Pope Francis meets with Patriarch Kirill in Havana, Cuba on Feb. 12, 2016. / L’Osservatore Romano.
Rome Newsroom, Apr 27, 2022 / 12:15 pm (CNA).
The long-awaited second meeting between Pope Francis and the head of the Russian Orthodox Church will not take place for now. The pope himself announced the news in an interview with the Argentine newspaper La Nacion published on April 22.
So we will have to wait longer for the next encounter between the pope and Patriarch Kirill of Moscow and All Russia. This allows further time to consider where the two Church leaders could eventually meet.
One location spoken about behind the scenes is Bratislava, the capital of the Central European country of Slovakia, which the pope visited last September.
Pope Francis told reporters as he returned from Malta earlier this month that the Middle East was being considered as a possible location for the meeting, thus confirming rumors that had spread since the start of 2022.
When Lebanese President Michel Aoun announced that Pope Francis would visit Lebanon on June 12-13, some concluded that the summit would take place in the Land of the Cedars. But the organizers had from the beginning intended the meeting to take place in Jerusalem, perhaps just after the Lebanon trip.
Jerusalem was considered an ideal location for various reasons. For one, the Moscow Patriarchate does not view it as a place where the Orthodox are discriminated against. It is, above all, a neutral territory outside of Europe, where Catholic-Orthodox tensions persist.
The historic first meeting between Pope Francis and Kirill took place at Havana airport in Cuba, another country outside Europe where the Orthodox do not consider themselves to be persecuted.
There was another idea: to echo in Jerusalem the landmark embraces of Athenagoras I and Paul VI in 1967 and Bartholomew I and Pope Francis in 2014. This act would have made it clear that both the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople and the Patriarchate of Moscow have strong friendships with Rome.
For Moscow, it would have been a highly symbolic gesture, considering the climate of hostility that has existed with Constantinople since it recognized the Orthodox Church of Ukraine, an autocephalous church that no longer depended on the Moscow Patriarchate as the Ukrainian Orthodox Church had since the 17th century.
But paradoxically, the factors that made a Jerusalem meeting an attractive option prompted the pope to cancel the encounter — at least for now.
The Holy See did not want the potential meeting to be exploited amid the Russia-Ukraine war and it did not want to be drawn into intra-Orthodox debates.
While the meeting has been postponed, could it ultimately take place in Kazakhstan — another venue that has been mentioned for some time?
Kazakhstan’s government has announced that Pope Francis will visit the country on Sept. 14-15 to participate in the Congress of Leaders of World and Traditional Religions. According to a project defined even before the pandemic, Patriarch Kirill was also invited to the gathering.
But the possibility of a meeting in Kazakhstan also had a downside: the Central Asian country’s link with its neighbor Russia. Kazakhstan is the canonical territory of the Moscow Patriarchate.
Another possible location mentioned was Hungary. This hypothesis was based on the desire that Pope Francis expressed to return to the country that he visited for a single day last September.
The suggested venue was Pannonhalma Archabbey, one of Hungary’s oldest historical monuments. This was considered in 1996 as a possible meeting place between Pope John Paul II and the then head of the Russian Orthodox Church Alexy II. The encounter did not, of course, take place.
The idea would have been for Pope Francis’ trip to coincide with a visit to Hungary by Patriarch Kirill, marking the restoration of the Orthodox cathedral in Budapest or the inauguration of the new Russian Orthodox church in Hévíz, western Hungary.
But this hypothesis faded away, to be replaced by the idea of a meeting in Slovakia, a country that the pope called “a message of peace in the heart of Europe” during his September trip.
The proposal of a meeting between Francis and Kirill in the capital Bratislava was advanced by Ján Figeľ, the special envoy of the European Union for religious freedom from 2016 to 2019.
Why Bratislava? Partly because it is the capital of a country that borders Ukraine and is receiving refugees from the war-torn Eastern European country. And also because it is a nation at the center of Europe, the continent that experienced Soviet oppression and knows the need for reconciliation.
“Peoples and the Church,” Ján Figeľ told CNA, “need to share important messages and commitments of loving faith and truth, courage, peace, reconciliation, and brotherhood, now mainly in and for Europe.”
