Can a Leopard Change His Spots?

[Lounger]

CAN THE LEOPARD CHANGE HIS SPOTS?
Vladimir Moss

As we witness the sad decline of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside
Russia under Metropolitan Lavr (ROCOR) into the embraces of the Moscow
Patriarchate (MP), it may be worth reviewing some of the arguments that members
of the
MP (and now even many members of the ROCOR) produce when challenged by members
of the True Russian Church. These arguments have varied considerably with
time, and even the MP would no doubt be ashamed of some of the arguments used in

Soviet times, when respect for both the Church and the State of the Soviet
Union was much higher than it is now. We shall not review these old
arguments
that even the MP is now ashamed of, but shall turn to the new ones that
have
appeared since the fall of communism “ although sometimes they are simply the
old ones souped up in a more contemporary, subtler form.

1. The Leopard and his spots.

One argument employed by contemporary advocates of the MP, and even by
the MP Patriarch Alexis himself is that since the ROCOR was formed as a
temporarily autonomous organization until the fall of communism, it must now
dissolve
itself insofar as communism fell nearly twelve years ago.

Two questions are immediately elicited by this argument. First, has
communism really fallen? And secondly, even if it has fallen, why should the
ROCOR
dissolve itself by joining the MP?

I think we cannot deny that in 1991 communism fell in the particular
statist form that we know as the Soviet Union, or Soviet power. I think it is
equally undeniable that, at least since New Year's Day, 2000, when KGB Colonel

Putin came to power, it has been in the process of being reconstructed.

The evidence is manifold. KGB men “ and let us recall Putin's remark
that there is no such thing as an ex-KGB man - now occupy about 50% of the

top governmental posts in the Soviet “ sorry, Russian - federation. The Soviet
anthem has been re-established as the country's national anthem; the red flag
has been restored to the armed forces. Putin has toasted Stalin, and recently
a new monument to Stalin was unveiled before a huge and enthusiastic crowd in
Ishim, Siberia (the see of ROCOR Bishop Evtikhy). It goes without saying that
Lenin's mummy remains in its pagan mausoleum in Red Square. The Chechen war
continues to be waged in a hideously cruel, typically Soviet manner. The media
are once again coming under tight state control (witness the way in which the
independent NTV station was simply taken over). Even the fledgling capitalist
economy is under threat, and its stock market is plunging, as a result of the
recent imprisonment of Khodorkovsky and the State's seizure of a large part of

his company's shares. So if there was a time for the ROCOR to dissolve
itself, it was in 1991, but not now.

In any case, what is the ROCOR to do after its self-dissolution? The
Fathers of the ROCOR always spoke of an All-Russian Council assembling after the

fall of communism, which would sort out the problems of the Russian Church,
elect a canonical patriarch, etc. Obviously by such an All-Russian Council they
did not mean a Council just of the MP, but a Council in which the ROCOR and
the Catacomb Church would be included. In fact, probably a Council from which
the MP would be excluded, but to which individual hierarchs of the MP would come

to offer their repentance, on the model of the repentant iconoclasts at the
Seventh Ecumenical Council. It is strange how little talk about such a Council
there has been since the supposed fall of communism?

Since no one seems to want to talk about an all-Russian Council, let us
consider some other alternatives. One is for the ROCOR to proclaim itself the
one and only Russian Orthodox Church. This was actually suggested by
Protopriest Lev Lebedev in the early 1990s, and appears to have been adopted to
some
extent by the ROCOR at that time. However, this was never done with much
conviction (except when dealing with dissidents inside Russia), and by the
late
1990s the talk was rather of a reunification of the different parts of the

Russian Church “ by which was meant the reunification only of the ROCOR and
the
MP.

But on what basis? On an equal basis, as if the ROCOR and the MP were
both equally legitimate parts of the Russian Church, two sisters of the
same
mother who had just had a quarrel and were now prepared to forgive and forget?
But this ecumenist solution was not really acceptable to either side,
since the MP resolutely calls itself (and is believed by many even in the ROCOR
to
be) the sole Mother Church, to which the ROCOR must return like a
naughty child to her parents, while the ROCOR believes that the MP must repent
of
certain dogmatic and canonical errors “ sergianism, ecumenism - before it can
be forgiven.

