In Russia, the Path to Unity is Defrosting

Benedict XVI meets Metropolitan Kirill of Smolensk and Kaliningrad in 2007.
Today, Kirill is the Russian Orthodox Patriarch (Photo: CNS)

From The Catholic Herald (UK)
By Neville Kyrke-Smith

"The Lefebvrists, the Anglicans... will it be the Orthodox next?" asked one slightly bewildered Catholic priest recently. Pope Benedict XVI is turning out to be ecumenically audacious. For this he has faced criticism, misunderstanding and accusations of insensitivity. But Pope Benedict and Patriarch Kirill of the Russian Orthodox Church seem now to be making progress in preparing the ground to overcome the Great Schism of 1054.

When I was in Russia late last year the Nuncio, Archbishop Antonio Mennini, commented on the imperative aim of both Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI to build "a dialogue of truth and charity" with the Orthodox. He emphasised how vital this was and thanked Aid to the Church in Need (ACN) for its work in supporting Catholic, Orthodox and ecumenical projects in Russia:

"We have to encourage the Catholic community to show solidarity to the Orthodox. The initiative of Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI is so important. Thank you for all that the charity does for the Church and for building relations with the Orthodox, in line with the will of the Holy Father... and Our Lord!"

He continued, reflecting on the great sufferings of all Christians in Soviet times: "We must find courage to turn the pages of history."

But it is not only Catholics who wish to "turn the pages of history" and establish an understanding, with a deeper respect.

Archpriest Fr Igor Vyzhanov, Secretary for inter-Christian Affairs at the Moscow Patriarchate, told me: "We have a common heritage, a common mission and challenges in common - both Catholics and Orthodox. We need your prayers and charity."

Fr Igor accompanied Archbishop Hilarion Alfeyev, who is head of the External Affairs Department of the Russian Orthodox Church, to a meeting at Castel Gandolfo with Pope Benedict XVI in late September. When asked about the continuing tense situation between churches in Ukraine - where the faithful of the Eastern Rite (Greek) Catholic Church suffered so much and where there is a raw sensitivity and a politically territorial religious viewpoint on both sides - Archpriest Igor recognised the scale of the challenges: "There is much hurt and there are very painful memories on both sides and the question is how a way forward can be found. But we must foster a solution with the Greek Catholics in Ukraine - and we both call for the need for dialogue."

So what underlies these recent changes in attitude? Where has this new energy come from, pushing towards a mutual recognition and some theological and ecclesial agreement? The difficult meetings of the International Joint Commission for Catholic-Orthodox Dialogue Theological Commission, the publishing of books and articles, as well as cultural and diplomatic exchanges, are definitely leading to a greater openness. Indeed, one sign of this is a forthcoming exhibition with lectures this spring 2010 in Rome entitled Days of Russian Spiritual Culture - and it is thought likely that the Holy Father will make a point of attending. Additionally, the projects supported by Aid to the Church in Need have helped to build bridges of charity - including the publishing of social teaching documents by the Russian Orthodox Church and the sponsoring of a television programme on the Holy Father, with a personal message from Pope Benedict in Russian, broadcast across Russia in 2008. Barriers of mistrust and superstition are coming down - as common social and religious challenges are faced - and some of the wounds of atheism are beginning to heal.

Above all, it is the personalities involved at the top of the ecclesial trees who are encouraging a growing closeness. It is almost as though both Patriarch Kirill and Pope Benedict, through their theological studies and meetings prior to their elevation to office, were being prepared for a big fraternal gesture between the Orthodox and Catholic communities.

Patriarch Kirill hand-picked Archbishop Hilarion Alfeyev as his successor as head of the External Relations Department of the Patriarchate, the post he himself previously held. While the Patriarch is cautious and measured in what he says, it is fascinating to hear what Archbishop Hilarion says. In Rome in September he said: "We support the Pope in his commitment to the defence of Christian values. We also support him when his courageous declarations arouse negative reactions on the part of politicians or public figures or they are criticised and sometimes misrepresented by some in the mass media. We believe that he has the duty to witness to the truth and we are therefore with him even when his word encounters opposition.

"Personally, I hope that sooner or later the meeting that many are awaiting between the Pope and the Patriarch of Moscow will take place. I can say with responsibility that on both sides there is the desire to prepare a meeting with great care."

Pope Benedict's theological grounding, his studies, his lecturing and his time at the Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith seem to have prepared him to be a bold pope who wishes to heal theological divides. Time and again he emphasises the common ground. The Holy Father summed up his deep respect for Orthodoxy late last year when he told Archbishop Anastas, head of the Orthodox Autocephalous Church of Albania late that we have "a common profession of the Nicene - Constantinopolitan creed; a common baptism for the remission of sins and for incorporation into Christ and the Church; the legacy of the first Ecumenical Councils; the real if imperfect communion which we already share, and the common desire and collaborative efforts to build upon what already exists".