He added that, “conscious of the historical spiritual and political divisions in Europe, and facing the reality of bloody conflict in the east of Europe, we must urgently converge our effort towards true Christian brotherhood and unity on this continent, where Christianity gave roots and orientation to its cultures and identities.”
Slovakia is a bridge between East and West. The opening lines of its constitution refer to the “the spiritual bequest of Cyril and Methodius,” the “Apostles to the Slavs” who are venerated by both Catholics and Orthodox Christians.
John Paul II spoke of a Europe that needed to breathe with two lungs — eastern and western — and for Figeľ, “this grand vision is still possible and achievable.”
“But the war must end,” he said, “and its consequences cannot represent any imperial expansion of Russia, religious or mental triumphalism, but an actual conversion of Eastern European nations to truth, respect for the dignity of all, proper reconciliation, and shared responsibility.”
Therefore, Bratislava is a strong candidate to be a meeting place for the pope and the Moscow patriarch, the first of its kind in Europe.
Figeľ added that the potential meeting could also “gather together other groups of goodwill, organized lay Christians,” faith-based organizations, and civil society organizations.
“For example, the ICLN [International Catholic Legislators Network] and the IAO [Interparliamentary Assembly on Orthodoxy] could start their regular biannual joint meetings in the center of Europe,” he suggested.
In this way, Figeľ said, the meeting “may inspire and encourage the missing post-war process of reconciliation and integration in Eastern Europe as we witnessed in Western Europe, starting with France and Germany under Robert Schuman’s plan.”
“Importantly as well, the name of the city [Bratislava] resonates exceptionally with the Holy Father’s repeated calls for human fraternity. Indeed, ‘brati’ and ‘slava’ in the Slovakian language mean ‘Glory to brothers,’ ‘Glory to brotherhood,’ as ‘brat’ means brother and ‘slava’ is glory. This meaning is the same in other Slavic languages. So, the pope and the patriarch can express, confirm, and visualize their brotherhood in Bratislava in the center of the two Christian and European lungs.”
Figeľ noted that the Holy See, led by Pope Pius XII, had been a “very active supporter” of the reconciliation process in Western Europe.
“Many people hope to stop this war soon,” he said. “After transitional justice and punishment of crimes, an updated Marshall Plan for the reconstruction of Ukraine must follow and an offer of a new, values- and rules-based supranational cooperation oriented towards peace, justice, and the common good, with the vision of integration of Eastern countries into one community, representing Europe whole and free, in a common European house.”
This proposal is now before Pope Francis and Patriarch Kirill, as well as their respective advisers, the Vatican Secretary of State Cardinal Pietro Parolin and Metropolitan Hilarion in Moscow. Naturally, the moment needs caution, and every meeting must be considered carefully. But every possibility must also be explored.
[…]
If my bishop has been credibly accused with serious sin, I don’t want him to draw close to me.
Also, I have the feeling that crafty Francis is intentionally using a double-entendre [with the word “accuser”] and intentionally mentioning sin without regard to it’s severity (e.g. whether such sin is venial or mortal.)
He is most certainly circling the wagons. I am not interested in excuses. Too many souls have been damaged by these priests and bishops. The buck stops here and I mean literally. No more money until they clean up this mess. It is a horror in our Church and a sacrilege to our Lord.
Yes, he is the master deceiver and “protector” of people like Wuerl, James Martin and many others. We will hold these people accountable to protect the Church.
Am I the only one here who is outraged by this smear of those who are uncovering hierarchical sexual depravity? This is of a piece with the disgusting claim that those who reveal Francis’ coverup are guilty of sinning against the Holy Spirit.
It looks to me like a last ditch attempt at survival — portraying the good and very brave Archbishop Vigano as a diabolical figure.
True
No, you are not alone. They are circling the wagons in the hopes that the people will forget the scandal. If they can draw back long enough, they think we will let it go. Not this time.
You are not alone. So many of the very faithful are outraged and angry. We want truth and the Pope is not forthcoming and therefore he is not helping his flock. He is making matters worse with this type of speech. It appears he thinks we are stupid.
