Europaica No. 95
Bulletin of the Representation of the Russian Orthodox Church to the
European Institutions
Metropolitan Kirill of Smolensk and Kaliningrad: Our Cooperation Is
Absolutely Necessary and Is Awaited by Millions of People
Excerpts from the interview to Inside the Vatican magazine.
Inside the Vatican: On May 25, 2005 in Bari, in southern Italy, just
a month after the election of Pope Benedict XVI, Cardinal Walter
Kasper made a proposal that caught the attention of many observers
of Catholic and Orthodox affairs: he proposed convening a type of
ecumenical "council" open to the participation of Orthodox as well
as Roman Catholics. He suggested that Bari could be the site of such
a "council" which would have as its goal the restoration of
friendship between the Catholic and Orthodox Churches, and that the
creation of an "alliance" for a rediscovery of the "Christian roots
of Europe" could become the council's theme. What do you think about
this proposal?
Metropolitan Kirill: Cardinal Walter Kasper's idea about holding
a "council" of Orthodox and Roman Catholic hierarchs in Bari is,
undoubtedly, rather interesting. At the same time, it is necessary
to bear in mind that a council as an ecclesiological reality is
impossible in the conditions of our present division. Therefore, we
may speak not about a council like ones of the Ancient Undivided
Church, but about a meeting or an assembly.
I believe that, on the way to any significant event in the sphere of
Orthodox-Catholic relations, it is necessary to tend to the solution
of specific problems complicating these relations. A joint
discussion of acute problems of the present is already under way.
For instance, an International Conference on "Christian Values in
Europe" organized by the Vatican's Pontifical Council for Culture
along with the Moscow Patriarchate's Department of External Church
Relations, which I head, will take place in Vienna in early May,
2006, with assistance from the "Pro Oriente" foundation of Vienna,
Austria.
Inside the Vatican: Cardinal Kasper also said, "I am convinced that
after the great efforts and significant steps made by John Paul II,
Pope Benedict XVI will open the way for such a plan in the future".
What do you think about Pope Benedict XVI? Have you ever spoken to
him? Do you think that you could meet with him in the future? Is
Benedict different from John Paul II, and if so, in what way?
Metropolitan Kirill: I respect the new Head of the Catholic Church
Pope Benedict XVI very much and I had repeatedly met him before his
election to the Roman throne. On April 25, 2005, the day after the
inaugural celebrations, His Holiness received me in the "Santa
Marta" residence where he had continued living after the end of the
conclave. Our conversation was informal and warm. However, during
this brief period of time we managed to discuss the basic questions
in the relations between the Russian Orthodox and Catholic Churches
and to note our agreement concerning the need for common action
between Orthodox and Roman Catholics in upholding and proclaiming
Christian values.
I was very grateful to His Holiness for this meeting and I see in it
a sign of the special significance which a newly-elected pontiff
attached to relations with Orthodox Churches and with the Russian
Orthodox Church as the largest of them.
I would rather not compare the personalities of the two heads of the
Catholic Church - the recently deceased John Paul II and the present
Pope Benedict XVI. Both of them are, undoubtedly, really outstanding
people. However, inter-Church relations don't always depend on
individual persons, even such high-ranking ones. As is well known,
there are a number of rather complicated problems that require, on
the one hand, an urgent resolution or settlement, and, on the other,
a responsible and thoughtful approach. Keeping both of these factors
in mind should assist the overcoming of existing difficulties in the
most effective way.
A major component of this important work therefore should be a fair
and open dialogue between our Churches. That is why I hope for the
continuation of fruitful meetings with leaders of the Catholic
Church.
Inside the Vatican: What are the main difficulties in relations
between the Roman Catholic and Orthodox Catholics? Which can be
settled relatively easily and which cannot?
Metropolitan Kirill: Problems in relations between Russian Orthodox
and Catholic Churches are well known. First of all, it is the
situation in the Ukraine, especially in the western part of it,
where oppressions of Orthodox believers by Greek Catholics continue.
Unfortunately, in the last years the situation has not changed for
the better. On the contrary, it tends to become more complicated due
to the transfer of Cardinal Lubomyr Husar's see from Lvov, with
which the center of the Ukrainian Uniates has been historically
connected, to Kiev, called the "mother of Russian cities" and for
centuries the see of the heads of the Orthodox Church of Russia, and
then the Ukraine.
In Russia, our believers are seriously concerned and misunderstand
missionary work done by Roman Catholic clergy among the Orthodox
population, in particular among children and youth. People often ask
me: why do Catholic priests not work more actively in the countries
from which they come to Russia and prefer to nurture Roman Catholic
traditions in Russian children from troubled families?
