Friday, May 10, 2013
Tuesday, May 7, 2013
Monday, May 6, 2013
Photo of the Day - "Pascha Bears"
Lara, Nick and Noah T. were stopped by Hieromonk Teodosy as they were leaving St. Elias Church on Easter Sunday morning.
Thursday, May 2, 2013
VIDEO: 1994 Holy Thursday at St. George's, Lviv
SOURCE: Медіаресурс Української Греко-Католицької Церкви
Фрагменти Богослужіння Страсного четверга у соборі Святого Юра у Львові 28 квітня 1994 року. Вечірню з Літургією Василія Великого очолив Блаженніший Мирослав Іван Любачівський.
На відео можна побачити як Глава УГКЦ освячує антимінси та здійснює Чин умивання ніг 12 священикам. Це богослужіння є спогадом Тайної Вечері, де Христос встановив Тайну Євхаристії та умив ноги своїм учням.
Фрагменти Богослужіння Страсного четверга у соборі Святого Юра у Львові 28 квітня 1994 року. Вечірню з Літургією Василія Великого очолив Блаженніший Мирослав Іван Любачівський.
На відео можна побачити як Глава УГКЦ освячує антимінси та здійснює Чин умивання ніг 12 священикам. Це богослужіння є спогадом Тайної Вечері, де Христос встановив Тайну Євхаристії та умив ноги своїм учням.
Wednesday, May 1, 2013
Tuesday, April 30, 2013
The Liturgy as Therapy
SOURCE: Symposium blog
Why is it, I wonder, that for fifty years priests have been able to get away with any number of liturgical abuses, from the simple disregard of a rubric here or there, to radically-disobedient ‘clown masses’ and other such things (see here, for example, and here… if you dare!), yet another priest may seek to guide his community in returning to the practice of the Church from the earliest centuries through to the modern era, in obedience to the liturgicon or missal and following the example of the recent Pope as well as the best liturgical scholars of either East or West, and this is met with bewilderment or even hostility?
For a few years when I had no access to an Eastern Church, I lived through Roman liturgy that was so bad I lost my faith. There were other factors involved in my disintegration, of course, but when I needed the Church to sustain me, all I encountered was a celebration of Mass based on whatever the priest happened to decide that week, or worse, the decisions of the Liturgical Committee. And it hurt. I think it was Protestant theologian Reinhold Niebuhr who declared that he was thankful he belonged to a church that recited the Creed, because when he couldn’t believe, the Church did for him. But whoever it was, he was spot on. The Mass or Divine Liturgy faithfully celebrated is, for Catholics and Orthodox, the weekly recitation of the Creed, for it is lex orandi lex credendi. And as such, it has the power to encourage or to undermine faith.
A number of things have knocked me for sixes and nines over the last few weeks, and I sometimes I struggle to find the inner resources to bother getting up in the morning. If I had my way, of course, I would spend my time in the Liturgy, happily touching my head to the floor (as in the Presanctified), or singing the Pater noster with dignified gusto, drawing from these acts the strength they have proffered the faithful through the ages. Alas, eventually all liturgies come to an end though (yes, even Byzantine ones!), and I am forced to contend with the fact that I must earn my keep, and live among my fellow human beings as a peculiar minority of one.
I turn to the Liturgy, though, because in it I find Christ. He promised that he would be known and encountered there, and I believe it; but I have also experienced it. The Liturgy has the power to transform, as it transcends all human categories and draws its partakers into a cosmic and eternal mystery. Just as our Lord himself became subject to the vulnerabilities of the flesh though, such as when the crowds pressed in and threatened him with death, his mysterious kenosis under the bread and wine is vulnerable to our abuse as well. By de-mystifying and anchoring our celebrations in the here and now, we limit the degree to which they can communicate heavenly realities, and undermine their power to nourish and strengthen.
Ultimately, the Liturgy has therapeutic power. This is because it is not a performance, but an effectual representation of heaven and what goes on before the throne of God. It is also, as our Lord himself promised, an extension not only of his act of Sacrifice, but of his own self for the sake of his people. And this means, in turn, that the entirety of his teaching ministry and the entirety of his healing ministry are manifest there, alongside everything else. It means that when the Liturgy is celebrated objectively and without the undo interference of personality and idiosyncrasy, of ego and fleeting taste, then God’s people can be assured of meeting him there, and of receiving his grace and mercies. In light of this, priests and people alike need to pursue the improvement of their liturgies in greater conformity to Tradition with some urgency. The well-being of our souls depends on it.
For a few years when I had no access to an Eastern Church, I lived through Roman liturgy that was so bad I lost my faith. There were other factors involved in my disintegration, of course, but when I needed the Church to sustain me, all I encountered was a celebration of Mass based on whatever the priest happened to decide that week, or worse, the decisions of the Liturgical Committee. And it hurt. I think it was Protestant theologian Reinhold Niebuhr who declared that he was thankful he belonged to a church that recited the Creed, because when he couldn’t believe, the Church did for him. But whoever it was, he was spot on. The Mass or Divine Liturgy faithfully celebrated is, for Catholics and Orthodox, the weekly recitation of the Creed, for it is lex orandi lex credendi. And as such, it has the power to encourage or to undermine faith.
A number of things have knocked me for sixes and nines over the last few weeks, and I sometimes I struggle to find the inner resources to bother getting up in the morning. If I had my way, of course, I would spend my time in the Liturgy, happily touching my head to the floor (as in the Presanctified), or singing the Pater noster with dignified gusto, drawing from these acts the strength they have proffered the faithful through the ages. Alas, eventually all liturgies come to an end though (yes, even Byzantine ones!), and I am forced to contend with the fact that I must earn my keep, and live among my fellow human beings as a peculiar minority of one.
I turn to the Liturgy, though, because in it I find Christ. He promised that he would be known and encountered there, and I believe it; but I have also experienced it. The Liturgy has the power to transform, as it transcends all human categories and draws its partakers into a cosmic and eternal mystery. Just as our Lord himself became subject to the vulnerabilities of the flesh though, such as when the crowds pressed in and threatened him with death, his mysterious kenosis under the bread and wine is vulnerable to our abuse as well. By de-mystifying and anchoring our celebrations in the here and now, we limit the degree to which they can communicate heavenly realities, and undermine their power to nourish and strengthen.
Ultimately, the Liturgy has therapeutic power. This is because it is not a performance, but an effectual representation of heaven and what goes on before the throne of God. It is also, as our Lord himself promised, an extension not only of his act of Sacrifice, but of his own self for the sake of his people. And this means, in turn, that the entirety of his teaching ministry and the entirety of his healing ministry are manifest there, alongside everything else. It means that when the Liturgy is celebrated objectively and without the undo interference of personality and idiosyncrasy, of ego and fleeting taste, then God’s people can be assured of meeting him there, and of receiving his grace and mercies. In light of this, priests and people alike need to pursue the improvement of their liturgies in greater conformity to Tradition with some urgency. The well-being of our souls depends on it.
Saturday, April 20, 2013
Patriarch Sviatoslav at the Phanar today
From the Facebook page of Daniel Galadza:
His All-Holiness Bartholomew, Archbishop of Constantinople and Ecumenical Patriarch, receives His Beatitude Sviatoslav and His Grace Borys at the Phanar — with Borys Gudziak at The Ecumenical Patriarchate.
From today's meeting with His All-Holiness, Bartholomew, Archbishop of Constantinople and Ecumenical Patriarch. Before the meeting Patriarch Sviatoslav and Bishop Borys visited the Cathedral of St. George at the Phanar and venerated the relics of the holy hierarchs Basil the Great, Gregory the Theologian, and John Chrysostom. After the meeting, there was a quick stop to the Church of the Theotokos of Blachernae, particularly significant today on the Saturday of the Akathist, where Patriarch Sviatoslav led the singing of the first Kontakion of the Akathist Hymn.
His All-Holiness Bartholomew, Archbishop of Constantinople and Ecumenical Patriarch, receives His Beatitude Sviatoslav and His Grace Borys at the Phanar — with Borys Gudziak at The Ecumenical Patriarchate.
From today's meeting with His All-Holiness, Bartholomew, Archbishop of Constantinople and Ecumenical Patriarch. Before the meeting Patriarch Sviatoslav and Bishop Borys visited the Cathedral of St. George at the Phanar and venerated the relics of the holy hierarchs Basil the Great, Gregory the Theologian, and John Chrysostom. After the meeting, there was a quick stop to the Church of the Theotokos of Blachernae, particularly significant today on the Saturday of the Akathist, where Patriarch Sviatoslav led the singing of the first Kontakion of the Akathist Hymn.
 | ||
| At ΙΕΡΟΣ ΝΑΟΣ ΠΑΝΑΓΙΑΣ ΒΛΑΧΕΡΝΑΣ |
 | |||||||||
With Borys Gudziak at The Ecumenical Patriarchate.    |
Thursday, April 11, 2013
Bishop Hlib Blesses Fr. Serge's Tombstone
SOURCE: RISU Facebook page
Bishop Hlib visited Dublin parish and blessing the tombstone on Fr. Serge Keleher's grave
Bishop Hlib visited Dublin parish and blessing the tombstone on Fr. Serge Keleher's grave
Friday, March 29, 2013
Russian Orthodox warns Church of England
SOURCE: World News Group
The Russian Orthodox Church recently warned the new head of the Church of England about the possibility of allowing female bishops, saying it could break the unity among the churches.
The Church of England, which oversees the world’s 80 million-member Anglican Communion, narrowly rejected allowing women bishops last November, while congregations in the United States, Australia, New Zealand, and Canada all allow female bishops.
But in a message to Justin Welby, the new archbishop of Canterbury, Metropolitan Hilarion, head of Synodal Department of External Church Relations of the Russian Orthodox Church, said that allowing female bishops would lead to the elimination of the theoretical possibility of the Orthodox Church recognizing the hierarchy of the Anglican Church.
“We know that the Anglican Church is now going through a difficult time and various views, positions, and parties co-exist in it,” Hilarion said. “However, we really hope that the traditional understanding of Christian morals and the church system will prevail in this polemic.”
Anglicans hold to the “branch theory,” which claims the three main branches of Christianity are the Roman Catholic Church, the Eastern Orthodox Church, and the Anglican Church. The Eastern Orthodox Church has long rejected the theory, and in it’s message last weekend hinted it would further distance itself from the Anglican Church if female bishops were allowed.
In the November vote, a majority of the bishops and clergy of the Church of England—a third of whom are female—cast their ballots for the measure to allow women to be bishops, but it did not have enough votes from the church’s lay members to gain approval.
Most Anglican churches in developing countries oppose both women priests and bishops, and have created a parallel group to the Anglican Communion to protest its liberal leanings.
The Church of England, which oversees the world’s 80 million-member Anglican Communion, narrowly rejected allowing women bishops last November, while congregations in the United States, Australia, New Zealand, and Canada all allow female bishops.
But in a message to Justin Welby, the new archbishop of Canterbury, Metropolitan Hilarion, head of Synodal Department of External Church Relations of the Russian Orthodox Church, said that allowing female bishops would lead to the elimination of the theoretical possibility of the Orthodox Church recognizing the hierarchy of the Anglican Church.
“We know that the Anglican Church is now going through a difficult time and various views, positions, and parties co-exist in it,” Hilarion said. “However, we really hope that the traditional understanding of Christian morals and the church system will prevail in this polemic.”
Anglicans hold to the “branch theory,” which claims the three main branches of Christianity are the Roman Catholic Church, the Eastern Orthodox Church, and the Anglican Church. The Eastern Orthodox Church has long rejected the theory, and in it’s message last weekend hinted it would further distance itself from the Anglican Church if female bishops were allowed.
In the November vote, a majority of the bishops and clergy of the Church of England—a third of whom are female—cast their ballots for the measure to allow women to be bishops, but it did not have enough votes from the church’s lay members to gain approval.
Most Anglican churches in developing countries oppose both women priests and bishops, and have created a parallel group to the Anglican Communion to protest its liberal leanings.
Wednesday, March 27, 2013
The Journey of Bishop Pavel
A fascinating account of the life of a Russian Orthodox bishop who was received into full communion with the Church of Rome.