That’s strange, St. Paul says the EXACT opposite in his letter to the Ephesians 5:
But sexual immorality and all impurity or covetousness must not even be named among you, as is proper among saints. Let there be no filthiness nor foolish talk nor crude joking, which are out of place, but instead let there be thanksgiving. For you may be sure of this, that everyone who is sexually immoral or impure, or who is covetous (that is, an idolater), has no inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and God. Let no one deceive you with empty words, for because of these things the wrath of God comes upon the sons of disobedience. Therefore do not become partners with them; for at one time you were darkness, but now you are light in the Lord. Walk as children of light (for the fruit of light is found in all that is good and right and true), and try to discern what is pleasing to the Lord. *Take no part in the unfruitful works of darkness, but instead expose them. For it is shameful even to speak of the things that they do in secret. But when anything is exposed by the light, it becomes visible, for anything that becomes visible is light.*
Absolutely agree.
Thank you for that.
True, which is why sexual immorality and all impurity or covetousness, cannot coexist with Holiness; our Call to Holiness, has always been a call to be chaste in our thoughts, in our words, and in our deeds.
Sexual immorality and all impurity or covetousness, which sexually obbjectifies the human person, demeans our inherent Dignity as belovd sons and daughters. Let not your hearts be hardened like a pillar of salt.
“When God Is denied”, by those who embrace sexual immorality and all impurity or covetousness, human Dignity is denied.
“Penance, Penance, Penance.”
Catholics recognize there are no “private” relationships; every Catholic is Called to be “A Temple for The Holy Ghost”.
The erroneous notion that private morality and public morality can serve in opposition to one another and are not complementary, has led to serious error in Faith and morals.
What we are witnessing, is an attack on The Holy Ghost, and thus an attack on Salvational Love, God’s Gift of Grace and Mercy.
“It is not possible to have Sacramental Communion without Ecclesial Communion”, due to The Unity of The Holy Ghost. (Filioque) It Is Through Christ, With Christ, and In Christ, In The Unity Of The Holy Ghost, that Holy Mother Church exists. The Sacrifice of The Cross, Is The Sacrifice of The Most Holy And Undivided Blessd Trinity, “for God So Loved us that He Sent His Only Son…”
Thank you
Is this now a “do-over” of the Chilean abuse crisis stonewalling that failed?
Following the cue from Ross Douthat that discovering the whole truth about the global sex abuse coverup scandal requires “going to the peripheries” of the Catholic blogosphere, I am now reading sites that have been condemned as “unreliable.”
For instance, at her blog Ann Barnhardt is now posting videos showing parents in Argentina who have accused Pope Francis and the Argentine Bishops of ignoring them and their victimized children in a number of cases when Francis was Archbishop of Buenos Aries.
In particular, it is pointed out that in one public statement, Pope Francis declared there were never any sex abuse cases in his jurisdiction as Bishop. And next the story shows evidence that there were in fact several cases during his tenure, including the most serious sex abuse case in the history of the Church in Argentina: the Rev. Julio Grassi case, where Grassi is now serving a 15 year term for sex abuse of a minor.
Of higher concern, evidence is shown that then-Cardinal Bergoglio, behind the scenes, authorized a “counter-investigation” by the Argentine Church, producing a 1,000 page “legal brief” aimed at defending Grassi and attacking the victims, which in the opinion of some Argentine judges and lawyers, was an attempt to undermine the state criminal proceedings, which went all the way at to the Argentine Supreme Court.
So why would Pope Francis publicly state that there were no sex abuse cases in his jurisdiction as Bishop, when there in fact are cases, and victims families say they were ignored?
This pattern sounds a lot like the Chilean case, where the Church higher authorities, along with Pope Francis, stonewalled and attacked the victims and their families and concerned faithful of Osorno.
What are we to make of Pope Francis’ new rhetoric about “accusing Bishops?”
Is it not the ULTIMATE CLERICALISM to suggest that those faithful who ask for answers to legitimate questions about grave accusations are being unfaithful?
Well, perhaps the pontiff really considers it “unfaithful to him?”
Chris,
Do you have a written source in English for your comments about the Argentine cover-up? If so, could you please post the link.
Or Spanish, French or Italian ?
Denis – the 1 Peter 5 Site has a story based on a French documentary of the abuse coverup, which includes the Argentinian sex abuse cases.
I will post links later tonight.