These problems can hardly be settled soon and easily but we should
aim for their prompt solution as there are destinies of real people,
their worries and feelings, behind them.
Inside the Vatican: Can you suggest any special initiatives that
could improve Roman Catholic-Russian Orthodox relations? Do you
support the creation of a "Catholic-Orthodox Alliance" in Europe in
support of Christian moral values, as suggested by Cardinal Kasper
and the Viennese and Austrian Diocesan Russian Orthodox Bishop
Hilarion Alfeyev?
Metropolitan Kirill: Regarding the idea of the creation of
an "Orthodox-Catholic alliance" I would like to say that it is
necessary to make correct emphasis here and to agree about the
terms. The concept of an "alliance" has a more political than Church-
related meaning. Therefore, I would prefer not to use this
__expression.
However, the Russian Orthodox Church actively supports the
development of interaction with the Catholic Church. We agree on a
majority of the questions that the Christian world faces today. It
is well known that both Churches are very concerned about the
expulsion of religious values from the life of modern society and
the need to preserve Christian ethical standards in it. Our
cooperation is absolutely necessary. It is awaited by millions of
people - believers and spiritual seekers alike. This interaction can
have far-reaching consequences for Europe and, what is especially
important, for the whole system of inter-Christian relations. It is
absolutely clear that in this case we speak not only about the
Russian Orthodox Church but about all local Orthodox Churches. I
think the place of Christian values in the world will in many ways
depend on the character of Orthodox-Catholic relations, at least on
the European continent <…>
The full text of the interview will be published in the May issue of
Inside the Vatican magazine.
Bishop Hilarion of Vienna and Austria: The Need to Act
Excerpts from the interview to Inside the Vatican magazine.
Inside the Vatican: A major conference involving Catholics and
Orthodox is scheduled to take place in Vienna in early May. Can you
tell us something about the background of this conference, and its
chief purpose?
Bishop Hilarion: The theme of the conference is "Christian Values in
Europe." The initiative to organize this conference belonged to
Metropolitan Kirill, chairman of the Department for External Church
Relations of the Moscow Patriarchate. Invited are distinguished
Church leaders and theologians from the Roman Catholic and Russian
Orthodox Churches. There will be about 25 participants on each side.
The discussion on Christian values acquires special relevance and
urgency in the context of the process of globalization, which is
affecting more and more of the world's population. Globalization is
a multi-dimensional, multi-faceted and multi-layered process. It
exerts influence on the world as a whole and on separate countries
and regions, on the entire human community and on concrete human
beings. It affects politics and economics, morals and law, the
sciences and arts, education and culture. Globalization leaves its
imprint on practically all areas of human endeavor, with the
possible exception of one: religion. Today only religion is
systematically resisting the relentless attack of globalization,
entering into an unequal battle to defend those values it considers
fundamental and which are being challenged by globalization.
Only religion is able to counter the ideology of globalization with
its own system of spiritual and moral orientation based on the
centuries-long experience of generations acquired during the pre-
globalization age. In the modern battle for values, people find
themselves more often than not on opposite sides of the barricades,
with those inspired by religious ideals on the one side and those
whose world-view is formed by secular humanism on the other.
At the core of the modern globalization ideology is the humanistic
idea of the absolute dignity of the human person and of the
existence of universal, "common human" values, which are proposed as
the foundation of a single world civilization. By "common human"
values, however, are understood not only those spiritual and moral
tenets which are common to all religions or which are equally
obligatory for both religious and non-religious people ("thou shall
not kill", "thou shall not steal", "thou shall not bear false
witness", etc.), but also many ideas that are questionable from the
religious point of view and which are rooted in liberal-humanistic
morality. To this latter group belong, in particular, the
affirmation of the right of each individual to his or her own way of
life, which extends insofar as it does not cause harm to others.
From the viewpoint of humanistic morality, the only limitation on
human freedom is the freedom of other people: the moral person is
one who does not harm the interests of others, while the immoral
person is one who infringes upon their freedom. The idea of absolute
moral norms as well as the notion of sin are completely absent from
modern humanistic ethics <…>
The potential explosiveness of today's inter-civilizational
situation is to a significant degree caused by the fact that the
Western liberal-humanistic ideology, acting on the idea of its own
universality, is imposing itself on people who were raised in other
spiritual and moral traditions and have different value systems.
These people see in the total dictate of the Western ideology a
threat to their identity. The evidently anti-religious character of
modern liberal humanism brings about non-acceptance and rejection by
those whose behaviour is religiously motivated and whose spiritual
life is founded on religious experience.
The question here is not only about individuals for whom faith is a
matter of personal choice, but also about entire nations, cultures
and civilizations formed under the influence of religious factors.