The ROCOR historians are to be thanked for such a fine and non-polemical article. (There is one small error - the monks of Chevetogne are Benedictines not Capuchins.)
SOURCE: ROCOR Studies
The future Bishop Pavel was born on 02 Nov 1880 in Arkhangelsk, Russia, to a Deacon’s family. He attended the Arkhangelsk Seminary, a venerable institution founded in 1723, graduating in 1903. The seminary library was famous for its collection of 16th and 17th century manuscripts. It was closed by the Bolsheviks in 1920. According to “the advice of the Optina Elders,” Trofim Meletiev was tonsured a monk at the Solovki Monastery. He was surely familiar with the Solovki Monastery, as the Monastery had a podvorye located in Arkhangelsk. Subsequently ordained hierodeacon in 1909, and hieromonk in 1910, he was elevated to Igumen and appointed as Diocesan Missionary in the Russian Far North in 1916. [1,2]
Igumen Pavel was arrested by the Soviet authorities in 1920, and received a death sentence, which was commuted to five years of hard labor. After his release, he travelled to Moscow, where he became acquainted with the Bishops Ioasaph (Shishkovsko-Drelevsky, +1935), a vicar of the Maloyaroslavets Diocese, and Pavlin (Kroshechkin, shot 1937 in Kemervsky Camp), ruling bishop of the Kaluga diocese. He “assisted these two Bishops in their ministry, and preached in Moscow, Serpukhov, and Kaluga.” For non-cooperation with the Soviet power, he was arrested again in 1931, and imprisoned in Butyrki, and subsequently sentenced to exile in Kazakhstan [other sources say hard labor in the Karaganda concentration camp] until 1937. From 1937 to 1941, he served as a Catacomb priest, secretively wandering here and there, often hiding from the authorities. His wanderings across the Soviet Union ended in Byelorussia, under the German occupation. [3]
The German Occupation Forces in Byelorussia, as they did in Ukraine, allowed the opening of churches, and a renewal of church life. This relatively free, revived Church became known as the Byelorussian Autonomous Orthodox Church. Igumen Pavel assisted the renewal of church life in the Smolensk, Briansk, and Mogilev regions. [4]
The German Occupation Forces mistrusted an Orthodox Church in Belorussia that was in contact with any other Orthodox Church, as in all the territories they occupied. Totally opposed to what they saw as the Bolshevik controlled Moscow Patriarchate, and forbidding the clergy of both the Polish Orthodox Church and Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia to enter the occupied areas of the Soviet Union, the Germans supported the creation of an Autocephalous Church for Byelorussia. This was done to support Byelorussian nationalism as part of a “divide and conquer” strategy against the Soviets. The Germans had united Byelorussian territory that had been parts of both the Soviet Union and Poland. Byelorussian nationalists had been “imported” into occupied Byelorussia from Germany, where many had lived in exile. The Germans utilized these nationalists to aid them in governing occupied Byelorussia, and to encourage the creation of an Autocephalous Byelorussian Church. [5]
In 1942, a local council of the Byelorussian Church was held in Minsk. Many of the nationalists the Germans placed in the Council were not church oriented in the least, but supported autocephaly for nationalistic reasons only. During this council, the creation of a Byelorussian Autocephalous Church was approved, despite the objections of Metropolitan Panteleimon (Pavel Stepanovich Rozhnovskii, 27 Oct 1867-12/30 Dec 1950) of Minsk & Byelorussia, and Archishop Filofei (Vladimir Narko, 21 Feb 1905-11/24 Sep 1984), Met. Panteleimon’s deputy, who served in his place during the Council. The Germans were aware of Vladika Panteleimon’s objections, and had him under arrest in the Zhirovitskii Monastery during the Council. As the decision was enacted during wartime, the hierarchs knew that little could be accomplished in a request for approval of a new autocephalous Church. Letters were composed to the Patriarchate of Constantinople asking approval. Would-could-these letters be delivered? No record exists of the receipt by, or any reply from the Patriarchate of Constantinople in relation to these letters. Since there was no approval of the autocephaly, the Byelorussian Church of the German occupation era has become commonly referred to as the Byelorussian Autonomous Church. (After the War, in the West, a small “Byelorussian Autocephalous Church” came into being, solely on the authority of the Council of 1942 in Minsk. It exists to this day, divided into two or three factions.) Technically considered as autonomous under the ultimate jurisdiction of the Moscow Patriarchate, there was little or no contact between the Byelorussian Church and the Moscow Patriarchate during the era of German occupation; it was strictly forbidden, and, as well, would have involved traversing battle lines. Despite being forbidden by the German occupation forces, there was contact and cooperation between the Byelorussian Church and the ROCOR. [6]
In October 1943, the Council of Bishops of the ROCOR met in Vienna, Austria. The primary reason for the meeting of the Council of Bishops was the declaration that the election of Metropolitan Sergey (Ivan Nikolaevich Stragorodskii, 11 Jun 1867-02 15 May 1944) as Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia was to be considered as “null and void.” Bishop Venedikt (Bobkovskii, 28 Feb 1876-21 Aug/03 Sept 1951) of Grodno, and Archimandrite Gregorii (George Borishkevitch) from the Byelorussian Autonomous Church also attended the Council, during which Archimandrite Gregory was consecrated as Bishop of Gomel & Mozyr’ for the Byelorussian Autonomous Church. ROCOR Hierarchs attending the Council, and participating in the consecration, were: Metropolitan Anastassy (Alexander Alexeevich Gribanovsky, 06 Aug 1873-09/22 May 1965), First Hierarch of the ROCOR; Metropolitan Seraphim (Alexander Ivanovich Lukianov, 23 Aug 1879-18 Feb 1959) of Paris & Western Europe; Metropolitan Seraphim (Albert Lade) of Berlin & Central Europe; Bishop Sergey (Arkady Dmitrievich Korolev, 18 Jan 1881-18 Dec 1952) of Prague (a Vicar of Metropolitan Evlogy, by German law under the jurisdiction of Met. Seraphim of Berlin during German rule of Czechoslovakia, who afforded Bishop Sergey a relatively free rule over his parishes); Bishop Vasily of Vienna (Vasily Gavrilovich Pavlovskii, 21 Nov 1880-1945); and Bishop Philip (Johann von Gardner, 09 Dec 1898-26 Feb 1984) of Potsdam (both vicars of Met. Seraphim of Berlin). The Germans allowed the participation of the Byelorussian clergy to bolster the condemnation of the election of Patriarch Sergey, but, in doing so, also confirmed the cooperation between the Byelorussian Autonomous Church and the ROCOR. [7]
On 7 Oct 1943, Igumen Pavel was consecrated to the Episcopate as Bishop of Roslavl’sk, Vicar of Bishop Stefan (Simeon Iosifovich Sevbo, 17 Apr 1872-25 Jan 1965, later ROCOR Archbishop of Vienna & Austria) of Smolensk & Briansk. The consecration took place in the Metropolitan Cathedral in Minsk, presided over by Metropolitan Panteleimon (Rozhnovsky), concelebrating with Archbishop Filofei (Narko), and Bishop Venedikt (Bobkovsky). [8, 9]
In June 1944, the entire episcopate of the Byelorussian Autonomous Church fled west to escape the swiftly advancing Red Army. The Byelorussian Hierarchs eventually found their way to Germany, along with many members of their flock. Meeting in Council in Dec 1944, Metropolitan Panteleimon insisted that their only possible course of action was to seek unity with the Russian Church Abroad. The Byelorussian Hierarchs, including Bishop Pavel, unanimously followed Metropolitan’s Panteleimon’s advice. Bishop Pavel, after travelling through Czechoslovakia, Austria, and Germany, upon arrival in Munich, “sought assistance from Metropolitan Anastassy of the ROCOR.” [10, 11]
On 24 Apr/07 May Apr 1946, a Hierarchical Council of the ROCOR was held in Munich. Hierarchs of the Byelorussian and Ukrainian Autonomous Churches were accepted into the ROCOR. During a session of the Council, after all the Byelorussian Bishops-except Bishop Pavel-had been officially accepted into the Church Abroad, Bishop Pavel was questioned about his leanings towards the Roman Catholic Church. The questions turned out to be unwelcomed, and Bishop Pavel walked out of the Council. [12]
The proceedings of the Council during the questioning of Bishop Pavel are fascinating, giving a look, as it were, “behind closed doors,” into the Council chamber. Perhaps most interesting was Metropolitan Anastassy’s roles an impartial moderator, peacemaker, diplomat, and chairman.
Attending were: Metropolitan Anastassy, First Hierarch of the ROCOR; Metropolitan Seraphim of Berlin & Germany; Archbishop Panteleimon (Rudyk, Ukrainian Automous Church UAC); Archbishop Venedikt (Bobkovsky, Bielorussian Automous Church BAC); Archbishop Filofeli (Narko, BAC) Bishop Leonty (Phillipovsky, UAC); Bishop Afanassy (Martos, BAC); Bishop Stefan (Sevbo, BAC); Bishop Evlogy (Markovsky, UAC;) Bishop Dimitry (Magan, UAC); Bishop Fyodor (Rafailsky, UAC); Bishop Gregory (Borishkevich, BAC); Bishop Alexander (Lovchy, ROCOR); Bishop Seraphim (Ivanov, ROCOR); and Bishop Pavel (Meletiev, BAC) . The Council began at 10:30 a.m. with prayers in the Synodal Church with all the bishops present. The first subject under discussion in the Council was to be the composition of the Council. The Hierarchical or Bishops Council is composed of all the Bishops of a given Church. At that time, the only Bishop who had not been officially accepted into the ROCOR was Bishop Pavel. Since the Bishops of the Byelorussian Autonomous Church had met in Council in Munich in Dec 1944, deciding to join themselves to the Church Abroad, and since they undoubtedly had all been working and serving together since that time, it was certain that Bishop Pavel, too, would join his brother bishops. The subject of the ‘composition’ of the Council, therefore, centered on Bishop Pavel.
“Metropolitan Anastassy noted that Bishop Pavel had not yet officially joined the Church Abroad, that there needed to be some discussion on the issue, and asked that Bishop Pavel leave the room until this discussion was completed. Bishop Pavel protested this request, but, after some opposition, withdrew.
Metropolitan Anastassy, after some discussion on historical aspects of the Church Abroad, asked for a decision about Bishop Pavel. Archbishop Venedikt stated that Bishp Pavel should not be allowed to join the Council until he swears fidelity to the Orthodox Church. He further mentioned that Bishop Pavel spoke at the meeting of the Diocesan Charity Committee in favor of ‘a connection with the pope.’ Metropolitan Seraphim, who had presided at the Charity Committee meeting, further stated that Bishop Pavel had caused total confusion at the meeting, stating that the most important is forgotten: ‘that we all should be one,’ and that ‘our efforts are doomed to failure because we break the commandment of prayer.’ At that point, Bishop Pavel was stopped, and asked to speak on the work at hand. He did not, but went on, and said that ‘We are separated from Rome because of adversity,’ and suggested a telegram to the Pope saying that, ‘We mourn because we are not in communion with Rome.’ Archbishop Filofei and several other bishops vouched for the correctness of the description of what Bishop Pavel had said. Bishop Afanassii then related that a priest had come with a story that Bishop Pavel hed received ‘some sort of letter from Rome.’ Archbishop Venedikt reiterated that some sort of declaration need be composed and signed by Bishop Pavel, stating that he is not converting to Catholicism, and until that declaration, and his official acceptance, he should not be able to participate in the works of the Council. Metroplitan Anastassy then stated that it could have been a mistake, Bishop Pavel may have not been clearly elucidating his ideas, and that he needed to be given a chance to explain.
