches which have a right to exist. So this is a touchy situation. Anyway, I guess what I am saying is 2 wrongs don't make a Right.

With that said, I think the ROC needs help in re-evanglize there own people! You got those JW's, SDA, Morons, Islam, and God only knows what else having a field day in the country. I personaly do not think the ROC can successfully re-evanglize there own people again. I believe this because technology has advance so far and I think the ROC is way behind. Unless the ROC adopts TV, Internet, and Radio in a major way I think they are going 2 loose the battle.

My 2 Cents Worth!

Dear All: This is a good topic and one in which yes, I see the Russian Church taking a double standard. As for the Orthodox Church letting in those who seek it out and also, in regards to serving the population of traditional Orthodox in a given territory, is this not the same thing that the Catholic Church says in reference to its activity in Russia, i.e.: ministering to those who have long been Catholic and not refusing to accept those who actively come to its doors seeking the faith, particularly the unchurched?

Both churches do not seem to employ overt, proactive types of proselytism, such as those used by evangelical Protestants or the Jehovah's Witnesses. This is not natural to either group. I don't think that the Catholics ever criticize (at least officially), Orthodox dogma or opinion, as may occur in the opposite direction. To me, the situations in which both Orthodox and Catholics have established jurisdictions in each other's "traditional" territories, appear to be more or less identical and therefore, neither side should complain. An oversimplified response, I know, but nevertheless, one which seems self-evident, at least to me. Priest Joe

In my country the vast majority of the believers are "nominal" Roman Catholics and traditional sincretists.
The Orthodox Exarchate of Mexico has 10 Missions. 5 of them are in poor and dangerous urban zones of Mexico City (Neza, Ecatepec) and are served by the Cathedral clergy. The Exarchate has a Mission in a rural zone of Veracruz.
Most of the parishes consist of unchurched or non religious people who knew very few things about christian spirituality (at the beggining, the existance of the mission was incomprehensible for most of them).
There were some troubles in the Mission of Veracruz. Before the Orthodox Mission arrived, most of the people had not been baptized and the RCC was not intersted in serving them, but after the RCC knew that there was an orthodox mission, they sent a priest who built a small chapel and started to proselitize agresively, calling the Orthodox faithful "herethics, lost souls". It's obvious that that Roman priest doesn't know anything about the Orthodox Church and that's why he acted in that way. On the other side the catholics don't try to stop the protestant sects that are harmful for the Mexicans, and attack this small orthodox group.

A sad situation that you have described, Remie. It is ridiculous that the Catholic diocese should choose to take its frustrations out on this small group of people in an Orthodox mission parish. Also sad is that the priest mentioned seems to know nothing about what the Orthodox Church is. This is not unusual however and it is common enough here in the US, where we have visible dialogue going on between our two churches. The situation in Mexico is probably similar to the amount of knowledge American Catholics once had about the Eastern Church in general. This has improved to an extent, but there are still many RCs who have never heard or know little about Orthodoxy, much less, of the Byzantine Catholic Churches.

I personally feel that we must have tolerance for all faiths of good will and not be threatened by their presence among us. I am convinced of the principles of "religious liberty" which acknowledge the right of every person to make their own choices in regards to faith. A system of beliefs that is forced upon anyone by either government, church hierarchy or both in combination is not in harmony with the human right to free-will, which God has bestowed upon us from the beginning of creation. Nor does this produce the kind of faith that is sincere and true, but merely another "requirement" that is dealt to a people in a position of submission.