Denis – I apologize for not getting you links last night as promised…work emergency prevented me from doing so.
I promise later tonight.
Key Links on Sex Abuse & Cardinal Bergoglio History:
1. On the documentary by Martin Boudot on Cardinal Bergoglio in Argentina:
https://pjmedia.com/video/watch-pope-francis-gets-caught-in-gigantic-lie-regarding-a-sexual-abuse-case-in-argentina/
2. Henry Sire – Bergoglio record in Argentina
https://onepeterfive.com/cardinal-bergoglio-questions/
Great Commentaries (3):
1. Damian Thompson – Failure & Disgrace: Pope Francis
https://www.spectator.co.uk/2018/09/what-has-pope-francis-covered-up/
2. Phillip Lawler – Track record supports the Vigano Testimony
https://www.catholicculture.org/commentary/otn.cfm?id=1304
3 & 4. Warren & Altieri at TCT: Francis and Credibility
https://www.thecatholicthing.org/2018/09/14/two-on-the-crisis/
Steve:
Yes, I will post links to 2 sites: stories on 11Sep at both 1Peter 5 and Barnhardt.biz. The 1 Peter 5 Site is all text. The Barnhardt site has text and videos with English subtitles.
I will post later from home. They are easily found, among others, like Rod Dreher’s American Conservative, and also Church Militant (Michael Voris).
Steve – apologize for not getting links posted last night. Work emergency prevented me. Will do tonight.
Meanwhile, articles on 11 Sep at 1 Peter 5, Lifesiite News and Barnhardt.biz (Ms. Barnhardt is hardcore, no diplomatic niceties at her site, wear your seatbelt, and weigh and sift evidence there).
I promise links tonight.
Key Links on Sex Abuse & Cardinal Bergoglio History:
1. On the documentary by Martin Boudot on Cardinal Bergoglio in Argentina:
https://pjmedia.com/video/watch-pope-francis-gets-caught-in-gigantic-lie-regarding-a-sexual-abuse-case-in-argentina/
2. Henry Sire – Bergoglio record in Argentina
https://onepeterfive.com/cardinal-bergoglio-questions/
Great Commentaries (3):
1. Damian Thompson – Failure & Disgrace: Pope Francis
https://www.spectator.co.uk/2018/09/what-has-pope-francis-covered-up/
2. Phillip Lawler – Track record supports the Vigano Testimony
https://www.catholicculture.org/commentary/otn.cfm?id=1304
3 & 4. Warren & Altieri at TCT: Francis and Credibility
https://www.thecatholicthing.org/2018/09/14/two-on-the-crisis/
Typical Saul Alinsky tactics – “blame the victims” syndrome.
Sorry, but the people are scandalized by the bishops themselves and not by any lying attack by “The Great Accuser.” Good Grief!
Dionysius,
It’s like the mafia complaining about “the great accuser” when their evil deeds come to light. “The great accuser, of course, is the district attorney’s office.
Is Francis implying that people who call the bishops to account and uncover the evil they have done are somehow in league with the devil? Shame on him if he is!
Those poor Bishops…….let’s not worry to much about the people they have spiritually and physically abused let’s just make sure those “elites” in the pews don’t say a word when our bishops promote and accept sodomy.
Of course Bergoglio says the opposite of St. Paul. He is the same Bergoglio who previously said , “No, no, no!” regarding “proselytization.” But why is he now attempting to “proselytize” members of the Church and concerned, faithful Catholics in this manner? Why does Bergoglio ostensibly make such an accusation towards those who seek answers if he himself is so opposed to “the Great Accuser?” Are accusations against Bishops the specialty of ‘the Great Accuser” and those presumably under his influence? Did Bergoglio “discern” this apart from Church History, Tradition or Scripture?
The Bergoglio papacy is now officially “what happened in Argentina” writ large. The so-called synodal (rigged) democracy is now a tyranny.
Count me among the “dumb” Chilean “slanderers” who seek answers. We should relentlessly keep seeking answers. There is no other time, no next time.
Our Lady of La Salette, pray for us.
Our Lady of Fatima, pray for us.
Unbelievable.
This is not just appalling, it is infuriating.
So we are serving the evil one when we attempt to hold bishops accountable for protecting their flocks from predators?
