|
Newsflash
> Thaw in Moscow?
Thaw in Moscow?
VATICAN CITY, Sunday, April 24, 2005 -- Tonight I stood outside
the former residence of Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger as a crowd
of several hundred Romans chanted "Ben-e-det-to, Ben-e-det-to"
(the Italian for Benedict) into the darkening spring evening.
They wanted the new Pope, Benedict XVI, the former Cardinal
Joseph Ratzinger, who was installed this morning on the See
of Peter in a splendid, solemn Mass in St. Peter's Square
attended by some 250,000 people, to come out and say hello
to them.
The new Pope eventually came out. Everyone surged forward.
Parents held babies over their heads. Cell phone cameras flashed.
People said to children on their shoulders, "Did you
see the man dressed in white? Did you see him?" And the
children nodded, "Yes, yes," their eyes wide.
Benedict had returned to his old apartment outside the Vatican
for the afternoon, mostly to see his brother, Georg, a priest
as well, who had come to Rome from Regensburg for the occasion.
Georg had wept openly during the installation Mass for his
brother.
A German priest told an Italian journalist, who told me (so,
this is a bit of hearsay, but I think it is likely true),
that Pope Benedict had spent part of the afternoon playing
his piano. It is certain that he is an accomplished classical
pianist, and I have seen the piano in his apartment, so there
is no reason not to believe the story. But it does seem suggestive,
to imagine this newly-elected Pope, relaxing in his private
quarters, playing a piano.
"They seem to like him here tonight," Cardinal
Jozef Tomko, 81, who was standing by me on the edge of the
crowd, said. "But in some parts of the world, they are
attacking him fiercely."
Tomko told me that Benedict is writing all of his recent
homilies entirely by himself, dictating them to a secretary.
His homily at the installation Mass today was so moving that
friends of mine had tears in their eyes as he delivered certain
passages, where he spoke in poetic language about human emptiness
and loneliness, and of human love that is destroyed.
It was a homily that reached out to other Christians above
all, in a Mass where the Gospel was read in two languages,
Latin and Greek (actually, the Gospel was not read but sung
in Latin -- perhaps a sign of what may be in store for the
liturgy in this pontificate).
In recent days, they are attacking Benedict in the West above
all: in England, in France, and in some circles in America,
but as one moves further east, the criticism grows muted and
starts to turn into quiet praise, and even into assurances
of good will.
In that regard, I conducted today one of the most remarkable
and historic interviews I have ever conducted.
I spoke with Bishop Hilarion Alfeyev of Vienna. He is not
a Catholic bishop. He is a bishop of the Russian Orthodox
Church. He is in Vienna to care for all the Russian Orthodox
scattered throughout the cities of central Europe.
I first met Bishop Hilarion in 2000, in Moscow, when he was
not yet a bishop. I met him several additional times in the
years since, most recently in Vienna in March. On each occasion,
he expressed reservations about the Vatican and its policies
in regard to the Orthodox world.
But in this interview, Bishop Hilarion issues a dramatic
appeal to the Roman Catholic Church: he asks that Catholics
join with the Orthodox in an "alliance" to defend
traditional religious values in a Europe which has been largely
"de-Christianized." during the past 200 years.
I think this is an historic interview, published on the very
day of Benedict XVI's installation. I will leave it up to
you, the reader, to judge whether it is as remarkable a text
as I think it is.
Towards a Catholic-Orthodox Alliance
Interview: Bishop Hilarion Alfeyev of Vienna and Austria,
Representative of the Russian Orthodox Church to the European
Institutions
An interview taken on 24 April 2005, the day of enthronement
of Pope Benedict XVI
What are your hopes for the new pontificate?
As a Russian Orthodox bishop, I hope, first of all, that
the new pontificate will be marked by a breakthrough in relations
between the Roman Catholic and the Russian Orthodox Churches,
and that a meeting of the Pope of Rome with the Patriarch
of Moscow does take place. This meeting must be preceded by
concrete steps in the direction of a better mutual understanding,
and by careful elaboration of a common position on major dividing
issues.
I hope, next, that there will be a general amelioration in
the relations between the Catholic Church and the world Orthodoxy,
and that the Joint Catholic-Orthodox Theological Commission
resumes its work after a five-year pause, or that a new commission
for bilateral dialogue is formed in order to discuss Uniatism,
primacy and other theological and ecclesiological questions
which still divide our churches.