However, it is becoming more and more obvious “ if it was ever really in
doubt “ that the MP, at least in its upper reaches, will not and cannot
repent. At most it will bend a little to pressure coming, not from the ROCOR,
but
from its own people, as in the case of its half-hearted and qualified
canonization of the Tsar-Martyr. The MP had a golden opportunity to repent in
1991, when
the chains imposed by its Soviet masters fell away, and there was a danger of
a large-scale exodus from the patriarchate. But it did not repent. And now,
when it is in a much stronger position than in 1991, and the ROCOR is much
weaker, it is less likely than ever to repent.

Not only is it not repenting: like the dog of the proverb, it is
returning to its own vomit. Thus ecumenism continues unabated since the fall of
communism. The patriarch's incredible speech to the Jewish rabbis in November,
1991
has not been repented of, membership of the WCC continues as before, and
while there are complaints about Catholic proselytism it looks as if the Pope is
going to visit Russia with the MP's agreement.

The MP today, amazing to tell, is no less enthusiastically pro-Soviet
than the civil government. Priests regularly praise Stalin - and now these
panegyrics cannot be excused on the grounds that they are made under duress. The

idea that the MP has repented of sergianism is laughable. Consider the
patriarch's latest statement on Metropolitan Sergius' notorious declaration,
on
November 9, 2001: This was a clever step by which Metropolitan Sergius tried
to save
the church and clergy.

Tout a change, tout c'est la me chose!

The ROCOR leadership knows all this perfectly well. But it also knows
that it is weak, and has therefore come to the conclusion: If you can't
beat
them, join them. The leopard, they try and persuade us, has changed its
spots;
the tree with an evil root is now bringing forth good fruits. But as we know
from the Holy Scriptures, a leopard cannot change its spots, and a corrupt
tree cannot bring forth good fruit. Every tree that bringeth not forth good
fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. Wherefore by their fruits ye shall
know them? (Matthew 7.17-19).

In order to make sure of this point, let us briefly look at fruits of
the six most powerful metropolitans of the MP, one of whom is likely to be the
next patriarch:-

(1) Metropolitan Yuvenaly of Kolomna and Krutitsa was described in 1994 by
the OCA Bishop Basil (Rodzianko) of Washington as not only a scoundrel, but,
perhaps, something much worse than that (testimony of Michael Rodzianko).
Sergei Bychkov wrote in 1999 that he has never served a day in a parish. He
knows the problems and needs of the clergy only by hearsay. Although he came up
through all the ranks, he spent the most difficult years for the Russian church
abroad. He served in Berlin, Jerusalem, Prague, and even in Japan. He headed
OVTsS [the Department of External Church Relations] for almost ten years. He
thought that he would be elected patriarch in 1990 after the death of
Patriarch Pimen. But he did not make it even to the second round. This so upset
him
that he suffered a heartattack. But after recovering, he reconciled himself to
the situation and began to support the rise of Master [Cyril] Gundiaev.
Metropolitan Yuvenaly is notorious in church circles for his nontraditional
sexual
orientation. A number of monasteries in the area around Moscow have already
been turned into annexes of Sodom.

(2) Metropolitan Cyril of Smolensk, the friend of Metropolitan Yuvenaly and
head of the Department of External Church Relations, is an extreme ecumenist
and an importer of tobacco and spirits duty-free. Bychkov writes of him that
until recently he was absolutely certain that after the death of Patriarch
Alexis II he would undoubtedly become primate of the Russian church. True,
events
of this year have shaken Master Gundiaev's assurance?. Metropolitan Kirill's
tobacco and alcohol scandals have undermined his authority on the
international level. Nevertheless he has held onto his positions in the synod.
He knows
very well the weaknesses of members of the synod and he skillfully manipulates
them. This is the great talent of the metropolitan. His impudence and
frankness befuddle weak minds. Synod members who know about his ties with high
places
are not about to withstand his unbearable pressure. His close friendship with
Berezovsky also has brought its fruits; the metropolitan has compromising
information not only about all of the episcopacy but even about the patriarch
and
he occasionally leaks it to the press. According to the witness of an MP
priest, Metropolitan Cyril once came into his church and saw an icon of
Tsar-Martyr Nicholas on the analoy. Get the Tsar out of here! he said
severely!