Bishop Pavel was called back into the Council, and Metropolitan Anastassy explained to him, ‘first of all,’ to keep to a peaceful tone, and that his remarks at the Charity Committee meeting caused the other bishops to think he was ‘criticizing the Orthodox Church because it is not in communion with Rome. That is the source of our unhappiness.’ Bishop Pavel declared that, in going to the meeting, he had no intention whatsoever of bringing up the subject. Then, Metropolitan Seraphim had offered to thank the Pope (for charitable contributions) and Archbishop Venedikt had commented, ‘It’s not necessary.’ Bishop Pavel said that he then stated that ‘Christians should live in peace, love and harmony, and we should live in peace with non-Orthodox Christians, and strive to achieve the unity of the Church.’ He went on to say that he had been speaking generally, had not made mention of any methods, had not called for Uniatism, had not suggested anyone come into union, and had not suggested that anyone become a traitor to the faith of their fathers. He did say he asked at the meeting for a telegram of thanks to the Pope for his assistance, that the meeting encouraged feelings of unity, and should go towards unity, and that the issue needed to be studied and ‘developed.’ He said he had not ‘developed this theme any further at the meeting.’
Bishop Pavel continued, mentioning that he had heard that some of his brother Byelorussian Bishops were ‘embarrassed,’ and that their confusion is due to a misunderstanding or one-sided understanding of the issue of the unity of the Church. ‘Nikolaev is giving a lecture on Rome, and tries to show that the Pope is the enemy of Orthodoxy. I do not share this sentiment, I am for rapprochement with Rome, I am not afraid of the Pope, and if the day came for talks, I would not yield one jot to him.’ Bishop Pavel was upset that the priest in question (who had mentioned that Bishop Pavel had received a letter from Rome) had refused to serve with him, and had asked him, ‘How much were you bought for?’ He said a priest has no business speaking to a bishop that way in public. He stated he had appealed to Archbishop Venedikt with Paschal greetings, and Archbishop Venedikt had responded by asking, ‘Are you Orthodox?’ Bishop Pavel concluded, stating that he felt both wronged and disappointed.
Archbishop Venedikt then spoke, stating that the speech delivered by Bishop Pavel at the Charity Committee meeting had given all the Byelorussian Bishops the distinct impression that he was ‘a supporter of Rome.’ Further, he stated that there were reports that Bishop Pavel had joined the unia, and a newspaper had reported that a Byelorussian bishop had converted to Catholicism. The Byelorussian bishops had all been sure it was Bishop Pavel who had converted. Archbishop Venedikt explained that he had not greeted him immediately, he needed to know the truth, and how to proceed-that’s why he asked the question. ‘If he is not Judas, I would be glad to welcome Bishop Pavel.’
Bishop Seraphim spoke of the desirability to ‘dot the i‘s.’ ‘Bishop Pavel stated that the Pope did not want to make changes in the Orthodox Church, and if he had entered into the canonical liturgical communion with him, it’s nothing. Eastern Rite Catholicism retains all the Orthodox doctrines, but with obedience to the Pope. It would be important to know whether this is something that has been offered to Bishop Pavel.’
Bishop Pavel stated that he was not a recipient of any offers, and had not engaged in any negotiations. He had asked to put forth the question of the connection and unity of churches thinking only about how to banish enmity. Metropolitan Anastassy observed that ‘this issue is beyond the competence of the Church Abroad. If Bishop Pavel, as he says, does not admit any canonical or doctrinal concessions, it should not be difficult to provide the written statement asked for by the Council. This was done in ancient times, and in this case, it is required.’
Bishop Pavel added that the air of distrust reminded him of the GPU. Bishop Dimitrii stated that he did not understand why it was difficult to meet in fraternal union with the Bishops, and that he would gladly submit such a document. Bishop Pavel said he still considered the request for such a statement as ‘an insult.’ Bishop Gregory said that he knew his fellow Byelorussian Bishops thought that Bishop Pavel had, indeed, converted to the unia, but that he himself did not. He went on to say that he believed in the unity of the Church, but that to submit to Rome and recognize the primacy and infallibility of the Pope would be ‘a retreat from the truth. I don’t see any humiliation in submitting the required statement.’ Bishop Pavel continued to insist that the claims presented did not justify asking him for such a statement. Metropolitan Anastassy responded that the signed statement is to reassure not only the Bishops, but, ‘also public opinion.’ Bishop Pavel countered that his signature on a statement was worthless, and that he would answer the charges in a series of public lectures. Metropolitan Anastassy replied that since the Council had unanimously decided to require the written statement, that if it was not supplied, it would be impossible for Bishop Pavel to participate in the Council. Bishop Pavel refused, said, ‘I need to pray,’ and left the Council.” [13]
Subsequently, Bishop Pavel received assistance from the German Roman Catholic Bishop Michael Buchberg. Later in 1946, Bishop Pavel, along with his sister, Igumenia Seraphima (Meletieva), were received into the Roman Catholic Church. Relating this turn of events, Bishop Pavel stated, “Adherence to the Universal Church, united to the Holy Apostolic Roman Throne, was, for me, my greatest joy in exile, and the most important step in the way of my ministry, Christ, Church, and Homeland.” After settling in Western Europe, Bishop Pavel explained that his “interest in Christian Unity, which has been with me from a young age, has increased.” He also stated that “our membership in the Catholic Church, and the jurisdiction of the Pope, is not subject to the waiver of any dogmas of the Orthodox Church.” [14]
“When the Germans began to retreat … , Bishop Pavel and his sister, a nun, Mother Igumenia Serafima, saw that exile was their only choice. Many adventures were in store for the two refugees, but God’s Providence accompanied them safely all the way to the end point of their journey – Rome. For some years, this sincere bishop had been led through prayer to believe in the necessity of being united with the Catholic Church under the Roman Pontiff. Indeed, the fulfilment of this desire had been the most serious reason prompting him to leave his beloved Russia.” [15]
“And so it came to pass on 21 September 1946 that the aged prelate humbly made his profession of the Catholic Faith into the hands of the Pope’s representative Cardinal Tisserant, receiving from Pope Pius XII the titular see of Heracleopolis.” [16]
Bishop Pavel became active in the ‘Russian Byzantine Catholic Church,’ a small group of Russian Catholic parishes, administered by an ‘Administrator’ or an ‘Exarch,’ who, historically, can be a Bishop or a priest. Bishop Pavel was never the ‘Exarch’ of the Russian Catholics, but a Bishop who served in their parishes. It is by no means, in adherents or status, the equal of large Uniate formations such as the Ukrainian or Melkite Eastern Rite Patriarchates. The genesis of the Russian Catholic Church is credited to one man, Vladimir Solovyov: “The Russian Byzantine Catholic Church traces its institutional origin back to the second half of the nineteenth century in Russia where the philosophy of Vladimir Soloviev (1853-1900) had fostered an active debate and interest among various circles of intellectuals in the notions of the universality of the church and Church unity.
According to Soloviev’s reasoning, the Russian Orthodox Church is separated from the Holy See only de facto (there was no direct formal breach between the Sees of Rome and Moscow), so that one can profess the totality of Catholic doctrine and be in communion with the Holy See while continuing to be Russian Orthodox. Soloviev was received into communion with the Holy See as a Russian Byzantine Catholic on February 18, 1896 by Fr. Nicholas Tolstoy, the first Russian Byzantine Catholic priest. Soloviev’s thought had a profound impact on several generations of Russian society and inspired such later thinkers as Fr. S. Bulgakov, Fr. P. Florensky, Fr. G. Florovsky, N. Berdyaev, L. Karsavin, the poet V. Ivanov, among others.
As a result of Soloviev’s thought a movement began among various intellectual circles, spanning the aristocracy, the intelligentsia, the growing middle class and later spreading as well amongst farmers and workers, that led various Russians to seek to be in communion with the See of Rome. At first they did this by being received into the Roman Catholic Church, but this solution left all but a few of them thirsting for the spiritual richness of the Byzantine Slavonic tradition.
This tendency began to change as the nineteenth century began to draw to a close. In 1893, Fr. Nicholas Tolstoy, a Russian Orthodox priest, was received into communion with the See of Rome and was incardinated in the Melkite Catholic church. He returned to Moscow and a small community began to form around him. A few years later, it was he who received Vladimir Soloviev into communion with the Holy See. Larger numbers of like-minded individuals began to form circles and communities in St. Petersburg and Moscow and among them were a number of Russian Orthodox clergy, as well as some Russian Old Ritualist or Old Believer priests.” [17]
It is of interest that, while many of the Uniate formations, as time passed, became increasingly Latinized, Pope Pius X commanded a “no Latinization” policy for the Russian Catholics: “On May 22, 1908 Fr. Zerchaninov was appointed the Administrator of the Mission to the Russian Catholics. The decree from the Vatican Secretariat of State appointing him specifically states: “Therefore His Holiness commands the aforementioned priest Zerchaninov to observe the laws of the Greek-Slavonic Rite faithfully and in all their integrity, without any admixture from the Latin Rite or any other Rite; he must also see that his subjects, clergy and all other Catholics, do the same.
Subsequently, this command to observe strictly the Russian Orthodox Church’s rituals and spirituality was confirmed during an audience with Pope Pius X attended by Mlle. Ushakova.
In response to Mlle. Ushakova’s inquiry whether the Russian Catholics should hold firmly to their Russian synodal and Old Ritualist practices, or adapt these to the more “latinized” Galician liturgical forms, Pope Pius replied that the Russian Catholics should adhere to the synodal and Old Rite practices with the now famous response in Latin: ‘nec plus, nec minus, nec aliter’ (‘no more, no less, no different’).” [18]
Bishop Pavel spent his time in “his beloved Rome and the visitation of various centres of Russian Catholics, particularly in Germany and Belgium. His, however, was rather a hidden and humble interior life. The dominating intention of all his prayer and penance in these last years was the conversion of his people to the Catholic Church. Perhaps the highlight of his life was the leading of a pilgrimage of some 500 Russian Catholics to Rome and Fatima for the Holy Year of 1950-1951, which terminated with his singing a Pontifical High Mass in his Russian Byzantine rite before the assembled crowds at Fatima.