I’m sorry, but that is is not the message of the Holy Spirit, but rather an unholy one.
Amen!
If a bishop is guilty of a crime, he must resign, not just pray.
In the Old Testament God sent prophets to hold the Israelites to account for their faithlessness. They were God’s drill instructors sent to whip the troops into line. St John the Baptist was more of the same. In Luke 11 Christ blasted the religious leadership with His woes. St Stephen was taking the Council to task when he was stoned to death. People always like to bring up the attempted stoning of the woman taken in adultery. They seem oddly silent about all of God’s prophets who were killed in the line of duty. The real blood letting in the Bible was more in the line of Cain and Abel, who was referred to by name in Christ’s woes.
There is a battle against Evil in our Church and so far Pope Francis has decided not to fight it. He will go down in history as one of the worst Popes or best Popes depending how he deals with sexually abusive priests and those who cover it up.
Actually he is fighting – on the wrong side.
So it seems…horrifying…and UNACCEPTABLE.
I seem to recall a prayer saying something to the effect of “as it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be, world without end”. I expect direct hits from the enemy, Satan. Where do people think all this nonsense is coming from? Look. We are in a spiritual battle every day of our lives. Let us live as soldiers for Christ. Let’s live Ephesians 6:10-20. Nowhere did Our Lord tell us we would merrily dance through life. He did tell us that the gates of Hell would not prevail against the Church He founded. Let’s continue in prayer and actions to be what He wants us to be. His harvesters.
Amen.
Well, he’s turning out to be a super comedian Non ?
If I wanted excuses from a homosexual I’d be go to a pride parade. Step down sinner.
I was thinking it was the Holy Spirit, not the Accuser, who is bringing these horrendous crimes to light so that the Church may be purged of this sickness. But if it is the Accuser, may God use this to bring about cleansing and healing.
Yes Kathryn, that is what The Holy Spirit is doing.
Jesus has sent Him to fight the evil that dares hide inside His Holy Church.
If I’m right about who Francis is, he primarily intended “the accuser” to be Vigano in people’s minds. But by using a double-entendre, he can easily say that he was talking about Satan.
Demonic plain and simple.
This is reminiscent of Nixon accusing the Watergate investigators of being communists.
Let’s be clear, because it is becoming increasingly apparent that this pope has a penchant for obfuscation. The people are scandalized not by what the Great Accuser is “uncovering” but by what priests and bishops have tried to keep under cover, that is, both the abuse and the coverup itself.
My university is accusing me of the same thing that Pope Francis says here. By criticizing the Pope, I am causing scandal, blah, blah, blah… Instead of looking at the real issues – primarily homosexual activity and pederasty by priests and bishops, and the continuing coverup, I am a “mean-spirited” Catholic professor!
I hope you have tenure.
Let’s see, is the Pope GASLIGHTING to put the blame on satan and hence cause us to question the reality of their sin and misdirect us to focus on the poor ole Bishops being exposed by Satan?
Let’s see, isn’t satan the liar?
Why would satan expose the truth about the Bishop’s sins?
And, so is this Papa Francis admitting to the lies and sins of the Bishops?
And implying that their sins were okay when they were hidden?
But exposing them is evil somehow?
But now satan is exposing the sins, that are real, so that we Faithful will be scandalized and this will somehow harm the Church? How?
I personally think ridding the Church of the liars, the sexual predators is a good thing. Is the Pope condemning satan or congratulating him?
I’m betting his counsel of Bishops had a hand in this train (wreck) of thought.
This is as twisted as it seems to silly ole scandalized me.
The man has no credence beyond a broken clock. On the dot twice a day no matter…
The meeting scheduled for the end of February with the representatives of the national conferences of bishops had better be a resounding demonstration of no confidence in a pontificate off the rails for over five years.
He has got to go.
I’m lost once more. Using the word “accuser” the Pope continues to muddy the swamp.
Is it time to defrock Francis?! This outrage can not go on…..
Sins must come into the light to be acknowledged and healed. The pope doesn’t want this, because he is concerned about the hierarchy, not the people… Therefore, maybe it is no longer a church. Jesus called on the church to feed his sheep, not protect it’s internal money, power and privilege. My family and I left in 2017.