(3) Metropolitan Vladimir of St. Petersburg, another extreme ecumenist who
is in favour of introducing the new calendar into the Russian Church was,
writes Bychkov, a representative of the Moscow patriarchate at the World
Council
of Churches in Geneva. At the end of the 1960s he was patriarchal exarch of
western Europe and served in Berlin. He is notorious for his aristocratic
manners (if he wears cuff links then they must be jeweled). Emulating Catherine
II's favorite Grigory Potemkin, he enjoys fresh oysters which are brought to him
from Paris and London. But his guests are most affected by his wine cellars.
Metropolitan Vladimir Sabodan, who replaced him in Rostov on Don, nearly lost
consciousness when he caught sight of and tasted the wines from the
metropolitan's cellars. In the1970-1980s his career rise halted and he was
shuttled from one episcopal see to another. Patriarch Pimen was not well disposed toward him. Only after his death did Vladimir come into favor again. From 1995 he has
ruled the St. Petersburg diocese, thereby becoming a permanent member of the
Holy Synod. In Petersburg he began restoring order with an 'iron hand',
primarily in financial matters, overturning traditions that had arisen over
decades (oysters are expensive nowadays). Metropolitan Vladimir's ministry has been
constantly accompanied by scandals. Their causes are his inability and lack of
desire to get along with clergy. His administrative style is authoritarian.

(4) Metropolitan Methodius of Voronezh was until recently one of the
strongest candidates to succeed the present patriarch. But in 1992 he was
described
by his colleague, Archbishop Chrysostom of Vilna, as a KGB officer, an
atheist, a liar, who is constantly advised by the KGB. An atheist for
patriarch? All
things are possible in the MP!

(5) and (6). Metropolitans Philaret of Minskand Vladimir of Kiev are both,
according to Bychkov, homosexuals who share one thing in common: under their

administrations the largest monasteries--the Kiev caves lavra and the
Zhirovitsy monastery--have become examples of Sodom and Gomorra. homosexual
families coexist peacefully in them, concealed by monastic garments.

Are things any better in the lower ranks?

Well, on July 19, 1999, according to Bychkov, the Synod devoted much
time to the scandals involving the homosexual conduct of two bishops, Nikon
Mironov of Ekaterinburg and Gury Shalimov of Korsun. The press devoted so much
attention to poor Bishop Nikon that he is notorious throughout Russia. The
behaviour of Bishop Gury was just as scandalous. The Holy Synod sent both into
retirement, that is, it dismissed them, confirming thereby the justice of the
journalistic accusations. But it dismissed them in conditions of strictest
secrecy!

[Lounger]

1. The Leopard and his cubs

Ah, but then there are the wonderfully holy village priests and old women that the supporters of the MP like to talk about! Personally, I have not met any holy priests in the MP. And as for the old women, I know of people who were put off Orthodoxy for years by the appallingly boorish behaviour of the old women in MP churches.

Of course, I may be missing something. But even if I am, what does that
prove? What does the presence of good, sincere people in the MP (and I have no
doubt that there are many) prove about the MP? No more than the presence of
good and sincere people among the Roman Catholics or Protestants about their
churches. That is to say: nothing. For is the truth and grace of a Church
defined by the quality of some of its junior members, or by the confession of
faith of its leaders? The latter, of course ?

But the supporters of the MP are very fond of this bottom-up
ecclesiology of theirs. They love to assert that even if the older generation of
bishops are all KGB agents (not even the patriarch denies that he is, and has
been for a longtime!), the next generation are going to be wonderful.

But why? Why should those appointed by KGB agents, ecumenists and
homosexuals be anti-sergianists, anti-ecumenists and irreproachably chaste? Is
it not much more likely that they will be at least partially tainted by the vices
of their teachers, whom they chose to follow while knowing their vices? After
all, as the apostle says, speaking precisely about such sins, "know ye not that
a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump?" (I Corinthians 5.6).