In Rome, where the Russian pilgrims had assisted at the joyous celebrations marking the proclamation of the dogma of the Assumption of Our Lady, Bishop Meletiev had handed a petition to the Sovereign Pontiff on their behalf in which he, Bishop Evreinov (another convert from Russian Orthodoxy) and the Russian Catholics asked, on behalf of their beloved homeland, for the ‘special consecration of our country, Russia, which has suffered so much, to Our Lady the Queen of the World, that is, to Her Motherly and Immaculate Heart pierced by the sword … the deliverance of our country, followed by that of the whole world from the terrible slavery of Bolshevism, cannot be obtained by material forces of arms and money … the struggle taken against God and Holy Church by the Bolsheviks is not led by mere human powers. These forces have at their source Satan himself and the spirits of darkness. The evil is Satan, who has assumed the appearance of Marxist-Bolshevik atheism, and the force capable of overcoming it is our Holy Queen and protectress, the Mother of our God … But who can make this consecration in the name of Russia, which has been profaned and enslaved? We see only one solution, and we express it by our humble request. We ask that this consecration be done by the Vicar of Christ on earth, successor of the Prince of the Apostles, Peter, Sovereign Pontiff of the Universal Church, the Pope of Rome…” [19]
Bishop Pavel, “the first Orthodox Bishop to convert to Catholicism,” as claimed by Russian Catholics, moved from Germany to Belgium in 1948, living at the Catholic Monastery at Chevetogne. In 1951, he moved to Brussels, where he lived in the Salesian Institute. He participated in the Congress of Catholic Clergy gathering in Rome in 1950. The thorny issue of nationalism was raised, and Bishop Pavel remarked “The Russian people do not need a Russian shepherd, they need a Good Shepherd!” He moved into a house church in 1953 that eventually became the “Foyer Chretien Oriental and Eastern Christian Center,” which was instituted to serve as “a gathering place for Eastern Catholics, especially from the Slavic countries.” Another purpose was stated that the Center was “to serve the cause of Christian unity, develop fraternal relations between Orthodoxy and Catholicism, and to explore the spirituality and history of the Russian Church.” Approved by the Congregation for Oriental Churches and the Belgian Catholic Church, a Russian Catholic parish had its home in the Center. Bishop Pavel officiated over the first Liturgy served there in 1954. [20]
In 1956, Bishop Pavel participated in the Second Congress of Russian Catholics, where he served. The Congress also included reports on the various Russian Catholic parishes, and a clergy conference. Bishop Pavel delivered a Christmas message in 1957: “We live in terrible and dangerous times. Christians are persecuted. Scientists who are Christians are ridiculed. Christ is expelled from state and public institutions. Important decisions are made without prayer. Christian religion among Christian people is barely palatable. People are reticent to profess Christ as God and Creator of the world. Many Christians are Christians by name only, which is unworthy. Christians live according to the laws of the heathen. Christian rulers are silent when they hear about persecution and religious harassment; to maintain ’friendly relations,’ believers are denied assistance … Evil is growing, and no one wants to fight it. All this means that humanity is wrong, and close to eternal death. The Lord will come to judge the people …” [21]
In 1961, Bishop Pavel visited Rome, and was given an audience with the Pope. He also ordained seminarians on Christmas. On his return to Belgium, he stopped in Lyons at the request of Father Peter Holodina to bless his house. He died on 19 May 1962. “Suffering from senility, in the 82nd year of his life, he stepped off the curb in front of a car, and was hit.” His funeral was served by Bishop Andrei Katkov, a Russian Catholic Bishop, and Father Joseph, Rector of the Russicum. Capuchin monks from Chevetogne, as well as Russian Catholic priests from Brussels were also in attendance. Bishop Pavel was buried in the Voluve St. Pierre Cemetery, alongside his sister, Igumenia Seraphima. In the eulogy, Father Alexander Kulik pronounced Bishop Pavel as “a Confessor of Christ on Earth.” [22]
An afternote: “This man of prayer was knocked over by a car in Brussels, where he died soon after on 19 May 1962. God in His mercy did not let him see the opening of the Second Vatican Council some four months later at which the appeasement of the Moscow régime and its puppet church was to set the keynote from the very opening speech, to which the Ukrainian bishops protested publicly.” [23] It is interesting to note how this quote, from a Catholic source, somewhat conflicts with another quote from a Catholic source regarding some of the same ‘issues:” This quote concerns events in the life of Bishop Andrei Katkov, the Russian Catholic Bishop who served Bishop Pavel’s funeral: “Perhaps the high point of his career was his invitation as an official guest of the Moscow Patriarchate to visit Russia in August and September 1969, during which trip he was accorded all the respect and honor due a bishop by his Russian Orthodox episcopal hosts. Patriarch Alexei I himself personally presented a ‘Panaghia’ (symbol of the Episcopate) to Bishop Andrei. Shortly thereafter, on December 16, 1969, the then Metropolitan Alexei of Tallinn (now Patriarch Alexei II), acting as Director of Affairs of the Moscow Patriarchate, announced the Sacred Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church’s decision to admit Catholics to receive communion in Russian Orthodox churches (this decision was subsequently rescinded several years later).” [24]
and RUSSIAN CATHOLICS OF EASTERN RITE--MYTH OR REALITY?
SOURCE: ROCOR Studies
Igumen Pavel was arrested by the Soviet authorities in 1920, and received a death sentence, which was commuted to five years of hard labor. After his release, he travelled to Moscow, where he became acquainted with the Bishops Ioasaph (Shishkovsko-Drelevsky, +1935), a vicar of the Maloyaroslavets Diocese, and Pavlin (Kroshechkin, shot 1937 in Kemervsky Camp), ruling bishop of the Kaluga diocese. He “assisted these two Bishops in their ministry, and preached in Moscow, Serpukhov, and Kaluga.” For non-cooperation with the Soviet power, he was arrested again in 1931, and imprisoned in Butyrki, and subsequently sentenced to exile in Kazakhstan [other sources say hard labor in the Karaganda concentration camp] until 1937. From 1937 to 1941, he served as a Catacomb priest, secretively wandering here and there, often hiding from the authorities. His wanderings across the Soviet Union ended in Byelorussia, under the German occupation. [3]
The German Occupation Forces in Byelorussia, as they did in Ukraine, allowed the opening of churches, and a renewal of church life. This relatively free, revived Church became known as the Byelorussian Autonomous Orthodox Church. Igumen Pavel assisted the renewal of church life in the Smolensk, Briansk, and Mogilev regions. [4]
In 1942, a local council of the Byelorussian Church was held in Minsk. Many of the nationalists the Germans placed in the Council were not church oriented in the least, but supported autocephaly for nationalistic reasons only. During this council, the creation of a Byelorussian Autocephalous Church was approved, despite the objections of Metropolitan Panteleimon (Pavel Stepanovich Rozhnovskii, 27 Oct 1867-12/30 Dec 1950) of Minsk & Byelorussia, and Archishop Filofei (Vladimir Narko, 21 Feb 1905-11/24 Sep 1984), Met. Panteleimon’s deputy, who served in his place during the Council. The Germans were aware of Vladika Panteleimon’s objections, and had him under arrest in the Zhirovitskii Monastery during the Council. As the decision was enacted during wartime, the hierarchs knew that little could be accomplished in a request for approval of a new autocephalous Church. Letters were composed to the Patriarchate of Constantinople asking approval. Would-could-these letters be delivered? No record exists of the receipt by, or any reply from the Patriarchate of Constantinople in relation to these letters. Since there was no approval of the autocephaly, the Byelorussian Church of the German occupation era has become commonly referred to as the Byelorussian Autonomous Church. (After the War, in the West, a small “Byelorussian Autocephalous Church” came into being, solely on the authority of the Council of 1942 in Minsk. It exists to this day, divided into two or three factions.) Technically considered as autonomous under the ultimate jurisdiction of the Moscow Patriarchate, there was little or no contact between the Byelorussian Church and the Moscow Patriarchate during the era of German occupation; it was strictly forbidden, and, as well, would have involved traversing battle lines. Despite being forbidden by the German occupation forces, there was contact and cooperation between the Byelorussian Church and the ROCOR. [6]
In October 1943, the Council of Bishops of the ROCOR met in Vienna, Austria. The primary reason for the meeting of the Council of Bishops was the declaration that the election of Metropolitan Sergey (Ivan Nikolaevich Stragorodskii, 11 Jun 1867-02 15 May 1944) as Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia was to be considered as “null and void.” Bishop Venedikt (Bobkovskii, 28 Feb 1876-21 Aug/03 Sept 1951) of Grodno, and Archimandrite Gregorii (George Borishkevitch) from the Byelorussian Autonomous Church also attended the Council, during which Archimandrite Gregory was consecrated as Bishop of Gomel & Mozyr’ for the Byelorussian Autonomous Church. ROCOR Hierarchs attending the Council, and participating in the consecration, were: Metropolitan Anastassy (Alexander Alexeevich Gribanovsky, 06 Aug 1873-09/22 May 1965), First Hierarch of the ROCOR; Metropolitan Seraphim (Alexander Ivanovich Lukianov, 23 Aug 1879-18 Feb 1959) of Paris & Western Europe; Metropolitan Seraphim (Albert Lade) of Berlin & Central Europe; Bishop Sergey (Arkady Dmitrievich Korolev, 18 Jan 1881-18 Dec 1952) of Prague (a Vicar of Metropolitan Evlogy, by German law under the jurisdiction of Met. Seraphim of Berlin during German rule of Czechoslovakia, who afforded Bishop Sergey a relatively free rule over his parishes); Bishop Vasily of Vienna (Vasily Gavrilovich Pavlovskii, 21 Nov 1880-1945); and Bishop Philip (Johann von Gardner, 09 Dec 1898-26 Feb 1984) of Potsdam (both vicars of Met. Seraphim of Berlin). The Germans allowed the participation of the Byelorussian clergy to bolster the condemnation of the election of Patriarch Sergey, but, in doing so, also confirmed the cooperation between the Byelorussian Autonomous Church and the ROCOR. [7]
On 7 Oct 1943, Igumen Pavel was consecrated to the Episcopate as Bishop of Roslavl’sk, Vicar of Bishop Stefan (Simeon Iosifovich Sevbo, 17 Apr 1872-25 Jan 1965, later ROCOR Archbishop of Vienna & Austria) of Smolensk & Briansk. The consecration took place in the Metropolitan Cathedral in Minsk, presided over by Metropolitan Panteleimon (Rozhnovsky), concelebrating with Archbishop Filofei (Narko), and Bishop Venedikt (Bobkovsky). [8, 9]
In June 1944, the entire episcopate of the Byelorussian Autonomous Church fled west to escape the swiftly advancing Red Army. The Byelorussian Hierarchs eventually found their way to Germany, along with many members of their flock. Meeting in Council in Dec 1944, Metropolitan Panteleimon insisted that their only possible course of action was to seek unity with the Russian Church Abroad. The Byelorussian Hierarchs, including Bishop Pavel, unanimously followed Metropolitan’s Panteleimon’s advice. Bishop Pavel, after travelling through Czechoslovakia, Austria, and Germany, upon arrival in Munich, “sought assistance from Metropolitan Anastassy of the ROCOR.” [10, 11]
On 24 Apr/07 May Apr 1946, a Hierarchical Council of the ROCOR was held in Munich. Hierarchs of the Byelorussian and Ukrainian Autonomous Churches were accepted into the ROCOR. During a session of the Council, after all the Byelorussian Bishops-except Bishop Pavel-had been officially accepted into the Church Abroad, Bishop Pavel was questioned about his leanings towards the Roman Catholic Church. The questions turned out to be unwelcomed, and Bishop Pavel walked out of the Council. [12]
The proceedings of the Council during the questioning of Bishop Pavel are fascinating, giving a look, as it were, “behind closed doors,” into the Council chamber. Perhaps most interesting was Metropolitan Anastassy’s roles an impartial moderator, peacemaker, diplomat, and chairman.
Attending were: Metropolitan Anastassy, First Hierarch of the ROCOR; Metropolitan Seraphim of Berlin & Germany; Archbishop Panteleimon (Rudyk, Ukrainian Automous Church UAC); Archbishop Venedikt (Bobkovsky, Bielorussian Automous Church BAC); Archbishop Filofeli (Narko, BAC) Bishop Leonty (Phillipovsky, UAC); Bishop Afanassy (Martos, BAC); Bishop Stefan (Sevbo, BAC); Bishop Evlogy (Markovsky, UAC;) Bishop Dimitry (Magan, UAC); Bishop Fyodor (Rafailsky, UAC); Bishop Gregory (Borishkevich, BAC); Bishop Alexander (Lovchy, ROCOR); Bishop Seraphim (Ivanov, ROCOR); and Bishop Pavel (Meletiev, BAC) . The Council began at 10:30 a.m. with prayers in the Synodal Church with all the bishops present. The first subject under discussion in the Council was to be the composition of the Council. The Hierarchical or Bishops Council is composed of all the Bishops of a given Church. At that time, the only Bishop who had not been officially accepted into the ROCOR was Bishop Pavel. Since the Bishops of the Byelorussian Autonomous Church had met in Council in Munich in Dec 1944, deciding to join themselves to the Church Abroad, and since they undoubtedly had all been working and serving together since that time, it was certain that Bishop Pavel, too, would join his brother bishops. The subject of the ‘composition’ of the Council, therefore, centered on Bishop Pavel.
“Metropolitan Anastassy noted that Bishop Pavel had not yet officially joined the Church Abroad, that there needed to be some discussion on the issue, and asked that Bishop Pavel leave the room until this discussion was completed. Bishop Pavel protested this request, but, after some opposition, withdrew.
Metropolitan Anastassy, after some discussion on historical aspects of the Church Abroad, asked for a decision about Bishop Pavel. Archbishop Venedikt stated that Bishp Pavel should not be allowed to join the Council until he swears fidelity to the Orthodox Church. He further mentioned that Bishop Pavel spoke at the meeting of the Diocesan Charity Committee in favor of ‘a connection with the pope.’ Metropolitan Seraphim, who had presided at the Charity Committee meeting, further stated that Bishop Pavel had caused total confusion at the meeting, stating that the most important is forgotten: ‘that we all should be one,’ and that ‘our efforts are doomed to failure because we break the commandment of prayer.’ At that point, Bishop Pavel was stopped, and asked to speak on the work at hand. He did not, but went on, and said that ‘We are separated from Rome because of adversity,’ and suggested a telegram to the Pope saying that, ‘We mourn because we are not in communion with Rome.’ Archbishop Filofei and several other bishops vouched for the correctness of the description of what Bishop Pavel had said. Bishop Afanassii then related that a priest had come with a story that Bishop Pavel hed received ‘some sort of letter from Rome.’ Archbishop Venedikt reiterated that some sort of declaration need be composed and signed by Bishop Pavel, stating that he is not converting to Catholicism, and until that declaration, and his official acceptance, he should not be able to participate in the works of the Council. Metroplitan Anastassy then stated that it could have been a mistake, Bishop Pavel may have not been clearly elucidating his ideas, and that he needed to be given a chance to explain.