As far as the Catholic Church as such is concerned, I hope
that it will continue to preserve its traditional social and
moral teaching without surrendering to pressures from the
‘progressive’ groups that demand the ordination
of women, the approval of the so-called ‘same-sex marriages,’
abortion, contraception, euthanasia, etc. There is no doubt
that Benedict XVI, who has already made his positions on these
issues clear, will continue to oppose such groups, which exist
both within the Catholic Church and outside it.
I also hope that the Catholic Church will continue to combat
liberalism, secularism and relativism both in Europe and outside
it. Just two days before becoming Pope Benedict XVI, the then
Cardinal Ratzinger addressed his fellow cardinals with a sermon
which, according to some journalists, broke like a thunderclap.
‘We are moving,’ he said, toward ‘a dictatorship
of relativism… that recognizes nothing definite and
leaves only one’s own ego and one’s own desires
as the final measure.’ A sermon on the eve of the conclave
was meant to be programmatic, and it is clear that the war
against relativism which Cardinal Ratzinger declared did not
scare the other cardinals: on the contrary, by electing him
as Pope they expressed their readiness to join him in this
noble, but extremely painful and difficult combat.
In order for this combat to be more inclusive, I have recently
suggested that a European Catholic-Orthodox Alliance be formed.
This alliance may enable European Catholics and Orthodox to
fight together against secularism, liberalism and relativism
prevailing in modern Europe, may help them to speak with one
voice in addressing secular society, may provide for them
an ample space where they will discuss modern issues and come
to common positions. The social and ethical teachings of the
Catholic and Orthodox Churches are extremely close, in many
cases practically identical. I have had a chance to compare
the ‘Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church,’
published by the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace
in 2004, with the ‘Bases of the Social Doctrine of the
Russian Orthodox Church,’ approved by the Bishops’
Council of the Moscow Patriarchate in 2000. There are so many
striking similarities and so little difference. Why, then,
should we not be able to reveal our unity on all these major
issues urbi et orbi?
How does this proposed alliance differ from the Joint Catholic-Orthodox
Commission that you have already mentioned?
It is meant to be something completely different. The commission
must be concentrated on what divides us, while the alliance
should explore, clarify and then publicly announce the things
on which we are united. The commission will be concentrated
on the matters of doctrine and ecclesiology, while the alliance
should be centred on social and moral issues. The commission
will continue the internal Catholic-Orthodox debate, which
has already lasted for many centuries, while the alliance
should enable us, without necessarily overcoming our internal
problems, to form a common front to defend Christianity as
such against everything that may challenge it now or in the
future.
I was the sole representative of the Moscow Patriarchate
at the last session of the Joint Catholic-Orthodox Commission,
which took place in Baltimore in 2000, and I remember how
difficult the discussion on the issue of Uniatism was. There
was so much frustration, disappointment and bitterness on
both sides that not only no agreement was reached, but even
the decision on whether the work of the commission would ever
be resumed was not taken.
Even if resumed, the work of the Joint Commission will not
be an easy one and is likely to continue for many years to
come. My fear, however, is that by concentrating exclusively
on the dividing issues, such as Uniatism, proselytism and
primacy, we are likely to lose precious time that could be
used for a common witness to the secularized world. Europe,
in particular, has so rapidly dechristianized that urgent
action is needed in order to save it from losing its centuries-old
Christian identity.
This is precisely why I propose that, parallel to and independently
from the Joint Commission, a European Catholic-Orthodox Alliance
should be formed in order for the official representatives
of the two churches to be able to elaborate a common position,
in particular, on all major social and ethical issues. The
two churches can speak with one voice, and there can be a
united Catholic-Orthodox response to the challenges of secularism,
liberalism and relativism. If necessary, some other issues
of mutual interest could be a subject of discussion within
the framework of the alliance with the view of presenting
a unified position on them.
Why should Protestants be excluded from your proposed alliance?
In the struggle against relativism the Roman Catholic Church
takes an uncompromising stand, but by doing so it further
distances itself from Protestants, whose positions are in
most cases much more in tune with modern developments. Protestants
are, therefore, rather unlikely allies in this struggle. Moreover,
there already exist many forums, organizations and agencies
promoting the dialogue between Catholics and Protestants on
social issues. There are also Protestant-Orthodox forums,
such as the Conference of European Churches. What is almost
entirely lacking in Europe is any space for a Catholic-Orthodox
dialogue on social and ethical issues, while this dialogue
would be so timely and so vital.