According to his brother Michael, the OCA Bishop Basil of Washington
said, after a trip to Moscow: Now I agree with you: amongst the young folks
there, there are many wonderful Orthodox people, and, briefly remaining
silent, he added, but it will require yet another entire generation, or perhaps even
longer, before everything gets back to normal . So, if we accept the testimony
even of this pro-Moscow witness, the ROCOR bishops should wait at least
another generation before thinking of joining the MP.

And yet even this pessimistic estimate seems to me to be unreasonably
optimistic. It depends on several assumptions, viz.: (1) that these wonderful

Orthodox people will remain in the corrupt MP, and will not feel compelled by

their conscience to leave it, (2) that the present leaders of the MP will
choose to promote precisely these wonderful Orthodox people and not
corrupt
time-servers like themselves, and (3) that even if, by some extraordinary
coincidence, some of these wonderful Orthodox people are promoted to
positions of power in the church, they will still be wonderful and Orthodox by that time,
and will not have been corrupted by the terrible environment they find
themselves in.

The fact remains that, while a certain degree of regeneration can take
place in a Church from below, that regeneration cannot go far, and will in time
peter out, until and unless it is supported and strengthened by regeneration
from above. For it is a basic principle of Orthodox ecclesiology that the
faith of a Churchis defined by the faith of its hierarchs. And if those
hierarchs are heretical,then all those in obedience to them share, to a greater or
lesser degree, intheir heresy. You cannot be an Orthodox Christian while
remaining knowingly under the omophorion of a heretical bishop.

But no, said one pious MP layman to me recently. This is the ecclesiological equivalent of the Filioque heresy! Grace does not come from God and the hierarchs. It comes from God alone! It can bypass the heretical hierarchs and go straight to the people.

Then there is hope for the Roman Catholics, who don't have to worry
about the heresy of their Pope! And hope for the Protestants, who said all along

that the hierarchy and the priesthood were unnecessary! And hope for all those
"Orthodox" individualists (and there are very many of them) who construct
their spiritual lives independently of the church organization to which they
belong, justifying themselves on the grounds that they have a direct line to God
that does not pass through the hierarch's office!

Yes, we do have a direct line to God. And God can certainly give grace
to a believer directly, independently of any hierarch or priest. But nobody can
receive the grace of baptism, or of chrismation, or of the Body and Blood of
Christ,without which salvation is impossible, except at the hands of a
canonically appointed and rightly believing priest. That is the order God has
ordained. And He has also ordained that this channel of sacramental grace does
not pass through the hands of heretics or those who represent them ?

1. The Leopard and his tamer

Another, not dissimilar argument that is sometimes heard is that the
rapid building of churches and monasteries in contemporary Russia shows that,
whatever the defects of the leaders, the resurrection of Russia is taking place,

and that, this being the case, instead of standing aside and carping, it is
necessary to have a more positive attitude, to join in the renewal process. And
that involves entering into communion. After all, they assert, perhaps we (the
ROCOR hierarchs) can have a good influence on the hierarchy, perhaps we can
put a brake on the negative aspects of patriarchal life, perhaps we can help to
tame the leopard ?

It is difficult to believe that anyone actually believes this argument.
As Nicholas Kazantsev has recently pointed out, the ROCOR has acted as a brake
on the MP only so long as it has existed outside the MP as a genuinely
independent force. Once the tiny ROCOR pond has been poured into the MP ocean, it
will cease to have any influence at all.

As it is, such influence as it has had has been rapidly declining in
recent years in exact proportion to its rapprochement with the patriarchate.
Surveys show that the influence of the ROCOR was at its greatest immediately
after the fall of communism, in the early 1990s, when the ROCOR actually fought
against the MP and the MP was seriously rattled. But then came the 1994
conciliar decision to enter into negotiations with the MP, the expulsion of the Suzdal
dissenters in 1995, and Archbishop Mark"s meeting with the patriarch in 1997,
as a direct result of which the MP felt emboldened to seize Hebron and
Jericho, and the Oak of Abraham at Hebron died after four thousand years of
life ?

