www.byzcath.org Forums News & Events Church News Icon of our Lady of Kazan to return to Russia

Dear Snoopers,

What else do you know about inside Vatican politics?

Alex

Snoopy,

What is wrong with Pope John Paul II wanting to return the icon in person?

Since the Holy Father has a history of asking forgiveness from the Orthodox on what basis do you form your accusation that he wanted some sort of triumphal entrance?

Please explain.

Admin

Dear Administrator,

Perhaps some of us Orthodox have fallen into the trap of seeing everything the Pope of Rome does as potentially having political overtures with respect to a Vatican ecumenical agenda.

So the return of the Icon of Kazan personally by the Pope of Rome, while praiseworthy on the face of it, is, from this perspective, simply a way by which he can make a symbolic statement and promote the old pro-Rome agenda in the heartland of Orthodox Russia.


Nothing has changed with Rome, these same Orthodox might say. RC missionaries still operate in Russia under the aegis of serving "only local RC citizens" which they don't ever believe for one moment. And the Uniates in Ukraine are still raging against the Orthodox, as the Moscow Patriarch continues to insist.

Some of us Orthodox feel that way, but not all.

Alex

Dear All:

Just to pick up on Alex's point, there can be little doubt that there is a pro-Rome and pro-Latin Rite agenda that is being carried out in traditional Byzantine Rite territories (Ukraine being the example I know best). Can anyone really tell me what was the purpose of the Pope's celebration of the Latin Rite Mass in Kyiv during his visit to Ukraine? Rome, of course, claims that it was for the RC's living in Ukraine from other countries. Yet the Mass was said in moderm Ukrainian. Not in German, French, Spanish, Italian, etc, etc, etc, but in Ukrainian! If we are a universal church and both Rites are equal in stature, why, then did Rome feel the need to translate the Mass into Ukrainian? The only plausible anwer is that it wants to Latinize the population.

Back to the point. The Pope going to Moscow to "return" something that the Russian people feel should never have left their territory would, IMHO, add insult to injury. Do it quietly without fanfare and we might buy into a story that Rome has piety and unity on its mind and not politics.

Finally, while I'm at it, does it bother anyone else that the earthly remains of St. John Chrysostom rest in the Vatican?

If I have offended, please forgive, but I speak what is in my heart.

Yours,

kl

Dear Snoopy:

It was the Bishop of Fatima, the Icon's custodian and the Blue Army, who decided that the Pope should personally return the Icon to Russia.

The Bishop of Fatima could have done it well enough himself, but thought that it would be a great ecumenical gesture if it came from the Bishop of Rome.

In the end it is the honour of the Mother of God which is being offended.

The Blue Army should have just minded their own business and let the Icon be sold publicly to some art institution.

Don't you think that it would have made a nice addition to the Metropolitan Museum of New York, or perhaps the Getty in Los Angeles.

Moscow would have stood less chance of getting it back for veneration than it does currently with all it's great and sacred Icons in Russian Museums.

As to plundered relics and treasures of the east, it too might have been better if the Turks had gotten their hands them.

At least it would have been infidels who would have caused the destruction and not fellow Christians.

But then again you lose both ways don't you?


defreitas


In answer to another post:

As I understand it there never was a complete body for St. Andrew, what was consigned to Rome so many years ago was just the skull.

I really think this is going a bit far. If a Byzantine Catholic church translates the Divine Liturgy into Spanish or Tagalog, I would not accuse it of trying to Byzantinize the Phillipines or Latin America. Perhaps there really are Ukrainian speaking Latins? Maybe descendants of Poles or Germans that no longer speak those languages? Maybe Ukrainian serves as a unifying tongue for the immigrants from other countries? Is it possible this was done for sincere and not nefarious reasons?

If Rome was concerned with finding a language for the ex-pat Poles and Germans living in Kyiv and vicinity, then it should have chosen Russian becasue that is the predominant language in that area.

Yours,

kl

Dear KL,

Would Russian really have been better? Wouldn�t it have angered Ukrainian nationalists? Doesn�t it make sense to say the Mass in Ukrainian when in Ukraine?

I still don�t see this as �proof� of latinization and can�t see how making blanket assumptions helps anybody. It doesn�t strike me as proof or evidence, just more personal speculation.If there are latins in Ukraine then why would a Mass not not be said for them in Ukrainian? Is it disturbing that they might consider themselves Ukrainian too and not just descendants of Poles, Lithuanians and whoever?

This line of thinking disturbs me because it might then follow that Masses in this country should be in Gaelic, Italian, Polish, German, Spanish, and Filipino. After all, why would they be in English? For a long time Roman Catholics in this country were suspected of not being �real� Americans.

