Vatican City, Aug 3, 2017 / 06:01 am (CNA/EWTN News).- The Vatican Secretary of State’s visit to Russia later this month comes at a crucial juncture for the country, and is packed with both political and religious significance.
He is expected to meet with President Vladimir Putin and leaders of the Russian Orthodox Church during the trip.
On a political level, the visit of Cardinal Pietro Parolin – the dates of which have yet to be announced – comes as Russia faces rising tensions with the West over Syria and Ukraine, and possible meddling in the 2016 U.S. presidential election.
Just this week the U.S. slapped Russia with more economic sanctions due to Russia’s involvement in the election. The decision prompted Putin to expell 755 people from its U.S. embassy and consulates.
On a religious level, Cardinal Parolin’s visit also comes at a key time, falling just a year and a half after the historic February 2016, meeting between Pope Francis and Patriarch Kirill of Moscow, head of the Russian Orthodox Church.
The meeting marked the first time leaders from each Church sat down together since the Russian Orthodox Church was founded some 400 years ago.
While there might be fear and criticism regarding their engagement with Russia, “the Vatican is nevertheless willing to take this risk,” seasoned Vatican analyst Robert Moynihan told CNA.
“On the world scene there is no more important and more significant relationship right now than that between Russia and the West,” he said. So for the Vatican “to bring the highest diplomatic figure to the center of Russia and to have him speak with the highest authorities is a dramatic and significant gesture on the part of Pope Francis.”
“The benefit of direct contact and of sitting and talking is so great, and the threat of wider conflict in Ukraine and of deeper division between the West and Russia is viewed in Rome as so dangerous, that the Vatican … is willing to publicly make this trip and underline the fact that they have hope that these types of talks can lessen tensions,” he said.
“So this is the delicacy of the moment. I think it’s a courageous act on the part of the Vatican.”
Moynihan is an American journalist and is the editor-in-chief of Inside the Vatican magazine. Holding a Ph.D in Medieval Studies from Yale University, he is also founder of the Urbi et Orbi Foundation, which is dedicated to building relations between Catholics and other Christians throughout the world.
Throughout his career he has taken a special interest in Russia, having traveled there some 30 times since 1999.
Moynihan said the significance of Cardinal Parolin’s visit and the meetings he will hold have deep historical roots, making the trip a pivotal moment not only for the present, but also in terms of what the future could look like.
Political Relevance
Quoting an Oct. 1, 1939, BBC broadcast with Winston Churchill, Moynihan said Russia “is a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma.” As such, it’s something “difficult to penetrate, to understand, [and] is a fascinating and important country.”
Russia is “a country that we should not put into a corner and condemn, but a country we should engage with and a country which can teach us many things,” he said.
In many ways still grappling with the dissolution of the Soviet Union, Russia is in a sense trying to find its place, he said, adding that the complexity of the current situation has been triggered at least in part by the events that followed the fall of the Iron Curtain.
Among these events are the re-unification of Germany, the integration of Eastern bloc countries into Europe, and current questions on Russia’s own integration into Europe and what role border countries – namely the Baltic states and others such as Belarus and Ukraine – will play.
Looking specifically to Ukraine, Moynihan pointed the severity of the situation, and noted that most Ukrainians would sadly recognize that the democratic process in their country is going though “an extremely difficult transition period.”
This is due largely to the conflict in the eastern region of the country, which has killed more than 10,000 people since April 2014, and crippled their economy.
With Cardinal Parolin’s visit, the Holy See will have the opportunity to play a similar role to the one it had in helping to broker restored ties between the U.S. and Cuba during the Obama administration, leading to the thaw of a 50 year freeze in relations.
Part of this mediation could come through the Catholic Church’s close ties with the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church, which is 4-5 million people strong in a country of 40 million, and with the Latin and Orthodox communities in Ukraine.
“I’ve always thought there could be a religious off-ramp that could cut through the geopolitical and political haggling and distrust to say we are all human beings, we all have the faith in God and in Jesus Christ,” and even with differences, are able to go beyond “this geopolitical conflict,” Moynihan said.
In looking at the situation between Russia and Ukraine from both the religious and geopolitical sides, the Vatican recognizes “that it’s always good to have channels of communication open,” he said.
“The idea that the Vatican and that Cardinal Parolin himself continually emphasize that it’s better to communicate and to talk than to be in a cold, non-communicative standoff.”
Religious Relevance
Cardinal Parolin’s expected meeting with Patriarch Kirill comes as part of what Moynihan termed “a longing” to restore at least partial, if not full, unity among the Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches.
Since the 1964 meeting of Bl. Paul VI and Patriarch Athenagoras of Constantinople, the two traditions have reached a point “where the profound suspicion and distrust of some past centuries has diminished by the hard work of thoughtful men of both Churches as they’ve come to respect and appreciate the faith and learning of their counterparts.”