No, the leopard has not been tamed, and it will not be tamed by the
ROCOR, in whatever form it may continue to exist after the unia with the MP ?

There are in fact strong grounds for believing in a future resurrection
of the Russian Church. These strong grounds consist in the prophecies of the
saints, which speak precisely about such a resurrection. But it is important
to note that these prophecies do not state that the MP will gradually evolve
into the True Church that is, that good fruit will gradually begin to appear

on the corrupt tree, transforming the tree from bad to good, from corrupt to
life-giving. On the contrary, St. Seraphim of Sarov says that at that time the Russian hierarchs will become so impious that they will not even believe in
the most important dogma of the Faith of Christ the resurrection of Christ
and the general resurrection. That is why it will be pleasing to the Lord God to
take me from this very temporary life for a time and then, for the
establishment of the dogma of the resurrection, to raise me, and my resurrection
will be like the resurrection of the seven youths in the cave of Okhlon ?

And then, continues the saint, he will begin the process of world-wide
repentance; for the absolutely necessary condition of true resurrection is
repentance.

The prophecies speak, not of an evolution of the MP from evil to good,
nor of the repentance of the bishops, but of a more or less complete removal of
the higher clergy of the Church. The initiative for this will not come from
well-known bishops, but from people unknown to the world, according to Elder
Porphyrius of Glinsk(+1868): "In due course, faith will collapse in Russia. The
brilliance of earthly glory will blind the mind. The word of truth will be
defiled, but with regard to the Faith, some from among the people, unknown to
the world, will come forward and restore what was scorned."

And the instrument of this restoration will be a True Orthodox Tsar.
Thus Archbishop Theophan of Poltava, passing on the tradition of the Valaam
elders, wrote: ...The Lord will have mercy on Russia for the sake of the
small remnant of true believers. In Russia, the elders said, in accordance with the
will of the people, the Monarchy, Autocratic power, will be re-established. The
Lord has forechosen the future Tsar. He will be a man of fiery faith, having
the mind of a genius and a will of iron. First of all he will introduce order in

the Orthodox Church, removing all the untrue, heretical and lukewarm
hierarchs. And many, very many - with few exceptions, all - will be deposed, and
new,
true, unshakeable hierarchs will take their place. He will be of the family of
the Romanovs according to the female line. Russia will be a powerful state,
but only for 'a short time'... And then the Antichrist will come into the
world,with all the horrors of the end as described in the Apocalypse."

As for the lower ranks, Catacomb Eldress Agatha of Belorussia, who was
martyred by the Bolsheviks at the age of 119 (!), counselled them not to go to
the MP: "This is not a true church. It has signed a contract to serve the
Antichrist. Do not go to it. Do not receive any mysteries from its servants. Do
not participate in prayer with them. They were to wait for the triumph of
Orthodoxy, when the people will show their true repentance by being baptised by
True Orthodox clergy: There will come a time when churches will beopened in
Russia, and the true Orthodox faith will triumph. Then peoplewill become
baptized, as at one time they were baptized under St. Vladimir.

1. The Leopard as a protected species

When Putin met the ROCOR hierarchs in New York, he used the argument
that the ROCOR should join with the MP in serving the homeland , its
culture
and traditions. This is a powerful emotional argument for Russians and those who

love Russia. After all, who would not want to serve his homeland? Who would
want to appear unpatriotic? And especially now that the homeland is beginning
to take on the appearance, externally at any rate, of an Orthodox country, and
Orthodoxy is being protected by the State as an inalienable part of the
national culture of Russia.

But what is the ultimate value here the State or the Church, the
earthly homeland or the Heavenly Homeland, God or Mammon? If Orthodoxy is to be
protected because it serves the Homeland, or the State, or culture, or any other

value whatsoever apart from eternal salvation with God, then it is no longer
Orthodoxy but at best an exhibit in a museum or a zoo, at worst an idol.