It is at the international, inter-cultural and inter-civilizational
levels that the opposition between secularism and religion can grow
into an open conflict. All these questions must be addressed by both
the Catholics and the Orthodox during the Vienna conference on
Christian values in Europe.
Inside the Vatican: Catholics and Orthodox are Christians, divided
since 1054. Can that division be healed? How?
Bishop Hilarion: <…> The schism of 1054 was <…> the result of quite
a long development, and not simply a matter of misunderstanding
between the papal envoys and the members of the Church of
Constantinople, as it is sometimes presented. Obviously, dogmatic
and ecclesiological differences between East and West in the first
millennium did not necessitate the complete breach of eucharistic
relations between the two traditions, but they definitely
contributed to the alienation that resulted in this breach.
The second millennium was marked by a continual struggle between
East and West, and by the numerous attempts of the Pope to bring
disobedient Easterners under his control.
The Crusades were the most striking and outrageous example of the
use of violence against the Orthodox by their Western fellow-
Christians. The memory of the Crusades is still alive among the
Greeks: the wound is still bleeding. The late Pope John Paul II
apologized for the Crusades before the Archbishop of Athens, which
by itself was a noble action. One has to admit, however, that the
apology was delayed by eight centuries. It must also be recognised
that numerous remnants of the Crusaders' activity still survive,
including, for example, the Latin Patriarchate of Jerusalem, which
was created at the time of the Crusades in order to replace the
respective Orthodox Patriarchate.
Other blows dealt repeatedly to the Orthodox were the numerous
attempts to bring them under the jurisdiction of Rome by means
of "union". The first such attempt, made in Lyon in the 13th
century, was followed the Union of Ferrara-Florence in 1439, on the
eve of the fall of the Byzantine Empire. Nothing has remained of
these two "unions". But the Union of Brest, proclaimed in 1596, gave
birth to ecclesiastical structures that still exist and whose recent
revival has contributed to aggravating Catholic-Orthodox relations.
Parallel to these processes, a continuing theological alienation
between Orthodox and Catholics also grew. This was to a significant
degree conditioned by the introduction of new doctrines in the
Catholic Church, which were (and are still) regarded by the Orthodox
as dogmatic innovations. The belief in the infallibility of the Pope
when he speaks ex cathedra is the most striking example. A teaching
that was the consequence of many centuries of theological debate
within the Catholic Church, it was strongly censured by the
Orthodox. Indeed, this doctrine was rejected also by some
traditional circles within the Western Church: hence the appearance
of the Old Catholic movement, which for many decades conducted a
dialogue with the Orthodox.
The struggles between the two Christian traditions in the first half
of the 20th century did not differ from those of previous times in
that they continued at various levels. There were, however, some
latent streams within both traditions which predetermined a rather
rapid rapprochement in the second half of the 20th century. Already
in the 1930s and 1940s theologians from both sides began to meet on
a more regular basis, and for the very first time in Christian
history the possibility emerged for each to cross the borders of its
own context.
The theological exchange that took place at that time contributed to
the remarkable change on the part of the Catholics towards the
Orthodox which was most evidently manifested during the Second
Vatican Council. At this Council, the Orthodox Church was recognized
as possessing the fullness of the divine grace that leads people to
salvation. It is from Vatican II that the term "sister Church" with
reference to the Orthodox Church stems.
This same Council predetermined the significant achievements
attained by the Mixed Commission for Theological Dialogue between
the Roman Catholic Church and the Orthodox Churches, which was
created in 1980. The work of this Commission lasted for 20 years and
then was interrupted in 2000 because of a strong disagreement on the
question of Uniatism. After a five-year break the Coordinating
Committee of this Commission met in the fall of 2005 in Rome to
prepare the plenary session, which is to be held in Serbia in 2006.
Thus, the theological dialogue has now resumed, and it is a good
sign. However, there is not much ground for excessive optimism,
since the questions to be discussed are quite difficult and quite
numerous. The issue of the primacy of the bishop of Rome, which will
be addressed by the Commission in 2006, is among the most difficult
ones, not only because it remains the main cause of disagreement
between the Catholics and the Orthodox, but also because there is no
unity among the Orthodox on the understanding of primacy in the
Universal Church. I envisage long and difficult discussions, many
years of assiduous work, and no immediate and visible results.
Inside the Vatican: If the division cannot be healed, can Catholics
and Orthodox nevertheless work together on certain social problems,
like caring for abandoned children, or supporting marriage and
family life? What possibilities do you see for this type of
collaboration?