There are still those in the Orthodox community who view Rome with suspicion, believing them to be a controlling entity that would limit their freedom and strip them of their traditions. On the other hand, many in the Latin rite hesitate to draw closer to the Orthodox for fear that they are often closely linked with their governing states.
According to Moynihan, many fear that the meeting between Cardinal Parolin and Putin would be used “as a piece in a chess game for geopolitical purposes,” to make Russia seem less aggressive.
“The Vatican is nevertheless willing to take this risk,” he said, because they have hope the meeting might help “prepare the way for a just peace in situations of conflict and for closer union between these thousand year-divided Churches.”
Turning to the days of St. John Paul II, Moynihan noted that the Polish Pope, who was very familiar with Russia and the Soviet regime, had said that “the Church needs to breathe with two lungs, that we need to have closer relations with the Orthodox.”
Russian Orthodox themselves were “brutally and cruelly suppressed” under the Soviet Union, he said, noting that thousands of churches were burned, many thousands of Orthodox Christians were arrested, and hundreds of priests executed.
“The atheist, communist regime was a brutal regime for our Christian brothers in the Soviet Union and in Russia, so I think this is a cause for us to feel compassion toward them,” Moynihan said.
When faced with accusations that the Russian Orthodox Church is nationalistic and is being used as a puppet of the government, the journalist said he insists that, in his opinion, the Russian government “is attempting to become more of a normal country’s government.”
“It’s in reaction to the ideological rigor of the communist system that they are still torn by the mixture of nostalgia for the Soviet time and the attraction of this Western, liberal democratic culture.”
“They’re right in the middle of this transition process,” he said, noting that in recent years they have been rebuilding their churches and re-studying Christian tradition.
In his opinion, Moynihan said efforts are those of a people trying to return to the “wellspring of faith” that was cut off for 70 years by “a very pitiless, tyrannical, atheist regime.”
“For this reason I feel up and down the line we ought to engage with the Russians and with all Eastern Europeans, and that we should gain from them a sense of how Christians can survive under cultural and political pressure as we ourselves face our own challenges in our increasingly post-Christian Western societies.”
In this sense, Cardinal Parolin’s visit marks “one more step in a multi-decade, multi-century process in which the Church tries to keep communications with the Eastern Churches.”
One point Cardinal Parolin and Patriarch Kirill are likely to touch on in their upcoming meeting is the joint declaration signed by the Patriarch and Pope Francis during their meeting in Havana last year, which highlighted the need to work together to protect the environment, the poor, and the persecuted.
But odds are, when he meets with Putin, Cardinal Parolin will try to move the political pen on touchy issues, reinforcing the idea that the Holy See “can serve as a type of honest broker in between colossal powers, which are as we all know positioning themselves in very significant ways that will effect the future of Ukraine, the future of Eastern Europe, the future of Europe as a whole and the future of the world.”
So it is against this political and religious backdrop that Cardinal Parolin will enter “right at the hinge-point of this decision, of whether we will keep Russia excluded from polite society, whether we will actually confront Russia and have a conflict or a war,” Moynihan said.
“This is a dramatic moment, and I wish Cardinal Parolin all the best. I think he’s a balanced, competent, thoughtful man,” he said, but noted that there are still those who are concerned, wishing to keep Russia isolated on the global playing field.
“I take a different view,” he said. “I think it’s a trip that’s filled with hope and is something that must be done in order to allow us to evade, if we may evade, a great tragedy of wider conflict that could harm the entire region and the world.”
[…]
Two problems here…
First, that to bless everyone is categorically different than to bless “irregular” COUPLES as such. On this point of “resistance” (meaning moral affirmation) the pope gives every appearance of being deaf in one ear.
And the second, is the broadly erased difference between mere “decisions” and “moral judgments”:
“A separation, or even an opposition [!], is thus established in some cases between the teaching of the precept, which is valid and general, and the norm of the individual conscience, which would in fact make the final DECISION [no longer a ‘MORAL JUDGMENT’!] about what is good and what is evil. On this basis, an attempt is made to legitimize so-called ‘pastoral’ solutions [!] contrary to the teaching of the Magisterium, and to justify a ‘creative’ hermeneutic according to which the moral conscience is in no way obliged, in every case, by a particular negative precept [‘thou shalt not…’]” (Veritatis Splendor, n. 56).
Relevant & cogent ecclesiology, dear Peter D. Beaulieu.
And let’s not forget to correct the anti-Apostolicity of this brazen papal public misrepresentation of the LORD, who told us:
“Then He [Christ in Glory] will say to those on his left:
‘Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil & his angels.'”