In early, Kievan and Muscovite Russia, the Church was protected, not
because it helped to support the State (although it did do that), and not
because
it constituted a part of Russia"s cultural heritage (although it was that),
but because the State of Russia and Russia as a whole existed in order to serve
the Church, without which neither the State nor the Nation had more than an
ephemeral significance. The earthly homeland, in Metropolitan Philaret of
Moscow"s phrase, was the antechamber of the Heavenly Homeland.
Membership of the earthly homeland was treasured and was fought for because it served as a
stepping-stone to membership of the Heavenly Homeland, the Kingdom of Heaven
and for no other reason.

Russia was Holy Russia precisely because she served something higher
than herself, the ideal of holiness, the ideal of union in faith and love with
God. And she began to descend to the far lesser ideal of Great Russia
under Peter the Great only when she began to serve herself rather than God, when

the Church became a tool in the hands of the State, serving the State"s
this-worldly aims. However,under the later Romanov Tsars the great ship that was

Russia began to return to her heavenly calling, to become holy again. This
process accelerated under Tsar-Martyr Nicholas, who led Russia into World War I, not
for the sake of her and his greater earthly glory, but to save Orthodoxy in
her sister-nation of Serbia. And when the Tsar abdicated, dooming himself and
his family to ignominy and death, he did so in order that this war-effort should
continue in other words, for the sake of Orthodoxy in the true sense.

But in today's Russia, as Protopriest Lev Lebedev writes, the
ideological idol under the name of "fatherland" ("Russia", "the
state") has been
completely preserved. We have already many times noted that these concepts are,
in essence, pagan ideological idols not because they are in themselves bad,
but because they have been torn out from the trinitarian unity of co-subjected
concepts: Faith,Tsar, Fatherland (Orthodoxy, Autocracy, People) ? Everything
that one might wish to be recognized and positive, even the regeneration of the
faith, is done under the slogan of "the regeneration of the Fatherland
(Russia)"! But nothing is being regenerated. Even among the monarchists the
regeneration of the Orthodox Autocratic Monarchy is mainly represented as no
more than the means for the regeneration of the Fatherland. We may note that if any of
the constituent parts of the triad Orthodoxy, Autocracy, People is torn
away from the others and becomes the only one, it loses its power. Only together
and in the indicated hierarchical order did they constitute, and do they
constitute now, the spiritual (and all the other) strength and significance of
Great Russia. But for the time being it is the ideological idol fatherland
that holds sway

If the ROCOR wishes to serve the Fatherland, she must wait for the true
Fatherland to appear above the horizon, like the submerged city of Kitezh. To
embrace the semi-Soviet, pseudo-Orthodox Fatherland that is Putin"s Russia
would be a betrayal of her calling, a betrayal of the true Russia.

There is still time to draw back!

November 4/17, 2003.

[John the Russian]

Thank you Lounger for posting this well thought out analysis on the MP and the situation in Russia. I think it is valuable for all those involved in ROCOR and it's fate to read this with a fine toothed comb. Manyu do not realize what is happening there and are just going with the flow. If the union is not stopped, they may be in for a rude awakening. I doubt there will be much of a ROCOR left after a union. The schism this will create will destroy the church and many will be left with nowhere to attend church or a priest they can talk to .
May God grant the bishops and clergy wisdom in this critical time.

[mwoerl]

lounger,

i second the thanks of john the russian. that article about says it all, now doesn't it?

michael woerl

[John the Russian]

mwoerl,
I find it so hard to belive that people don't take the time to read and learn the facts before making such a critical decision. Either they are lazy, stubborn or are promoting an agenda for the evil forces of the antichrist.

[尼古拉前执事]

2004.06.03 Asia News: http://www.asianews.it/view.php?l=en&art=902
3 June, 2004

RUSSIA - VATICAN Rome and Moscow: a willing separation?

by Vladimir Rozanskij

Proselytism is a trivial problem compared to necessity of
evangelising the world. A Russian expert analyses the results
obtained by the Orthodox-Catholic Group.

Moscow (AsiaNews) - Cardinal Walter Kasper's recent visit to Russia
is beginning to be show its first fruits. Probably, the most
important result of the trip is the organisation of the Joint
(Orthodox-Catholic) Working Group. The Joint Group, which started its
activity in May, is established to analyse the various existing
controversies between the two Churches, and to suggest possible
solutions.