Of course, I do not believe that any church should actively try to steel parishioners from another denomination, just to build up their own statistics. It just goes against all principles of decency, not to mention the idea of ecumenical dialogue. But to me, the attitude of fear and adverse reaction expressed by some churches when they see other groups having success in their areas, only betrays their own insecurity and points to the fact that they must feel (although not admittedly) that they have failed in their evangelical purpose to some extent or another. Why feel threatened? If I have preached God's Word to my people as best that I can, have used all of my talents and energy to the greatest extent possible and have not compromised anything in regards to the faith, then I can do no more but to serve those who God has given me and pray for those that choose, for whatever reasons, to respond to the Gospel through another means or not at all. To continually complain about the presence of other churches may indeed betray a desire to maintain what one feels to be the "status quo" or really, to not have to work hard at all to continue the easy lifestyles that some dispensers of the faith have grown used to. One does not have to exert much effort to minister to a flock that is obliged to attend your church, but ministry should be a challenging and ever-renewed office, in which the one called to serve constantly and consistently is about the Lord's business.

Obviously, there is more to the situation than just acceptance. Principles of ecclesiology can be cited in which there should be but one church, with one bishop, in a given location. This has been the case from the beginning but we have grown so far away from that ideal situation, that one ecclesial body can hardly criticize another, for trying to minister to people that God sends their way or for setting up church structures where there has been a definite and positive call for it. We have honestly evolved in a much different manner and with a different methodology than was present at one point in church history, so to use this ecclesiological principle to condemn other denominations that may be present in our locales simply uses standards that no longer are sufficient, in and of themselves, to address the issues at hand.

Don't get me wrong, I believe in good ecclesiology and its application, where this is possible. But, it is one thing to debate these principles in the theology classroom or in a study group and another thing completely, to expect them to be applied with all simplicity and straight forwardness in a concrete situation. Today's world is a completely different place than was the one which prompted the church fathers to speak of the principle of "one city, one bishop." A lot has happened since then. A split between the churches took place almost 1,000 years ago. A reformation took place within the Roman Church. Faithful of various ritual traditions have sought communion on both sides of the ecclesiological coin - with Rome and with Orthodoxy. This is what has contributed to the co-existence of Christian bodies, side by side in the same cities, serving diverse communicants and each offering a unique expression of the Christian faith. Further, this does not only apply to particular "denominations" as such, but the situation also exists within churches that have different ritual expressions. Now one may say that this is unique to America or other places with a large diaspora, but quickly this is happening all over the world, as people move from place to place in a manner that never before existed. Work, economic and political considerations, family ties and more have landed people in places far from the lands of their heritage. It is not an immigration problem alone anymore but a world wide reality.

We have to realize this and accept it. In practice, we have done this and of course, this is the situation as it has existed for centuries. What we must do is admit this on a theological and academic plane, and try to come up with new solutions to the problems that annoy and offend us. This, in my eyes, is what has not taken place, at least officially. Admittance of problems and the existence of situations with which we may not agree is the first step to either solving them or living in harmony with the way things are. All of the protests in the world will not help in the least, when people have a right to choose which faith or expression thereof they will ascribe to. Honesty and respect, coupled with solid theological consideration and yes, creativity, are what will help Christians, as divided as we are, to give a better witness to the world at large, of the basic tenets of our faith.

A united voice for Christianity may have ended with the last ecumenical council, but theological creativity and the ability to address concerns affecting us all did not, unless of course, one wants the church to either die or live in a time warp. The Fathers were among the most creative men of their time and they had to address the issues of the era in which they lived. And they did this and gave the church a solid foundation that lasted for centuries. I think that they would want us too, using their example and ingenuity, to face the problems of our own day with the good of all of the faithful in mind, and grounded in the scripture and tradition that has been our stronghold since the birth of the church. Priest Joe

Hmmm...Remie, if one to change just few words in your post concerning Othodoxy in Mexico...like change Mexico to Russia, Mexico City to Moscow, Roman Catholic to Russian Othodox and vice versa... Seems to me to be the same thing that the MOP is complaining about the RCs doing in Russia! Don

First of all let me tell you that I am Catholic (post Vatican II).

I agree with Joe that no Apostolic Church should try to proselytize members of another Apostolic Church. Active proselytizing shall be discarded. The Catholic Church should keep their support to the Orthodox Church in evangelizing Russian people. Regarding the situation of the unchurched it is not an easy one and I think no one can claim them.