Those who willfully misrepresent Christ’s teaching in life are in danger of hearing that most terrible of all commands when they die.
Ever looking to hear & lovingly obey King Jesus Christ; blessings from marty
This is a spiritual delusion, a pride under a mask of false humility. Usually, it is close to impossible to deal with people imprisoned by that kind of delusion because they build very thick psychological defenses which protect them from the truth about themselves. Clearly, Pope Francis is driven by the deep-seated need to be perceived as “nice”, “merciful”, “the humblest” and so on. He already outdone Christ in that quest. Our Lord called some people “brood of wipers” instead of running after them and blessing them. Who knows, perhaps he threw away an opportunity to convert them… to Himself.
Here is the point. Our Lord came to do the will of His Father and this is why He did not care about being perceived as “nice”. Being the Truth He simply said and acted the truth. Unlike Christ, PF is driven only by his own will – hence his delusion. He is focused on himself. Do not be fooled – when a priest twists the divine revelation and says “it is out of mercy” he does it not for a sinner’s sake but for his own sake, for the purpose of being perceived as “merciful” resulting from a deep-seated emotional need to be liked. But how can he know what is truly good for a sinner if he, in his insatiable desire to be liked, pushed God aside?
Hence, when PF speaks about blessings of the homosexual couples, he thinks about his “good”, not theirs. Their good would be the truth about what God said on that matter and quiet compassionate pastoral work with them (as it has been in the Church). A priest who says “unfortunately this is a sin, I sympathize, let us work on stopping it and ask God’s blessing and help” does not sound “nice” to the world but he is genuinely good. He does not speak on his own authority and this is why he does not care about where he is being liked or not. A priest who says “come as you are, you are welcome, it is all good, let me bless you as a couple” is nice and fluffy indeed because he speaks on his own authority. The first priest obeys God, the second obeys himself.
A well worded response from His Holiness on the resistance to the blessing of those living in sin. We shouldn’t condemn from the start, rather we should take them by the hand to discern where and how God would take them. Although the direction is not a mystery. That’s where the disagreement lies. And why they’re “strong denouncements” from some senior prelates.
What apparently compels rejection of the blessing, which is a form of affirmation, is the overall diminution of rules, the commandments to convert our lives in imitation of Christ. A softer welcoming approach does indeed resemble Christ’s response to sinners, eating with them, spending hours in their company feeding them spiritually with extreme kindness, and with firmness never leaving his sheep in doubt. When the revealed Word is manipulated and diluted, we’re giving them something other. What the world perceives are the vexing calibre of Vatican appointments, the trend toward secular values. Omission of a call to repent. Warmth and good will is manifest in spiritual substance, not in cloudiness.
A blessing is acknowledgment of some good in the person blessed, not simply that they are God’s creation as alluded to by Francis, rather that they express a willingness to become more likened unto the goodness of Christ.
PS: Pope Francis in his “defense” employs the patterns of communication typical of toxic families. They are all about control, via:
– making extremely general statements (“sometimes decisions are not accepted”)
– never addressing concrete points raised by the opponents
– vague murky language
– veiled accusations of the opponents in “badness” (“ugly conclusions”, an attempt to shame) instead of addressing their arguments (in this case instead of making a solid theological argument).
I will provide just one example of untruth achieved by those methods, in this case by a generalization:
“Sometimes decisions are not accepted,” Pope Francis replied. “But in most cases, when you don’t accept a decision, it’s because you don’t understand.”
Indeed, sometimes the decisions are not accepted. The general statement above used to “excuse” not a smooth process of an implementation of ‘FS’. However, it is not true that a rejection of a decision is caused by the lack of understanding “in most cases” because the lack of understanding can be overcome, by one who made a decision, via engaging in an open and honest discussion. He explains the decision clearly so those who did not understand can accept it. Most often however a decision is not accepted because it is understood correctly and deemed as wrong = unacceptable. This is precisely what happened with ‘FS’.
When you don’t accept a decision, it’s because you don’t understand.
Insulting and patronizing.
Trying to slip FS through by making it a matter of ethnic/cultural acceptance is devious.
See Jeff Mirus, Catholic Culture.
“When you don’t accept a decision, it’s because you don’t understand.
Insulting and patronizing.”
You are right, it is in fact a manifestation of an entitlement. The true meaning of PF’s offence with “non-understanding” is “You did not understand ME, how dare you to think I can propose something bad!” Thus, he does not bother to explain his “theological idea” because the issue is not about theology but about HIS “goodness” = HIM being rejected. By definition all he does is for the greater good; to reject his actions means to doubt his goodness.
Therefore, in the person of Pope Francis the Church has a huge metaphysical problem. “No one is good, only God.”
The Lord does not commit sacrileges, nor lead that, against His own sacramentals.