I have confidence that the Churches in Ukraine, Byzantine and Latin, knew what they were doing when arranging the Papal visit and that they sought to meet the needs of the faithful. I also trust that they and the Holy Father were sincere in their actions.

Since the Holy Father has a history of asking forgiveness from the Orthodox on what basis do you form your accusation that he wanted some sort of triumphal entrance?

What accusation? I never said that Pope John Paul II was doing wrong. Oh my God!

What I meant is that some people in the Latin Church would have presented the images of Pope John Paul II in Moscow with the icon embracing Patriarch Alexei as if all the problems betwen both Churches were solved or as if the Russian Church had forgot the issue of proselitism. I remember last christmas when a Russian girls choir was sent to greet John Paul II in Rome, some Catholic newspapers saw this as a tryumph and as if the dialogues were about to restart.

What I mean is that if the disputes between both Churches are not solved, a Papal visit would only be a symbol, generator of enormous hopes and the moment after the visit would have been very dissapointing for all Catholics and Orthodox who support the Ecumenical dialogues.

Dear Krylos Leader,

Actually, I have a prayerbook of the Ukrainian Latin-Rite Catholic Church in Ukraine . . .

In the aftermath of 1946, numerous Ukrainian Greek Catholic families opted to attend the Roman Catholic church rather than become either Orthodox or go to the underground Eastern Catholic Church (a dangerous business after all).

The result today is that there are generations of Ukrainians for whom the Latin Catholic Church is now THEIR Church and they serve their Mass and devotions in modern Ukrainian.

The prayerbook I have (it's currently on loan) is written in excellent Ukrainian, there are prayers for Ukraine there, traditional Latin devotions and the like.

In short, it is very much like my Basilian Greek Catholic prayerbook . . .

The Roman Catholic Church in Kyiv has quite a long history. The main Church there is that of St Alexander I, Pope of Rome.

Roman Catholic presence in Kyiv began with St Olha the Great who not only invited Latin missionaries to come to Kyiv to discuss their Church with her and her Court, but who also encouraged them to lay down roots in Kyiv.

There is a long line of successive Roman Catholic "Bishops of Rus'" starting from that time, which line was renewed in 1990 after being ended with the Russian Revolution.

We Ukies now have two Catholic Churches as a result of 1946. But Ukraine has been home to Latin Catholic Bishops of Rus' for a thousand years.

The RC Church of St Alexander I, Pope of Rome (celebrated in our Church on my birthday and I'm named for him) has a website that I saw a while ago.

Alex

Dear Alex:

But did not St. Olha and her grandson reject the Latin church and its practices, rules and devotions in favor of the Church of Constantinople? In that case, the Latins should have taken the hint 1000+ years ago, gotten out and stayed out! (JOKE! JOKE! Please don't flame me for that). I guess we Ukies can be proud for having withstood a millenium of attempts at Latinization by Rome. (Another joke!). As for the Basillian prayer books, just make sure to substitute "pravoslavnyj" for "pravovirnyj" and you should be relatively OK.

Anyway, we are completely off the topic of the return of the icon of our Lady of Kazan, so I will stop right there. Now where did I put that fanfare trumpet???

Yours,

kl

Dear Kliros,

Actually, give me the Latins in Kyiv rather than the Russkies any day!

But everyone is welcome, no matter how they make the Sign of the Cross . . .

God bless,

Alex

While I am personally disappointed that the Holy Father will not be able to persoanlly return the icon of Our Lady to Kazan to Russia, I still have hope that this goodwill gesture will still open the door for the eventual visit of the Holy Father to Moscow.

The Catholic Church cannot be accused of stealing the icon from Russia, since-according to accounts- the icon was either smuggled out by Orthodox Christians or sold by the communists.

After two attempts in which the Russian Orthodox churhces in the USA were unable to purchase the icon from the private owner who had it, the Blue Army stepped in to puchase it at the insistence of the then-living Russian Byzantine Catholic bishop and the Russian Byzantine Catholic priests involved in the Blue Army. The icon was ceremonially enshrined in the magnificent Russian Byzantine Catholic chapel of the Dormition in Fatima.

Russian pilgrims would come to Fatima to venerate the icon, even the late Metropolitan of "Leningrad", Nikodim, served a moleben in the chapel, which was a significant ecumenical event.

What a gesture! It may not sit well with the Russian Orthodox hierarchy to think that they owe a debt of gratitude to Russian "Uniates" for coming to the aid of acquiring the icon of Our Lady of Kazan.