I see it, the situation of the Catholic Church in Russia is not different than the situation of the Orthodox Church in Western Europe, America and Australia where Orthodox Churches have set eparchies and even Metropolitan Sees to minister their diaspora flock. The Catholic Church has restablished the church institutions it had before the Soviet era to care of their own people. Nothing wrong about it. Inconvenience for the Ecumenical dialogue? Yes? Whose to be blamed? The RCC? Don�t think so.

Remie:
I think it is a misrepresentation to say that the vast majoroty of the population in Mexico is "nominal" Catholic. What is the test to define a "nominal" Catholic, or Orthodox, or other Christian? Where are the statistics to say so?

I have always been a Catholic and I have seen many sincere people living their faith and raising their sons and daughters as Christian, having them baptized, confirmated (crismated), receiving communion, being married and buried as Catholics. Let me tell you that my own parish is a mega-parish and during Holy Mass there are always 600-700 people (6 times during Sundays). But this is only my personal experience...

Again, from my own experience the RCC in Mexico has 4 main problems: (1) People raised Catholic, but who don�t practice their faith (eventhough many of them keep their lives under the moral standards of their religion); (2) Precarious religious education, which has been acknowledged by our Bishops and who concentrated their efforts towards what is called the "New Evangelization" (theological institutions for lay people, mandatory courses before baptism, confirmation, communion, marriage, etc.); (3) Protestant sects comming to the country with great support and financial means provided by their American denominations, with an agressive proselytizing style; (4) A chronical bad financial situation that has annoyed many people, and made the skeptical towards religion in general.

May the Holy Deigenitrix (Theotokos) keep all of us.

There is absolutely nothing wrong proselytizing non-Apostolic churches even Roman. However, the truth remains that the East will attract the West. Where the West fails, the East will succeed. The Balamand statement is but a mere statement. In fact, it is a foolish political statement that has no bearing on the large body of Orthodoxy.
As for the Russian Orthodox Church, Rome can do better by minding her own business. If the Russian Patriarch wants help he certainly would not ask Rome. In fact, he does not need Rome. He needs Orthodox support which he is getting. The Russians have much work to do with their own people and the Roman intrusions do not help the situation.
As for Roman failings, the Orthodox will come and clean house whether its filled with nominal Latins or Protestants in Latin & South American countries. We Orthodox are a stubborn people for the true Faith and are always cautious of Latin intrusions. Maybe it's time that the Latins wake up and restore their ecclessiology to what it was once before the Schism.

...So the Roman Church is not apostolic?

Moe Ephrem,
Rome WAS apostolic.

OK, Rum Orthodox, thanks for clarifying your POV on the matter. I'm interested in knowing what you think of the Syrian Orthodox Church and the other Oriental Orthodox Churches in communion with her? Thanks!

Hi Mor Ephrem,
If you are speaking of oriental Orthodox Churches in communion with Rome, I'm afriad they too have lost it. For those oriental Orthodox, whom I do have great admiration for, I believe we are closer to achieving Unity in the Faith. Bottom line is that they will by default accept all Seven Ecumenical Councils as binding. Having studied and conversed with the Oriental Orthodox, I have no problems with them. We await the official acceptance of all 7 Ecumenical Councils. Even the Oriental Orthodox don't accept Rome's current apostolicity. Your welcome!

Dear Friends:

May God grant us cool heads and patience.

None of this is as bad as it appears.

Russia will not become a Roman Catholic country, and Orthodoxy will not disappear from the land.

If I recall the Moscow Patriarchate was non-too happy about the original establishment of the Apostolic Administrations.

If I recall they used the same words in the 1990s as they did to describe today�s present situation.

After a cooling off period, when they realized that the threat was not as significant as they thought it would be, their tone mellowed considerably.

On more than one occasion I have seen Bishop Tadeusz Kondrusevich in cordial meetings with Bishops of the Moscow Patriarchate.

Again, may the Lord grant us cool heads and holy patience.


defreitas