Bishop Hilarion: I think there are many possibilities for such
collaboration, and I regret that until now we have done very little
together in the field of Christian charity. Sometimes our missions
and charitable organizations act almost as competing structures,
while we desperately need to learn to work together.
Caring for abandoned children and supporting marriage and family
life are among the most urgent tasks in such countries as Russia. It
is important, however, that these noble activities not be used for
the aims of proselytism, which devalues them and makes them an
obstacle, rather then a means for Christian unity.
I hope some way of closer collaboration of the Catholics with the
Orthodox in the field of promoting and defending Christian values in
Europe will be found in the near future. Over a year ago, on the
pages of your periodical, I called for a European Catholic-Orthodox
alliance to be created, and I still think this idea is quite
relevant.
There are now two obvious essentially-differing versions of
Christianity - the traditional and the liberal. The abyss that now
exists divides not so much the Orthodox and Catholics, or the
Catholics and Protestants, as the "traditionalists" and "liberals"
(with all the conventions of such labels). Of course, there are
defenders of traditional values in the Protestant camp (especially
in the Southern churches, that is, Africa, Asia, Latin America). But
a liberal attitude prevails among the Protestants.
In this situation, I suppose that a consolidation is needed in the
efforts of those churches which consider themselves "Churches of
Tradition," that is, the Orthodox, Catholics and the Oriental
Orthodox. I am not speaking about the serious dogmatic and
ecclesiological differences which exist between these Churches and
which can be considered within the framework of bilateral dialogue.
I am speaking about the need to reach an agreement between these
Churches on some strategic alliance, pact or cooperation for
defending traditional Christianity as such - defending it from all
modern challenges, be it militant liberalism, militant atheism or
militant Islam. When I expressed this idea for the first time, I
used the word "alliance' to describe the body which, in my opinion,
needs to be created. Some subsequent critics, while enthusiastic
about the idea itself, did not like the term "alliance" for the
military or political connotations which, allegedly, could be
discerned in it.
Indeed, what matters most is not the terminology, but the idea.
Perhaps we could speak about a Catholic-Orthodox Committee on
Cooperation in Europe, or about a European Catholic-Orthodox
Consultative Board. In any case, for the body in question, we need a
word which has no ecclesiastical connotations: words like "council"
or "union" should be avoided. Otherwise one may suspect that a new
type of Uniatism is envisaged.
I would like to make clear that we do not need another union of the
type of Ferrara-Florence, a union aimed at restoration of full
Eucharistic communion but based on a theological compromise. What we
do need at this stage, in my opinion, is a close and efficient
strategic cooperation, for the challenge is made to traditional
Christianity as such. This is especially noticeable in Europe, where
de-Christianization and liberalization are occurring as persistently
as the gradual and unswerving Islamization. The liberal,
weakened "Christianity" of the Protestant communities cannot resist
the onslaught of Islam; only staunch, traditional Christianity can
stand against it, ready to defend its moral positions. In this
battle, the Orthodox and Catholics could, even in the face of all
the differences accumulated over the centuries, form a united front.
The primary purpose of the strategic cooperation that I propose
should be the defense of traditional moral values such as the
family, childbirth, spousal fidelity. These values are subjected to
systematic mockery and derision in Europe by liberals and democrats
of all types. Instead of spousal fidelity, "free love" is promoted,
same-sex partnerships are equated with the union of marriage,
childbirth is opposed by "family planning." Unfortunately, we have
serious differences in these matters with most Protestants, not to
speak of fundamental differences of theological and ecclesiological
character <…>
Inside the Vatican: Is there a specific structure you have in mind
for this type of collaboration?
Bishop Hilarion: A European Catholic-Orthodox Alliance, or Committee
on Cooperation, or Consultative Board, whatever name is given to the
body that is proposed, should consist of the official
representatives of both Catholic and Orthodox Churches. If, for
example, the 25 representatives of the European Bishops'
Conferences, who now constitute the COMECE (the European Catholic
bishops' conference), could be joined by some 15 Orthodox bishops,
representing the Orthodox Churches that have dioceses and parishes
in Europe, this could become an authoritative and creative body for
defending traditional Christian values in Europe. But I presume
there could be some other, perhaps less ambitious structures of a
smaller scale.
Whatever is the structure and whatever is its name, I am convinced
that we must act speedily, since the challenges that traditional
Christianity faces are numerous and are growing. We should not wait
until Christianity is swallowed by Islam, or defeated by militant
secularism, or crushed by consumerism and relativism prevailing in
modern society. We must think very seriously about common ways of
facing all these modern challenges, and I greatly hope that the
Vienna conference will be just the first step on the path which we
will travel together.
The full text of the interview will be published in the May issue of
Inside the Vatican magazine.