The rationale behind my proposal is the following: our churches
are on their way to unity, but one has to be realistic and
understand that it will probably take decades, if not centuries,
before this unity is realized. In the meantime we desperately
need to address the world with a united voice. Without being
one Church, can we act as one Church, can we present ourselves
to the outside world as a unified structure, as an alliance?
I am convinced that we can, and that by doing so we may become
much stronger.
Why, then, a European alliance and not a world alliance?
Firstly, because I believe that it is in Europe that the
most deadly battles between Christianity and relativism are
going to take place in the nearest future. It is in Europe
that the onslaught of militant secularism against religion
takes the most aggressive forms. It is Europe that most obsessively
denies its Christian heritage. It is in Europe that crucifixes
are taken away from schools, religious symbols are banned
from public places, and Christianity becomes an object of
constant criticism, outrage and mockery. It is in Europe that
a profound demographic crisis affected Christian population,
threatening its very survival. Not that these processes do
not take place in other parts of the world, but it is in Europe
that they become so stunningly evident.
Secondly, in Europe there is a certain numerical balance
between Catholics and Orthodox: 280 million of the former
against 200 million of the latter. In some other parts of
the world (like, for example, in South America) the former
outnumber the latter to such a degree that no dialogue on
an equal footing is feasible.
How, in concrete terms, do you see such an alliance organized?
Who should take the initiative? Who will take part? What kind
of structure do you envisage?
It would be ideal if the initiative comes from the top, e.g.,
from the Pontiff, or from the leadership of the Orthodox Churches,
or it could be a joint initiative. The important thing is
that it should be an official proposal, and that the official
representatives of the Catholic and the Orthodox Churches
take part. There are already quite a number of ‘grass-root’
initiatives, various discussion groups on the level of clergy
and laity, but until something is done on the official level,
I do not think we may speak about any type of real alliance.
As far as the structure is concerned, it should be developed
by the Churches themselves. The Catholic side may consist,
for example, of representatives of the European Bishops’
Conferences, while the Orthodox side may consist of the representatives
of all Local Autocephalous Churches that are present in Europe.
ComECE emerges as the most obvious partner to the Orthodox,
if such a structure is taken as a basis. One also has to define
whether we are speaking about the EU or about Europe in general.
I would personally advocate the latter option, in which case
ComECE may be enlarged by representatives of the Bishops’
Conferences from non-EU countries.
Another type of structure is when the Catholic side consists
of those people nominated by the Curia, while the Orthodox
of those nominated by each Local Church. This was precisely
how the Joint Commission was formed and this, I believe, was
one of the reasons for its failure. A model based on local
participation seems to me to be more appropriate.
I also believe that the Oriental Orthodox Churches should
from the very beginning be a part of the alliance on behalf
of the Orthodox family. There is no Eucharistic communion
between the Eastern and the Oriental Orthodox Churches, but
their spirituality and ethos, as well as their social and
moral teachings are quite identical. Moreover, in an ecumenical
context the Eastern and Oriental Orthodox Churches have already
proved to be able to act as one Orthodox family.
Suppose such alliance is formed, what issues should it address?
Apart from the issues of militant secularism, liberalism
and relativism, which I already listed, it should, in my view,
concentrate on various aspects of family and sexual ethics,
as well as on bioethical questions. The Catholic Church has
already made its official position on family, marriage, abortion,
contraception, euthanasia, cloning etc. known to the world,
so have some Orthodox Churches, notably the Russian Orthodox
Church in its ‘Bases of the Social Conception.’
But where is a united position?
I believe that the modern battle between traditional Christianity
(by which I mean primarily the Catholic and the Orthodox Churches)
on the one hand and secularism, liberalism and relativism
on the other is primarily centred round the question of values.
It is not a theological argument, because it is not the existence
of God that is debated: it is the existence of an absolute
moral norm, on which human life should be founded, that is
put into question. The contest has an anthropological character,
and it is the present and future of humanity that is at stake.
By defending life, marriage and procreation, by struggling
against legalization of contraception, abortion and euthanasia,
against recognition of homosexual unions as equal to marital
ones, against libertinage in all forms, Catholics and Orthodox
are engaged in a battle for survival of the European civilization,
of European peoples, of Europe as such. Let us unite our efforts
and form a common front of traditional Christianity in order
to protect Europe from being irrevocably devoured by secularism,
liberalism and relativism.
Subscription Information
Inside The Vatican (ISSN 1068-8579) is published monthly except July
and September, with occasional special supplements. |