Members of the group unofficially reported that the relationship
between the Catholic and Orthodox participants was welcoming and
friendly, despite the difficult issues that the Group had to discuss:
the legitimacy of the "acts of proselytism" on the part of the
catholic Church in the 15 years since the borders to the former
Soviet countries opened.

The peaceful atmosphere that pervaded the Group's meetings does not
spring from any great achievement, but from the spirit of diversity
that animates the protagonists of this new season of ecumenical
dialogue. Almost with a sense of freedom, in fact, the
representatives of the two sister-Churches were asked neither to work
for a re-unification, nor to organise improbable meetings between
their highest ecclesial authorities. The task is not so difficult,
and corresponds to the present reality: The Churches will take an
inventory of the rights and wrongs of the relationship between the
two ecclesiastical communities with a view to avoid 'stepping on each
other's toes' in the future.

More than to 'reunite the family', as it were, this step is more like
asking lawyers to divide assets and define the terms of the mutual,
willing separation between two parties. Despite the doctrine of
marriage (which in the Orthodox Church is not as strict as in
Catholicism), nowadays even Catholics seem to appreciate the
advantages of a peaceful "separation". Before Vatican II the Catholic
Church referred to Christians of other denominations as "dissidents".
After the Council they became "brothers"
(even if affected by some minor imperfections), to be welcomed back
home. Now, it looks like they are turning into "willing divorcees".

"Microscopic" proselytism

Therefore, the Group discussed 'concrete things', listing the names
and surnames of those who have offended and betrayed the mission of
the Churches. In truth, it would have been better if the Group had
considered some important statistics as well, to give the true
dimensions of the problem of 'Catholic proselytism'. In Russia there
are officially 500,000 Catholics, but only 50,000 of them actually go
to church. Most important, there are only 5,000 Russians who turned
to the Church of Rome without having any kind of Catholic tradition
in their families (ie. A German or Polish grandmother). Among them,
only 2,000 had some link with the Orthodox Church in their past. In
Russia live 150 million people…

Truthfully, the Group considered some statistics. An orthodox
representative quoted the "offensive" words spoken by Verbist Fr.
Jerzy Jagodzinski, who questioned the Orthodox nature of the Russian
population observing that, "only 1.2% of people in Moscow
participated to the Easter celebrations", 120,000 out of 10 million.
Actually, Jagodzinski was being generous with the Orthodox church:
Moscow's authorities confirmed that "for Easter less than 1% of the
population attended any kind of religious service". In the last ten
years, there are twenty times more churches than there was under
communism, with building being built or re-opened. Yet in relation to
the immediate post-communism years, only one third of people now
attend the services.

Ultimately, it seems that the practical things discussed by the Group
concern only "those provincial reports of strategic activities to
convert people of Orthodox roots to another faith and another
culture." According to Vsevolod Chaplin, the head of the Orthodox
delegation.. These kind of 'provincial reports' is a constant in
Russian history, which prefers 'informing' and secret accusations to
flagrant crimes. The Group was informed of supposed grave violations
that happened in remote locations, above all in the Siberian city of
Novosibirsk. Here Catholics are believed to be have been incited in
various sectors, especially within schools, hospitals, universities
and through TV programs. It is important to notice that Novosibirsk,
which is 4.000 km away from Moscow, was the place of deportation of
those considered dangerous by the Communist regime- free-thinkers and
undesirable ethnicities. German Catholics built their church there in
Soviet times. The Catholic activities, therefore, must be explained
in context of the Catholic roots of many living there.

In truth, the real reason behind the reports is something else.
Novosibirsk in fact is a city were Jesuits have concentrated their
efforts, the "Catholic devils" of Russian literature, an expression
of the inferiority complex of the Orthodox towards Western culture.
The local bishop, Mons. Jozif Werth, (a Russian German) is a Jesuit
himself and has called many in his Community to collaborate with him,
excluding the invitation, however, to Jesuits of the eastern rites,
in order not to provoke the distrust of Orthodox authorities. It is
as if the Orthodox Church would say, 'They have tried again to
convert us, this time starting from the extreme peripheries. But
again, we have unmasked them!'