Bishop Pavel was called back into the Council, and Metropolitan Anastassy explained to him, ‘first of all,’ to keep to a peaceful tone, and that his remarks at the Charity Committee meeting caused the other bishops to think he was ‘criticizing the Orthodox Church because it is not in communion with Rome. That is the source of our unhappiness.’ Bishop Pavel declared that, in going to the meeting, he had no intention whatsoever of bringing up the subject. Then, Metropolitan Seraphim had offered to thank the Pope (for charitable contributions) and Archbishop Venedikt had commented, ‘It’s not necessary.’ Bishop Pavel said that he then stated that ‘Christians should live in peace, love and harmony, and we should live in peace with non-Orthodox Christians, and strive to achieve the unity of the Church.’ He went on to say that he had been speaking generally, had not made mention of any methods, had not called for Uniatism, had not suggested anyone come into union, and had not suggested that anyone become a traitor to the faith of their fathers. He did say he asked at the meeting for a telegram of thanks to the Pope for his assistance, that the meeting encouraged feelings of unity, and should go towards unity, and that the issue needed to be studied and ‘developed.’ He said he had not ‘developed this theme any further at the meeting.’
Bishop Pavel continued, mentioning that he had heard that some of his brother Byelorussian Bishops were ‘embarrassed,’ and that their confusion is due to a misunderstanding or one-sided understanding of the issue of the unity of the Church. ‘Nikolaev is giving a lecture on Rome, and tries to show that the Pope is the enemy of Orthodoxy. I do not share this sentiment, I am for rapprochement with Rome, I am not afraid of the Pope, and if the day came for talks, I would not yield one jot to him.’ Bishop Pavel was upset that the priest in question (who had mentioned that Bishop Pavel had received a letter from Rome) had refused to serve with him, and had asked him, ‘How much were you bought for?’ He said a priest has no business speaking to a bishop that way in public. He stated he had appealed to Archbishop Venedikt with Paschal greetings, and Archbishop Venedikt had responded by asking, ‘Are you Orthodox?’ Bishop Pavel concluded, stating that he felt both wronged and disappointed.
Archbishop Venedikt then spoke, stating that the speech delivered by Bishop Pavel at the Charity Committee meeting had given all the Byelorussian Bishops the distinct impression that he was ‘a supporter of Rome.’ Further, he stated that there were reports that Bishop Pavel had joined the unia, and a newspaper had reported that a Byelorussian bishop had converted to Catholicism. The Byelorussian bishops had all been sure it was Bishop Pavel who had converted. Archbishop Venedikt explained that he had not greeted him immediately, he needed to know the truth, and how to proceed-that’s why he asked the question. ‘If he is not Judas, I would be glad to welcome Bishop Pavel.’
Bishop Seraphim spoke of the desirability to ‘dot the i‘s.’ ‘Bishop Pavel stated that the Pope did not want to make changes in the Orthodox Church, and if he had entered into the canonical liturgical communion with him, it’s nothing. Eastern Rite Catholicism retains all the Orthodox doctrines, but with obedience to the Pope. It would be important to know whether this is something that has been offered to Bishop Pavel.’
Bishop Pavel stated that he was not a recipient of any offers, and had not engaged in any negotiations. He had asked to put forth the question of the connection and unity of churches thinking only about how to banish enmity. Metropolitan Anastassy observed that ‘this issue is beyond the competence of the Church Abroad. If Bishop Pavel, as he says, does not admit any canonical or doctrinal concessions, it should not be difficult to provide the written statement asked for by the Council. This was done in ancient times, and in this case, it is required.’
Bishop Pavel added that the air of distrust reminded him of the GPU. Bishop Dimitrii stated that he did not understand why it was difficult to meet in fraternal union with the Bishops, and that he would gladly submit such a document. Bishop Pavel said he still considered the request for such a statement as ‘an insult.’ Bishop Gregory said that he knew his fellow Byelorussian Bishops thought that Bishop Pavel had, indeed, converted to the unia, but that he himself did not. He went on to say that he believed in the unity of the Church, but that to submit to Rome and recognize the primacy and infallibility of the Pope would be ‘a retreat from the truth. I don’t see any humiliation in submitting the required statement.’ Bishop Pavel continued to insist that the claims presented did not justify asking him for such a statement. Metropolitan Anastassy responded that the signed statement is to reassure not only the Bishops, but, ‘also public opinion.’ Bishop Pavel countered that his signature on a statement was worthless, and that he would answer the charges in a series of public lectures. Metropolitan Anastassy replied that since the Council had unanimously decided to require the written statement, that if it was not supplied, it would be impossible for Bishop Pavel to participate in the Council. Bishop Pavel refused, said, ‘I need to pray,’ and left the Council.” [13]
Subsequently, Bishop Pavel received assistance from the German Roman Catholic Bishop Michael Buchberg. Later in 1946, Bishop Pavel, along with his sister, Igumenia Seraphima (Meletieva), were received into the Roman Catholic Church. Relating this turn of events, Bishop Pavel stated, “Adherence to the Universal Church, united to the Holy Apostolic Roman Throne, was, for me, my greatest joy in exile, and the most important step in the way of my ministry, Christ, Church, and Homeland.” After settling in Western Europe, Bishop Pavel explained that his “interest in Christian Unity, which has been with me from a young age, has increased.” He also stated that “our membership in the Catholic Church, and the jurisdiction of the Pope, is not subject to the waiver of any dogmas of the Orthodox Church.” [14]
“When the Germans began to retreat … , Bishop Pavel and his sister, a nun, Mother Igumenia Serafima, saw that exile was their only choice. Many adventures were in store for the two refugees, but God’s Providence accompanied them safely all the way to the end point of their journey – Rome. For some years, this sincere bishop had been led through prayer to believe in the necessity of being united with the Catholic Church under the Roman Pontiff. Indeed, the fulfilment of this desire had been the most serious reason prompting him to leave his beloved Russia.” [15]
“And so it came to pass on 21 September 1946 that the aged prelate humbly made his profession of the Catholic Faith into the hands of the Pope’s representative Cardinal Tisserant, receiving from Pope Pius XII the titular see of Heracleopolis.” [16]
Bishop Pavel became active in the ‘Russian Byzantine Catholic Church,’ a small group of Russian Catholic parishes, administered by an ‘Administrator’ or an ‘Exarch,’ who, historically, can be a Bishop or a priest. Bishop Pavel was never the ‘Exarch’ of the Russian Catholics, but a Bishop who served in their parishes. It is by no means, in adherents or status, the equal of large Uniate formations such as the Ukrainian or Melkite Eastern Rite Patriarchates. The genesis of the Russian Catholic Church is credited to one man, Vladimir Solovyov: “The Russian Byzantine Catholic Church traces its institutional origin back to the second half of the nineteenth century in Russia where the philosophy of Vladimir Soloviev (1853-1900) had fostered an active debate and interest among various circles of intellectuals in the notions of the universality of the church and Church unity.
According to Soloviev’s reasoning, the Russian Orthodox Church is separated from the Holy See only de facto (there was no direct formal breach between the Sees of Rome and Moscow), so that one can profess the totality of Catholic doctrine and be in communion with the Holy See while continuing to be Russian Orthodox. Soloviev was received into communion with the Holy See as a Russian Byzantine Catholic on February 18, 1896 by Fr. Nicholas Tolstoy, the first Russian Byzantine Catholic priest. Soloviev’s thought had a profound impact on several generations of Russian society and inspired such later thinkers as Fr. S. Bulgakov, Fr. P. Florensky, Fr. G. Florovsky, N. Berdyaev, L. Karsavin, the poet V. Ivanov, among others.
As a result of Soloviev’s thought a movement began among various intellectual circles, spanning the aristocracy, the intelligentsia, the growing middle class and later spreading as well amongst farmers and workers, that led various Russians to seek to be in communion with the See of Rome. At first they did this by being received into the Roman Catholic Church, but this solution left all but a few of them thirsting for the spiritual richness of the Byzantine Slavonic tradition.
This tendency began to change as the nineteenth century began to draw to a close. In 1893, Fr. Nicholas Tolstoy, a Russian Orthodox priest, was received into communion with the See of Rome and was incardinated in the Melkite Catholic church. He returned to Moscow and a small community began to form around him. A few years later, it was he who received Vladimir Soloviev into communion with the Holy See. Larger numbers of like-minded individuals began to form circles and communities in St. Petersburg and Moscow and among them were a number of Russian Orthodox clergy, as well as some Russian Old Ritualist or Old Believer priests.” [17]
 |
| Bishop Meletiev leads Pontifical Divine Liturgy in the the Russian Byzantine Riteat Fatima. |
Subsequently, this command to observe strictly the Russian Orthodox Church’s rituals and spirituality was confirmed during an audience with Pope Pius X attended by Mlle. Ushakova.
In response to Mlle. Ushakova’s inquiry whether the Russian Catholics should hold firmly to their Russian synodal and Old Ritualist practices, or adapt these to the more “latinized” Galician liturgical forms, Pope Pius replied that the Russian Catholics should adhere to the synodal and Old Rite practices with the now famous response in Latin: ‘nec plus, nec minus, nec aliter’ (‘no more, no less, no different’).” [18]
Bishop Pavel spent his time in “his beloved Rome and the visitation of various centres of Russian Catholics, particularly in Germany and Belgium. His, however, was rather a hidden and humble interior life. The dominating intention of all his prayer and penance in these last years was the conversion of his people to the Catholic Church. Perhaps the highlight of his life was the leading of a pilgrimage of some 500 Russian Catholics to Rome and Fatima for the Holy Year of 1950-1951, which terminated with his singing a Pontifical High Mass in his Russian Byzantine rite before the assembled crowds at Fatima.