Is it not possible then that this miracle-working icon will obtain another miracle in improving the relationship between the Roman Catholic and Orthodox Churches? I certainly think so.

Too optimistic? NO! With Our Lord, ANYTHING is possible.

Dear Griego,

Actually, I think the Russian Greek Catholics are on the best possible of terms with the Russian Orthodox.

They call themselves Russian "Catholic Orthodox" and follow the Russian traditions VERY scrupulously.

Historically, even Uniate Metropolitans of Kyiv won admiration from the Orthodox faithful if they were careful to observe the Byzantine traditions to the fullest and resisted Latinizations - this is written up in Fr. Nazarko's book on the Metropolitans.

The Russian Catholic Orthodox publish a lot of Orthodox liturgical materials for shipment to Russia and her Orthodox faithful.

Even Jordanville sells the Russian Catholic Orthodox Russian language "Akafistnyk" or book of Akathists - which I have.

Akathists to the Russian saints are contained therein, along with Akathists to Russian miracle-working Icons of the Theotokos.

The Orthodox Akathist to St Vladimir has one line in it that is a "jab" at Rome.

The Russian Catholics simply made a slight change to it . . .

The line has to do with why St Vladimir chose the Eastern Church - the Orthodox version said it was because he rejected the Western heresy while the Catholic version said it was because he loved the beauty of the Eastern services more.

The latter is probably closer to what actually happened any way!

As a long-time member of the Blue Army, I remember with great fondness the icon of Kazan and the many times it appeared in Fatima publications.

I also understand that the icon of Our Lady of Fatima in the Byzantine style was circulated in Russia itself and this BEFORE the Fatima apparitions (?).

God bless,

Alex

Actually, I think the Russian Greek Catholics are on the best possible of terms with the Russian Orthodox.
They call themselves Russian "Catholic Orthodox" and follow the Russian traditions VERY scrupulously.

Historically, even Uniate Metropolitans of Kyiv won admiration from the Orthodox faithful if they were careful to observe the Byzantine traditions to the fullest and resisted Latinizations - this is written up in Fr. Nazarko's book on the Metropolitans. Yes, you are correct! If I remember correctly, the late Russian Catholic priest, Archimandrite John Mowatt, former rector of the Dormition Russian Catholic chapel in Fatima, met with Patriarch Pimen on a visit to Russia. Patriarch Pimen presented him with a pectoral cross.


As a long-time member of the Blue Army, I remember with great fondness the icon of Kazan and the many times it appeared in Fatima publications. Yes, I am too a member of the Blue Army. I am though a bit diappointed with the Blue Army as of late. The above mentioned Fr. Mowatt died several months ago, and I have not seen any posthumous recognition for the work he has done for the Blue Army. He played a major role in convincing the Blue Army to acquire the icon of Our Lady of Kazan. He also set up the Our Lady of Kazan Guild, as a means of bringing awareness to Roman Catholics about the East. He also published, "Looking East", a superb magazine that explained Byzantine liturgical traditions. Fr. Mowatt was also responsible for the interior furnishings of the Dormition chapel(www.doumuspacis.com [doumuspacis.com]), which now stands as a testament to his work for the Theotokos of Fatima. Unfortunately, when Fr. Mowatt left to retire to Boston, the apostolate that he so worked hard for ended.

Even now, I have not seen any mention regarding the current dealings between the Vatican and Russia regarding the transfer of the icon on any of the Blue Army publications or on the website www.bluearmy.com [bluearmy.com] .

I also understand that the icon of Our Lady of Fatima in the Byzantine style was circulated in Russia itself and this BEFORE the Fatima apparitions (?). Yes. In Russia, there appeared a version of the "Joy Of All Who Sorrrow" icon that showed the Theotokos dressed in white- a rarity in Byzantine icons! It was this icon that served the basis for the Byzantine icon of OLF. The iconographer-as Fr. Mowatt states in a booklet he wrote- simply added the images of Francisco, Jacinta, and Lucia. It is a very unique icon. Copies of this icon are enshrined in the Dormtion chapel in Fatima and in Our Lady of Fatima Russian Catholic Church in San Francisco.

The 101foundation sells a variation of the Fatima icon. You can purchase a copy at http://www.101foundation.com/itemdtl.phtml?orderid=8d0b2b82afef6624ff138bd42f652172&idnum=474 . During a pilgrimage to Moscow, the 101foundation presented a copy of this icon to the Metropolitan of Moscow in the Patriarchal Cathedral of the Theophany. The metropolitan showed the pilgrims a copy of the icon of Our lady of Kazan, which itself is miracle-working. The metropoltian stated to the pilgrims that he knew the original was in Fatima.