Targeting children's activities

Another point of attack of the Orthodox Inquisition are "activities
for children". Here and there, (in fact, always in the most
inaccessible places: Murmansk, Angarsk, Sakhalin) Catholics have been
accused of using schools and orphanages "for profit", to take the
souls of those who would be the future sons of Orthodoxy. The fathers
of the Work Don Calabria would be the worst ones. According to
Orthodox authorities, these priests used to meet in a secret place
not far from Moscow airport, in order to organise their plots against
the local church. Actually, the fathers (from Verona) invested a
large amount of money, more than all the money from their Brazilian
and African missions combined, to buy and restore a completely
abandoned tourist center. They wanted to transform it into a modern
school, with independent heating. After 10 years, they have not still
not obtained the permission to open the school. They wanted was to
show the Russian people that Christians can propose an educational
method which is absolutely "secular" in its nature and appreciated in
the world. Paradoxically, they ended up in becoming the symbol of
Catholic proselytism, without even having begun their work. Today the
Rodnichock Center, run by the Fathers, is used only by groups of
children who are always escorted by their lay tutors. The Fathers
entirely pay for their vacations, but not even a single one of these
children has become Catholic. Fr. Igor Kovalevskij (head of the
Catholic delegation of the Group) has held the role of the
peacemaker. He acknowledged that "there are some cases that have
generated misunderstandings, as they could be interpreted as acts of
proselytism". Patriarch Aleksij II has taken advantage of Fr.
Kovalevskij's words by declaring, in the presence of Pierferdinando
Casini
(the President of the Italian Congress) that "for the first time
their was official recognition of the existence of the problem of
proselytism in the territory of the Patriarchy of Moscow, above all
on the part of religious orders". We don't know how much MP Casini
has appreciated these updates of the Joint Working Group. What is
certain is that Orthodox authorities have always been suspicious
about religious orders. Probably, they cannot fully understand either
the independence of the orders from the dioceses (such thing does not
exist in the East), or their missionary nature (and almost all the
Orders have the word 'missionary' in their name). It is not a
coincidence that in the past someone accused even the Indian nuns of
Mother Theresa- who were called to Armenia by the government after
the earthquake of 1998- or proselytising.

Evangelisation

In truth, Kovalevskij emphasised that the Catholic Church rejects
proselytism at every level. He added that the Catholic Church has no
intention to proselytise in Russia, as this is a country where it is
not necessary to spread the Gospel. After all, Russia has a long
Christian tradition. It is not the situation of New Guinea or an
African country where it is necessary to preach the Gospel. These
affirmations seem to be not in line with the real situation of the
country. Kovalevskij concluded by saying that "our relationships with
the Orthodox church are cold, but it is not winter yet", echoing
Patriarch Aleksij who declared that "there are some clouds" over our
relationship. In this way, with the use of these weather metaphors,
the ecumenical dialogue has taken a new direction, to divide itself
peacefully rather than to unite. Perhaps one can see also the design
of Divine Providence, useful, not only to define new connections
between Christians, but also into affect conflicts on an
international level. Psychological and spiritual confines, more than
geographical and political ones, show the urgency of proclaiming the
Gospel of unity and peace in a world upset by conflicts and
accusations for so long. Only in this Gospel will we be able to find
our proper "ecclesial territories".

[Waldemar]

Some Leopard trivia:

Leopard, common name for a large member of the cat family that occupies a wide range of habitats and has the most extensive distribution of any of the wild species of cat, occurring throughout much of Africa and Asia... Specimens with darker ground colors are seen, and some leopards—born in otherwise ordinary litters—are completely black and are known as black panthers.
http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761 ... opard.html

In other words, spotted leopards are known to have given birth to unspotted leopards.

And now back to our regularly scheduled programming:

Though we have changed, thanks to the help of others and God's grace, too often we cannot imagine others changing. We are convinced they are always going to have all the faults we currently perceive in them. We see all efforts to change them, even prayers on their behalf, as a waste of time. While it's true that leopards don't change their spots, thank God people do.

Jim Forest
Orthodox Peace Fellowship