In Rome, where the Russian pilgrims had assisted at the joyous celebrations marking the proclamation of the dogma of the Assumption of Our Lady, Bishop Meletiev had handed a petition to the Sovereign Pontiff on their behalf in which he, Bishop Evreinov (another convert from Russian Orthodoxy) and the Russian Catholics asked, on behalf of their beloved homeland, for the ‘special consecration of our country, Russia, which has suffered so much, to Our Lady the Queen of the World, that is, to Her Motherly and Immaculate Heart pierced by the sword … the deliverance of our country, followed by that of the whole world from the terrible slavery of Bolshevism, cannot be obtained by material forces of arms and money … the struggle taken against God and Holy Church by the Bolsheviks is not led by mere human powers. These forces have at their source Satan himself and the spirits of darkness. The evil is Satan, who has assumed the appearance of Marxist-Bolshevik atheism, and the force capable of overcoming it is our Holy Queen and protectress, the Mother of our God … But who can make this consecration in the name of Russia, which has been profaned and enslaved? We see only one solution, and we express it by our humble request. We ask that this consecration be done by the Vicar of Christ on earth, successor of the Prince of the Apostles, Peter, Sovereign Pontiff of the Universal Church, the Pope of Rome…” [19]
Bishop Pavel, “the first Orthodox Bishop to convert to Catholicism,” as claimed by Russian Catholics, moved from Germany to Belgium in 1948, living at the Catholic Monastery at Chevetogne. In 1951, he moved to Brussels, where he lived in the Salesian Institute. He participated in the Congress of Catholic Clergy gathering in Rome in 1950. The thorny issue of nationalism was raised, and Bishop Pavel remarked “The Russian people do not need a Russian shepherd, they need a Good Shepherd!” He moved into a house church in 1953 that eventually became the “Foyer Chretien Oriental and Eastern Christian Center,” which was instituted to serve as “a gathering place for Eastern Catholics, especially from the Slavic countries.” Another purpose was stated that the Center was “to serve the cause of Christian unity, develop fraternal relations between Orthodoxy and Catholicism, and to explore the spirituality and history of the Russian Church.” Approved by the Congregation for Oriental Churches and the Belgian Catholic Church, a Russian Catholic parish had its home in the Center. Bishop Pavel officiated over the first Liturgy served there in 1954. [20]
In 1956, Bishop Pavel participated in the Second Congress of Russian Catholics, where he served. The Congress also included reports on the various Russian Catholic parishes, and a clergy conference. Bishop Pavel delivered a Christmas message in 1957: “We live in terrible and dangerous times. Christians are persecuted. Scientists who are Christians are ridiculed. Christ is expelled from state and public institutions. Important decisions are made without prayer. Christian religion among Christian people is barely palatable. People are reticent to profess Christ as God and Creator of the world. Many Christians are Christians by name only, which is unworthy. Christians live according to the laws of the heathen. Christian rulers are silent when they hear about persecution and religious harassment; to maintain ’friendly relations,’ believers are denied assistance … Evil is growing, and no one wants to fight it. All this means that humanity is wrong, and close to eternal death. The Lord will come to judge the people …” [21]
In 1961, Bishop Pavel visited Rome, and was given an audience with the Pope. He also ordained seminarians on Christmas. On his return to Belgium, he stopped in Lyons at the request of Father Peter Holodina to bless his house. He died on 19 May 1962. “Suffering from senility, in the 82nd year of his life, he stepped off the curb in front of a car, and was hit.” His funeral was served by Bishop Andrei Katkov, a Russian Catholic Bishop, and Father Joseph, Rector of the Russicum. Capuchin monks from Chevetogne, as well as Russian Catholic priests from Brussels were also in attendance. Bishop Pavel was buried in the Voluve St. Pierre Cemetery, alongside his sister, Igumenia Seraphima. In the eulogy, Father Alexander Kulik pronounced Bishop Pavel as “a Confessor of Christ on Earth.” [22]
An afternote: “This man of prayer was knocked over by a car in Brussels, where he died soon after on 19 May 1962. God in His mercy did not let him see the opening of the Second Vatican Council some four months later at which the appeasement of the Moscow régime and its puppet church was to set the keynote from the very opening speech, to which the Ukrainian bishops protested publicly.” [23] It is interesting to note how this quote, from a Catholic source, somewhat conflicts with another quote from a Catholic source regarding some of the same ‘issues:” This quote concerns events in the life of Bishop Andrei Katkov, the Russian Catholic Bishop who served Bishop Pavel’s funeral: “Perhaps the high point of his career was his invitation as an official guest of the Moscow Patriarchate to visit Russia in August and September 1969, during which trip he was accorded all the respect and honor due a bishop by his Russian Orthodox episcopal hosts. Patriarch Alexei I himself personally presented a ‘Panaghia’ (symbol of the Episcopate) to Bishop Andrei. Shortly thereafter, on December 16, 1969, the then Metropolitan Alexei of Tallinn (now Patriarch Alexei II), acting as Director of Affairs of the Moscow Patriarchate, announced the Sacred Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church’s decision to admit Catholics to receive communion in Russian Orthodox churches (this decision was subsequently rescinded several years later).” [24]
- [1] Епископ Павел Мелетьев. zarubezhje.narod.ru/mp/M_324.htm by Igumen Rostislav Kolupaev (Russian Catholic Church)
- [2] ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Архангельская_Духовная_семинария
- [3] ibid., 1; kuraev.ru/smf/index.php?option=com_smf&Itemid=63&topic=564459.60; www.ortho-rus.ru/cgi-bin/ps_file.cgi?2_905
- [4] ibid., 1
- [5]Michael Woerl. The Life of Archbishop Gregory (Borishkevich). www.rocorstudies.org
- [6] ibid., 5
- [7] ibid., 5
- [8] ibid., 1
- [9] www.ortho-rus.ru/cgi-bin/ps_file.cgi?2_5632; www.ortho-rus.ru/cgi-bin/ps_file.cgi?2_942
- [10] ibid., 5
- [11] ibid., 1
- [12] ПРОТОКОЛ №1, АРХИЕРЕЙСКОГО СОБОРА РУССКОЙ ПРАВОСЛАВНОЙ ЦЕРКВИ ЗАГРАНИЦЕЙ, 24апреля/7мая 1946 года. www.rocor-dv.ru
The original Russian language minutes of the Council are presented in an “enhanced Google translation” into English. The translation is not entirely literal, but accurately conveys the sense of the exchanges between the Bishops. - [13] ibid.
- [14] ibid., 1
- [15] holyunia.blogspot.com/2009/04/bishop-pavlos-meletiev-1880-1962.html
- [16] rumkatkilise.org/necplus.htm
- [17] ibid., 15
- [18] ibid., 14
- [19] ibid., 14
- [20] ibid., 15
- [21] ibid., 1
- [22] ibid., 1
- [23] ibid., 1
- [24] ibid., 15
- Bishop Pavel: zarubezhje.narod.ru
- “Bishop Meletiev sings Pontifical High Mass in the Russian Byzantine rite at Fatima:” holyunia.blogspot.com/2009/04/bishop-pavlos-meletiev-1880-1962.html
- Photos of Arkhangelsk: en.welcome2russia.ru/russia/?id=2212
and RUSSIAN CATHOLICS OF EASTERN RITE--MYTH OR REALITY?
Eastern Catholics express excitement at the nomination of Pope Francis
(SOURCE: Vatican Radio) Fr. Peter Galadza, is a Ukrainian Catholic priest and professor at the Sheptytsky Institute at the University of St. Paul in Ottawa, Canada.
He was here in Rome as part of the Canadian government's official delegation to Rome for the inauguration of Pope Francis.During his stay, Fr. Galadza popped into Vatican Radio to participate in a live webcast on Vatican Radio’s YouTube channel last week where he shared his first impressions of Pope Francis and spoke a little about his hopes for the future.
Speaking to Vatican Radio’s Linda Bordoni he said that Ukrainian Catholics were excited and happy when they heard of Cardinal Bergoglio’s nomination as Pope Francis.
Father Galadza says one of the reasons for the joy expressed by Ukrainian Catholics for the nomination of Pope Francis, is the latter’s special affection for the poor because so many of the Eastern Catholics throughout the world – whether they are Ukrainian Catholics or Catholics in the Middle East – are from very poor communities.
In the case of Ukraine, Father Galadza explains, poverty has been the norm for Eastern Catholics for some 800 years.
Hear the interview now:
Another very special connection Pope Francis has to Eastern Catholics, Father Galadza says, is that “when he was still a student at high school, he used to serve as an acolyte, every day for a Ukrainian Catholic priest who served in the Byzantine rite. So he has grown up with a real knowledge of the Eastern Catholic Church”.
As regards the fact that Pope Francis has been asking for prayers for him, since the very beginning of his Papacy, Father Galadza says Francis is really putting the focus on the divine. It is so easy for us – he says – to lose sight of this, and so this looking upward and saying “I need your prayers” is crucial.
And adding to that, Father Galadza says that “in our day and age, to be able to proclaim the totality, the integrity of Catholic doctrine is such an uphill battle”. And – he says – “when you have someone who is committed to this kind of doctrinal and moral orthodoxy, authentic Catholicism, and who at the same time is visiting sick people in the middle of the night in the slums – nobody is going to say that he is ‘ancient regime’, someone who can’t get out of the 19th century – it’s very effective, a very powerful witness”.
People seem to be bowled over by the simplicity of Francis’ message. Father Galadza says “those of us who are in the Church, who love Jesus Christ, who love the Catholic Church, we know that these things are not the most important. Unfortunately, in the world of optics and image, if you can come off with that kind of evangelical simplicity – which of course is not just a matter of image or optics – but if you can add that to your presentation it very much helps because we are in the age where everything is image and optics”. As regards to what he is looking forward to, Father Galadza says he anticipates a reinvigoration of faith that occurs when the Church gets “a shot in the arm like this”.
He points out that he personally was very excited about Benedict XVI because of his amazing intellectual abilities. “In history, the works that that Pope theologian produced, even as Cardinal and then as a Pope will go down in history and endure”. And what’s more he says, “it’s been 500 years since we had a bad Pope so we are on a roll here and we get another shot in the arm with someone who is going to be stressing other things and – especially for North Americans – this question of authenticity is crucial. Our Primate, Archbishop Shevchuk, has used the word authenticity to describe the Pope over and over in the past days. And he knew him personally, he considers Cardinal Bergoglio his mentor in the episcopate because his first assignment as a Ukrainian Catholic bishop was in Argentina, so this whole dimension of poverty, simplicity, evangelical councils etc. is something that will provide another inburst of the Holy Spirit for the Catholic Church worldwide”.
Speaking to Vatican Radio’s Linda Bordoni he said that Ukrainian Catholics were excited and happy when they heard of Cardinal Bergoglio’s nomination as Pope Francis.
Father Galadza says one of the reasons for the joy expressed by Ukrainian Catholics for the nomination of Pope Francis, is the latter’s special affection for the poor because so many of the Eastern Catholics throughout the world – whether they are Ukrainian Catholics or Catholics in the Middle East – are from very poor communities.
In the case of Ukraine, Father Galadza explains, poverty has been the norm for Eastern Catholics for some 800 years.
Another very special connection Pope Francis has to Eastern Catholics, Father Galadza says, is that “when he was still a student at high school, he used to serve as an acolyte, every day for a Ukrainian Catholic priest who served in the Byzantine rite. So he has grown up with a real knowledge of the Eastern Catholic Church”.
As regards the fact that Pope Francis has been asking for prayers for him, since the very beginning of his Papacy, Father Galadza says Francis is really putting the focus on the divine. It is so easy for us – he says – to lose sight of this, and so this looking upward and saying “I need your prayers” is crucial.
And adding to that, Father Galadza says that “in our day and age, to be able to proclaim the totality, the integrity of Catholic doctrine is such an uphill battle”. And – he says – “when you have someone who is committed to this kind of doctrinal and moral orthodoxy, authentic Catholicism, and who at the same time is visiting sick people in the middle of the night in the slums – nobody is going to say that he is ‘ancient regime’, someone who can’t get out of the 19th century – it’s very effective, a very powerful witness”.
People seem to be bowled over by the simplicity of Francis’ message. Father Galadza says “those of us who are in the Church, who love Jesus Christ, who love the Catholic Church, we know that these things are not the most important. Unfortunately, in the world of optics and image, if you can come off with that kind of evangelical simplicity – which of course is not just a matter of image or optics – but if you can add that to your presentation it very much helps because we are in the age where everything is image and optics”. As regards to what he is looking forward to, Father Galadza says he anticipates a reinvigoration of faith that occurs when the Church gets “a shot in the arm like this”.
He points out that he personally was very excited about Benedict XVI because of his amazing intellectual abilities. “In history, the works that that Pope theologian produced, even as Cardinal and then as a Pope will go down in history and endure”. And what’s more he says, “it’s been 500 years since we had a bad Pope so we are on a roll here and we get another shot in the arm with someone who is going to be stressing other things and – especially for North Americans – this question of authenticity is crucial. Our Primate, Archbishop Shevchuk, has used the word authenticity to describe the Pope over and over in the past days. And he knew him personally, he considers Cardinal Bergoglio his mentor in the episcopate because his first assignment as a Ukrainian Catholic bishop was in Argentina, so this whole dimension of poverty, simplicity, evangelical councils etc. is something that will provide another inburst of the Holy Spirit for the Catholic Church worldwide”.
Sunday, March 24, 2013
Moscow Now Must Deal with ‘Ukrainian Pope,’ Estonian World Review
SOURCE: Estonian World Review
Staunton, March 24 – Having watched as the Polish pope, John Paul II, helped end the communist empire in Europe, Moscow must now cope with a new reality, a Russian commentator says, it must recognize that in Pope Francis I, “we have a Ukrainian pope,” someone whose ideaas could threaten Russian interests in a new way.
According to a commentary on the Boardnews.ru portal, many Ukrainians hope and many Russian Orthodox hierarchs fear that the new pope, precisely because of his experiences with and sympathy for Ukrainian Christians, will give the Ukrainian Greek Orthodox Church – the Uniates -- a patriarch (boardnews.ru/index.php/obshchestvo/2901-imeem-ykrainskogo-papy).
This unsigned commentary provides a wealth of evidence for both these hopes and fears. It begins by noting that Francis has shown himself committed to inter-religious dialogue, and it notes that “for the first time” since the 1054 split between Orthodoxy and Catholicis, Patriarch Bartholemew of Constantinople, the universal patriarch, attended a papal enthronement.
It cites the words of Father Orest-Dmitry Vilchinsky who says that the new pope’s “personality was formed in a multi-ethnic and poly-confessional society” and that Francis is thus is inclined to and fully capable of opening a dialogue with representatives of all other religious denominations and faiths.
But the commentary continues, Ukraine occupies a special place in the new pope’s heart. He was a student of Stepan Chmil, a Greek Catholic priest who is “one of the three” Uniate leaders whom Patriarch Iosif Slipyi “secretly” consecrated so that they could “in case of necessity” enter “the territory of the USSR” and elevate new bishops for that church.
The new pope apparently knows the Byzantine Ukrainian rite and felt close enough to its leaders to provide testimony for the beatification of Slipyi. According to another Ukrainian émigré churchman who occasionally met with the future pope, Francis has a “sentimental” soft spot for Ukrainians.
The new pope also had significant experience in working with the Ukrainian church as an institution. While archbishop of Buenos Aires, he served as the protector of Eastern Rite Christians who “did not have their own bishopric in Argentina,” including clergy and laity of the Uniate Church.
The Blessed Svyatoslav, the head of that church, worked “under the direct leadership” of the Argentinian cardinal, and following the election of Francis as pope expressed the hope that the latter would support a patriarchate for the Uniates, something they have long wanted because of the standing it would give them.
Russian concerns about the new pope’s probable course of action with respect to the Uniates are exacerbated, the Boardnews.ru commentary says, because Francis is the first Jesuit pope. The Jesuits trained many Ukrainian churchmen, and their activities have long been viewed with suspicion by the Moscow Patriarchate and the Russian state, the commentary says.
And the leadership of the Moscow Patriarchate has issued a clear warning to the pope about the consequences of involvement with the Uniates. Metropolitan Ilarion of Volokolamsk, the head of the Russian church’s powerful department of external church relations, said that such contacts “will not lead” to anything good (nakanune.ru/news/2013/3/20/22303511/).
Uniatism is “the most sensitive issue in Orthodox-Catholic dialogue and in relations between the Orthodox and the Catholics,” the metropolitan said, because “the Orthodox Church has always been sharply against Uniatism as such because we view it as a deceptive attempt to force Orthodox into entering community with Rome.”
Not only did the Uniate church injure Orthodoxy by its work to revive its organization in Western Ukraine in the late 1980s and early 1990s, Ilarion continued, it has created a situation in which “Uniates even mask themselves as Orthodox and do not say they are Catholics but call themselves Orthodox,” thus creating serious problems for the Moscow Patriarchate.
In addition, the metropolitan touched on the Jesuit roots of Pope Francis. The Russian churchman noted that it is “not accidental” that “the word ‘Jesuit’ has acquired in the Russian language a negative connotation.” According to some, he continued, “a Jesuit is someone who appears to be one thing but is another, who says one thing but thinks another.”
Given the sensitivity of the Uniate issue for the Moscow Patriarchate, Ilarion’s observation suggests that the Russian Church, however much it may hope for better relations with the Vatican in order to promote traditional values, will view the actions of a man whom some are calling “the Ukrainian pope” with deep suspicion.
Staunton, March 24 – Having watched as the Polish pope, John Paul II, helped end the communist empire in Europe, Moscow must now cope with a new reality, a Russian commentator says, it must recognize that in Pope Francis I, “we have a Ukrainian pope,” someone whose ideaas could threaten Russian interests in a new way.
This unsigned commentary provides a wealth of evidence for both these hopes and fears. It begins by noting that Francis has shown himself committed to inter-religious dialogue, and it notes that “for the first time” since the 1054 split between Orthodoxy and Catholicis, Patriarch Bartholemew of Constantinople, the universal patriarch, attended a papal enthronement.
It cites the words of Father Orest-Dmitry Vilchinsky who says that the new pope’s “personality was formed in a multi-ethnic and poly-confessional society” and that Francis is thus is inclined to and fully capable of opening a dialogue with representatives of all other religious denominations and faiths.
But the commentary continues, Ukraine occupies a special place in the new pope’s heart. He was a student of Stepan Chmil, a Greek Catholic priest who is “one of the three” Uniate leaders whom Patriarch Iosif Slipyi “secretly” consecrated so that they could “in case of necessity” enter “the territory of the USSR” and elevate new bishops for that church.
The new pope apparently knows the Byzantine Ukrainian rite and felt close enough to its leaders to provide testimony for the beatification of Slipyi. According to another Ukrainian émigré churchman who occasionally met with the future pope, Francis has a “sentimental” soft spot for Ukrainians.
The Blessed Svyatoslav, the head of that church, worked “under the direct leadership” of the Argentinian cardinal, and following the election of Francis as pope expressed the hope that the latter would support a patriarchate for the Uniates, something they have long wanted because of the standing it would give them.
Russian concerns about the new pope’s probable course of action with respect to the Uniates are exacerbated, the Boardnews.ru commentary says, because Francis is the first Jesuit pope. The Jesuits trained many Ukrainian churchmen, and their activities have long been viewed with suspicion by the Moscow Patriarchate and the Russian state, the commentary says.
And the leadership of the Moscow Patriarchate has issued a clear warning to the pope about the consequences of involvement with the Uniates. Metropolitan Ilarion of Volokolamsk, the head of the Russian church’s powerful department of external church relations, said that such contacts “will not lead” to anything good (nakanune.ru/news/2013/3/20/22303511/).
Uniatism is “the most sensitive issue in Orthodox-Catholic dialogue and in relations between the Orthodox and the Catholics,” the metropolitan said, because “the Orthodox Church has always been sharply against Uniatism as such because we view it as a deceptive attempt to force Orthodox into entering community with Rome.”
Not only did the Uniate church injure Orthodoxy by its work to revive its organization in Western Ukraine in the late 1980s and early 1990s, Ilarion continued, it has created a situation in which “Uniates even mask themselves as Orthodox and do not say they are Catholics but call themselves Orthodox,” thus creating serious problems for the Moscow Patriarchate.
In addition, the metropolitan touched on the Jesuit roots of Pope Francis. The Russian churchman noted that it is “not accidental” that “the word ‘Jesuit’ has acquired in the Russian language a negative connotation.” According to some, he continued, “a Jesuit is someone who appears to be one thing but is another, who says one thing but thinks another.”
Given the sensitivity of the Uniate issue for the Moscow Patriarchate, Ilarion’s observation suggests that the Russian Church, however much it may hope for better relations with the Vatican in order to promote traditional values, will view the actions of a man whom some are calling “the Ukrainian pope” with deep suspicion.
Wednesday, March 20, 2013
Orientale Lumen Conferences for 2013
Orientale Lumen XVII Conference on a
Vision of a Reunited Church
The Orientale Lumen XVII Conference will be held June 17-20, 2013 at the Washington Retreat House in Washington, DC on the theme of “Vision of a Reunited Church.” We will be honored with the presence of several outstanding speakers, some of whom are members of the North American Catholic-Orthodox Theological Consultation, including:
Orthodox Church in America,
Washington, DC
Archimandrite Robert Taft, SJ
Professor Emeritus of the Pontifical
Oriental Institute, Boston,
MA
Father Thomas FitzGerald
Holy Cross/Hellenic College, Boston, MA
Father Sidney Griffith
The Catholic University of America, Washington,
DC
Father Nicholas Apostola
St. Nicholas Romanian Orthodox Church, Worcester, MA
Sr. Susan Wood, SCL
Marquette University,
Milwaukee, WI
Father Ron Roberson, OP, Moderator Romanian Greek Catholic Diocese of Canton, OH
Orientale Lumen EuroEast IV
Conference on Saints Cyril and Methodius
This year is the 1150th anniversary of the mission of Saints Cyril and Methodius from Constantinople to Great Moravia to bring Christianity to the Slavic people. Their inspiring story balances evangelization and ecumenism that inspired Blessed John Paul II to name them “Apostles to the Slavs” and “Co-Patrons of Europe.” The Orientale Lumen EuroEast IV Conference will be held July 8-11, 2013 at the Crowne Plaza Hotel in Bratislava, Slovakia in the heart of the former Great Moravia. Come and hear the brothers’ story and learn how their work has lasted through the centuries from:
Ecumenical Patriarchate
of Constantinople, Oxford
Archbishop
Cyril Vasil’ (invited)
Congregation for the
Eastern Churches, The Vatican
Metropolitan
Krystof (invited)
Orthodox Church of the
Czech and Slovak Lands,
Prague
Sr. Dr.
Vassa Larin
University of Vienna, Austria
Dr.
Daniel Galadza
Pontifical Oriental
Institute, Rome
Prof.
Illya Bey
Ukrainian Orthodox
Theological Academy, Kyiv
Msgr.
George Dobes (Moderator)
Military Chaplains Association, Washington, DC
More details about both conferences and online registration can be found at the Future Conferences page http://www.olconference.com/
Pass the word to your friends and associates. The topics for this year’s OL Conferences promise to be both educational and exciting! I look forward to seeing many old and new friends this summer. Note: If we don’t have at least 50 paid registrations by April 1st, we may have to cancel one or both conferences – please hurry and sign up and tell your friends!
Theosis – New Monthly Magazine/Booklet
Eastern Christian Publications in Fairfax, Virginia recently announced a new popular monthly magazine called Theosis: Spiritual Reflections from the Christian East. It is a small-format, full-color magazine which is published in both a print and eZine version. Each month contains several short essays on Prayer, Eucharist, Sacraments, Scripture, Holy Icons, Sacramental Living, Spirituality, and a Feast of the Month. Contributors are authors and theologians from a wide variety of Orthodox and Catholic Churches including Metropolitan Kallistos (Ware) and Archimandrite Robert Taft, SJ.
We have received many positive reactions to it, including the following:
- “Thank you so much for this wonderful publication. It has been truly a blessing for me.”—Basilius, Raleigh, NC
- “Thank you so much! I've been waiting for something like this magazine to happen.”—Kathy, Akron, OH
- “Enjoying all the articles so far and I agree it’s great for laymen like me and very simple.”—Stephen, Dublin, Ireland.
- “Thank you for such a great contribution to our lives.”—Fr Jaroslav
- “I am really looking forward to praying with the content and having it as a companion throughout each month during this year of faith. Thanks and God bless you for this wonderful resource.”—Sister Linda, Ontario, Canada.
Print subscriptions are just $60.00/year, or $5.00 per month and each issue contains approximately 100 pages of text and color images. The electronic eZine subscription is $29.95/year. Six month and twenty-four month subscriptions are also available, along with bulk discounts for parishes or prayer groups. More information is available at www.ecpubs.com/theosis.html. Or call 703-691-8862.
Monday, March 18, 2013
Літургія на могилі апостола Петра - Блаженніший Святослав
У великий піст з молитвою та прощенням. В апостольській столиці глава УГКЦ разом з українцями молились на гробі апостола Петра першого папи римського. Мощі головного апостола знаходяться у крипті собору святого петра у Ватикані разом з іншими римськими понтифіками.
Блаженніший Святослав закликав вірних молитися за нового Папу та в дусі покаяння і всепрощення розпочати шлях Великого посту.
Після завершення Літургії Блаженніший Святослав поблагословив усіх присутніх часткою мощей св. Верховних Апостолів Петра і Павла Апостольська столиця передала парафії с. Вишка, що на Закарпатті.
Блаженніший Святослав закликав вірних молитися за нового Папу та в дусі покаяння і всепрощення розпочати шлях Великого посту.
Після завершення Літургії Блаженніший Святослав поблагословив усіх присутніх часткою мощей св. Верховних Апостолів Петра і Павла Апостольська столиця передала парафії с. Вишка, що на Закарпатті.
Pope stresses simplicity, ecumenism in inaugural Mass plans
SOURCE: NCR
| Mar. 18, 2013
If the plans for his inaugural Mass -- expected to attract 1 million people to St. Peter's Square on Tuesday -- are any indication, it seems Pope Francis is setting three key themes for the event: simplicity, ecumenism and mercy.
In what may also be signposts into the pope's wider focus, the Vatican announced Monday that the events surrounding the Mass will see:
The Mass, officially known as "the solemn Mass of the beginning of the Petrine ministry," is to start at 9:30 a.m. Rome time Tuesday. Vatican and Roman officials are preparing for enormous crowds, with some estimating the number could reach well over the 1 million mark.
Official estimates for the pope's first Angelus blessing, held at noon Sunday, put the number there at about 300,000.
Representatives of governments from around the world are expected to attend Tuesday. U.S. Vice President Joe Biden arrived in Rome on Sunday night for the event.
News of the pope's plans for the event came Monday at a Vatican press conference.
The pope is to pray with the Eastern Rite church leaders before the Mass begins at the crypt of St. Peter, where the apostle is thought to be buried and upon which St. Peter's Basilica is built.
Included in the group will be the ecumenical patriarch of Constantinople, Bartholomew I, the first of his line to attend a papal inauguration since the year 1054, when the Eastern and Western churches split.
Following the prayer, the official ceremony will get under way with the pope receiving both his ring -- known as the fisherman's ring, as Peter was a fisherman before an apostle -- and his pallium, a woolen liturgical vestment signifying unity with the world's archbishops and the pope's role as shepherd of the universal church.
The pope will be using the same pallium as his predecessor, Pope Benedict XVI, the Vatican spokesmen said Monday.
The ring he will wear has been made by an Italian jeweler either from a model of or from a ring worn by Pope Paul VI's private secretary, Archbishop Pasquale Macchi, the spokesmen said. Unlike Benedict's ring, which was made of gold, Francis' will be made of gold-plated silver.
A picture of the ring provided by the Vatican shows a small face with a relief image of a bearded St. Peter holding the symbolic keys to heaven.
The pope has also approved his official coat of arms, using the same heraldry he used while he was bishop of Buenos Aires, Argentina, the Vatican said Monday.
The coat of arms features a blue background with three symbols focused on the Holy Family: the official seal of the Jesuits, which spells out IHS, the first three letters of Jesus' name in Greek; an image of a spikenard flower, traditionally a symbol of Joseph; and a five-pointed star, a symbol of Mary.
The pope's motto, which he also used in Argentina, is taken from a homily of St. Bede, an eighth-century English monk.
Translated literally, it means, "because he saw him through the eyes of mercy and chose him."
"Jesus saw Matthew, not merely in the usual sense, but more significantly with his merciful understanding of men," St. Bede wrote in the homily the motto references.
Tuesday's inaugural Mass is being held on the feast day of St. Joseph. The pope has decided to use the normal readings for the day instead of special readings for the occasion, the Vatican said Monday.
The first reading will be made in English; the second in Spanish. The pope will homilize in Italian.
Although Basilian Fr. Thomas Rosica, who provides English translation during the press conferences, said a text of the homily would be available to journalists ahead of time, he also said, "As we have noticed over the past few days, there is a certain spontaneity in the pope's talks."
The first reading for the Mass will be from the Book of Samuel, recalling the Lord speaking to the prophet Nathan, asking him to tell David that "I will preserve the offspring of your body after you and make his sovereignty secure."
The second reading will be from Paul's letter to the Romans, regarding God's promise to Abraham "on account of the righteousness which consists in faith."
The Gospel account, taken from Matthew, focuses on Joseph's uncertainty around Mary's unexplained pregnancy. Appearing before Joseph, according to the account, an angel tells Joseph to stay with Mary regardless.
Among the petitions are: prayers for government officials, that they may "help build the civilization of love"; and prayers for the poor, that God will "grant them refreshment, comfort, and hope, not least through the love of their brothers and sisters."
A total of 132 delegations from around the world are expected to attend the event, the Vatican said, including 31 heads of state and two ruling monarchs.
Stressing that the Vatican is not controlling the guest list -- which is reported to include controversial Zimbabwean president Robert Mugabe -- Rosica said all are welcome to attend.
"The Holy See does not invite any foreign delegation ... we inform the world that this is taking place," Rosica said. "Those who wish to come are welcome, no one is refused."
On Wednesday, Francis will meet with representatives of both Christian groups and those of other faiths, the Vatican said.
Stressing the tie between ecumenism, or relations between Christian churches, and relations between other faiths, the Vatican said the pope would be meeting with the ecumenical and interfaith leaders at the "same moment, not two different moments."
Among those included in the meeting will be leaders of 33 Christian churches, 16 Jewish leaders, and leaders of the Muslim, Buddhist, Sikh and Jain communities.
Included in the Christian group will be Bartholomew I; Patriarch Kirill I, the metropolitan of Moscow; a representative of the Armenian orthodox church; an Anglican representative; and the secretary of the World Council of Churches.
| Mar. 18, 2013
If the plans for his inaugural Mass -- expected to attract 1 million people to St. Peter's Square on Tuesday -- are any indication, it seems Pope Francis is setting three key themes for the event: simplicity, ecumenism and mercy.
In what may also be signposts into the pope's wider focus, the Vatican announced Monday that the events surrounding the Mass will see:
- Combined prayer between the pontiff and representatives of the Eastern Rite churches at the tomb of St. Peter;
- Proclamation of the Gospel being made in Greek, "in order to simplify the liturgy";
- The pope wearing a simple new ring of office, a gold-plated silver band, either recycled from or based on a model from the era of Pope Paul VI (1963-1978); and
- Adoption of the Latin phrase Miserando atque eligendo as the pope's motto, a reflection on Christ's mercy in choosing Matthew, who was a tax collector, as an apostle.
The Mass, officially known as "the solemn Mass of the beginning of the Petrine ministry," is to start at 9:30 a.m. Rome time Tuesday. Vatican and Roman officials are preparing for enormous crowds, with some estimating the number could reach well over the 1 million mark.
Official estimates for the pope's first Angelus blessing, held at noon Sunday, put the number there at about 300,000.
Representatives of governments from around the world are expected to attend Tuesday. U.S. Vice President Joe Biden arrived in Rome on Sunday night for the event.
News of the pope's plans for the event came Monday at a Vatican press conference.
The pope is to pray with the Eastern Rite church leaders before the Mass begins at the crypt of St. Peter, where the apostle is thought to be buried and upon which St. Peter's Basilica is built.
Included in the group will be the ecumenical patriarch of Constantinople, Bartholomew I, the first of his line to attend a papal inauguration since the year 1054, when the Eastern and Western churches split.
Following the prayer, the official ceremony will get under way with the pope receiving both his ring -- known as the fisherman's ring, as Peter was a fisherman before an apostle -- and his pallium, a woolen liturgical vestment signifying unity with the world's archbishops and the pope's role as shepherd of the universal church.
The ring he will wear has been made by an Italian jeweler either from a model of or from a ring worn by Pope Paul VI's private secretary, Archbishop Pasquale Macchi, the spokesmen said. Unlike Benedict's ring, which was made of gold, Francis' will be made of gold-plated silver.
A picture of the ring provided by the Vatican shows a small face with a relief image of a bearded St. Peter holding the symbolic keys to heaven.
The pope has also approved his official coat of arms, using the same heraldry he used while he was bishop of Buenos Aires, Argentina, the Vatican said Monday.
The pope's motto, which he also used in Argentina, is taken from a homily of St. Bede, an eighth-century English monk.
Translated literally, it means, "because he saw him through the eyes of mercy and chose him."
"Jesus saw Matthew, not merely in the usual sense, but more significantly with his merciful understanding of men," St. Bede wrote in the homily the motto references.
Tuesday's inaugural Mass is being held on the feast day of St. Joseph. The pope has decided to use the normal readings for the day instead of special readings for the occasion, the Vatican said Monday.
The first reading will be made in English; the second in Spanish. The pope will homilize in Italian.
Although Basilian Fr. Thomas Rosica, who provides English translation during the press conferences, said a text of the homily would be available to journalists ahead of time, he also said, "As we have noticed over the past few days, there is a certain spontaneity in the pope's talks."
The first reading for the Mass will be from the Book of Samuel, recalling the Lord speaking to the prophet Nathan, asking him to tell David that "I will preserve the offspring of your body after you and make his sovereignty secure."
The second reading will be from Paul's letter to the Romans, regarding God's promise to Abraham "on account of the righteousness which consists in faith."
The Gospel account, taken from Matthew, focuses on Joseph's uncertainty around Mary's unexplained pregnancy. Appearing before Joseph, according to the account, an angel tells Joseph to stay with Mary regardless.
Among the petitions are: prayers for government officials, that they may "help build the civilization of love"; and prayers for the poor, that God will "grant them refreshment, comfort, and hope, not least through the love of their brothers and sisters."
A total of 132 delegations from around the world are expected to attend the event, the Vatican said, including 31 heads of state and two ruling monarchs.
Stressing that the Vatican is not controlling the guest list -- which is reported to include controversial Zimbabwean president Robert Mugabe -- Rosica said all are welcome to attend.
"The Holy See does not invite any foreign delegation ... we inform the world that this is taking place," Rosica said. "Those who wish to come are welcome, no one is refused."
On Wednesday, Francis will meet with representatives of both Christian groups and those of other faiths, the Vatican said.
Stressing the tie between ecumenism, or relations between Christian churches, and relations between other faiths, the Vatican said the pope would be meeting with the ecumenical and interfaith leaders at the "same moment, not two different moments."
Among those included in the meeting will be leaders of 33 Christian churches, 16 Jewish leaders, and leaders of the Muslim, Buddhist, Sikh and Jain communities.
Included in the Christian group will be Bartholomew I; Patriarch Kirill I, the metropolitan of Moscow; a representative of the Armenian orthodox church; an Anglican representative; and the secretary of the World Council of Churches.
"Axios! Ἀξιός! Aксиос!" - New Archimandrite for Russian Catholics in Lyon
SOURCE: Website of the parish of St. Irénée de Lyon
Le père Joël Courtois a été élevé à la dignité d’archimandrite le dimanche 3 mars 2013 par Mgr Dimitrios (Salachas), évêque de Gratianopolis, exarque pour les byzantins catholiques de Grèce.
Fr. Joel Courtois was raised to the rank of archimandrite Sunday, March 3, 2013 by Bishop Dimitrios (Salachas), bishop of Gratianopolis, Byzantine Catholic Exarch for Greece.
Le père Joël Courtois a été élevé à la dignité d’archimandrite le dimanche 3 mars 2013 par Mgr Dimitrios (Salachas), évêque de Gratianopolis, exarque pour les byzantins catholiques de Grèce.
Fr. Joel Courtois was raised to the rank of archimandrite Sunday, March 3, 2013 by Bishop Dimitrios (Salachas), bishop of Gratianopolis, Byzantine Catholic Exarch for Greece.
O Dieu dont la providence continue pour les hommes l'oeuvre du salut, toi qui as rassemblé dans l'unité ce troupeau spirituel, toi-même, Seigneur de l'univers, en ton immense amour des hommes, conserve sans reproche ton serviteur dans l'observance ininterrompue de tes commandements, afin que nulle brebis de ce troupeau ne soit perdue, dévorée par le loup ennemi. Et ton serviteur Joël, que tu as jugé bon d'établir à sa tête comme archimandrite, rends-le digne de ta bonté, pare-le de toutes les vertus, afin que, par ses oeuvres, il donne le bon exemple à ses subordonnés, pour qu'ils puissent imiter sa vie sans reproche et se présenter avec lui, sans encourir de condamnation, devant ton redoutable tribunal.
(...)
Axios, axios, axios!
 |
 |
 |
 |
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)