In Russia the Catholic Church is seen in a different light from the Nineties when there was a great deal of suspicion and mistrust. Even in late 2001 Catholics were seen by the Orthodox to be triumphalistic and insensitive in establishing dioceses in Russia, without any consultation, just after the interfaith Assisi gathering with Pope John Paul II. Now Cardinal Walter Kasper, president of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity, has opened many doors and helped deepen respect for the Holy Father, Pope Benedict. Additionally, Italian diplomatic skills and ways seem to be to the fore. The Nuncio Archbishop Mennini has built good relationships - which led to the recent proposal from President Medvedev to upgrade the status of the Holy See so that the Vatican has full diplomatic relations with Russia. Archbishop Paolo Pezzi in Moscow and all the Catholic bishops are also working wherever they can to improve understanding and co-operation with the local Orthodox bishops.

Fr Pietro Scalini, the rector of the Catholic seminary in St Petersburg, told me that he has Orthodox lecturers and how there is a growing understanding, even if it is not easy at times.

"As the Pope has called the Church to breathe with both lungs, our presence here enables communication and knowing each other," he said. "I have taught a lot of Orthodox here, who come to learn. Our presence may help unity. It is not our aim to spread the Gospel - it relies on God."

Why does all this matter? So that Christ can be proclaimed with two lungs in today's world - breathed, lived, spoken of and witnessed to with real energy and power. For Catholics and Orthodox need each other. Both Cardinal Kasper and Archbishop Hilarion have spoken about the importance of the social teachings of the Church and the Liturgy. Indeed, Archbishop Hilarion has not held back at times with his comments: "Only united will we be able to propose to the world the spiritual and moral values of the Christian faith; together we will be able to offer our Christian vision of the family, of procreation, of a human love made not only for pleasure; to confirm our concept of social justice, of a more equitable distribution of goods, of a commitment to safeguarding the environment, for the defence of human life and its dignity. Therefore, the time has come to move from a failure to meet and competition, to solidarity, mutual respect and esteem; I would say, without a doubt, that we must move to mutual love. Our Christian preaching can have effect, can be convincing in our contemporary world, if we are able to live this mutual love between us, Christians."

He has also written: "Orthodox divine services are a priceless treasure that we must carefully guard... 'divine wisdom accessible to simple, loving hearts' (St John of Kronstadt)."

He added sadly that "since the liturgical reforms of the Second Vatican Council, services in some Catholic churches have become little different from Protestant ones".

Looking around Moscow, the visitor will see numerous Orthodox churches. There were just 40 functioning churches in Moscow during Soviet times, but now there are 400 churches for a population of perhaps 10 million. Surveys indicate that over 70 per cent of Russians claim to be Orthodox, even if only perhaps four to seven per cent attend the Liturgy regularly. There is a real feeling of Russian identity associated with the Orthodox Church and the Patriarch is recognised as an important diplomatic figure of influence within Russia. We in the West may worry about a resurgent Russian nationalism - with the Church getting too close to the state - but the Orthodox say that they are just developing a relationship with the Kremlin in order to have influence and to be able to have religion taught in schools.

In pastoral work and mission there are some imaginative initiatives. In St Petersburg Fr Alexander Tkachenko, a young priest, runs a centre providing pastoral care for terminally ill children. His is the only hospice for children in the whole of Russia. About 200 children are cared for per annum and the Centre is now registered. ACN has helped with three vehicles which visit outlying parishes - and vital paediatric palliative care is given, and the Liturgy is also celebrated. This is faith in action - and very similar to the founding work of Fr Werenfreid van Straaten at Aid to the Church in Need for displaced and abandoned German refugee families after the Second World War. For three years Fr Alexander had the only disabled vehicle in St Petersburg. In other developments the programmes of Blagovest Media and the courses of St Andrew's Biblical Theological Institute are real bridges of understanding.

The ecumenical road is not easy - often it is frozen or even non-existent in Russia - but the foundations of respect and understanding are being laid, with the help of Italian diplomatic engineering and a theologian Pope. These foundations are also built upon the joint witness of the Orthodox and Catholic martyrs of the 20th century. Human rights issues, political misunderstandings, Russian historical identity and Ukrainian tensions are all part of the terrible legacy of Soviet suffering. But there is one other legacy in Russia which has been rediscovered: a legacy of Christian faith which somehow survived the Gulag prison camps. Look at the icons of the Mother of God and the Protecting Veil, and perhaps we in the West can be challenged to a deeper understanding and respect.


Neville Kyrke-Smith is National Director of Aid to the Church in Need UK and has travelled extensively for more than 25 years in Russia and Eastern Europe. ACN gives priority to supporting Catholic projects in Russia and also assists with Orthodox and ecumenical projects.

Is Catholic-Orthodox Unity in Sight?

From National Catholic Register
By Edward Pentin

The Catholic Archbishop of Moscow has given a remarkably upbeat assessment of relations with the Orthodox Church, saying unity between Catholics and Orthodox could be achieved “within a few months.”

In an interview today in Italy’s Corriere della Sera newspaper, Archbishop Paolo Pezzi said the miracle of reunification “is possible, indeed it has never been so close.” The archbishop added that Catholic-Orthodox reunification, the end of the historic schism that has divided them for a millennium, and spiritual communion between the two churches “could happen soon, also within a few months.”

Read the rest of this entry >>

Russia’s Plan To Introduce Religion in Schools Lauded

From The Christian Post
By Gretta Curtis

Russian President Dmitry Medvedev has announced a pilot project Tuesday that will require schoolchildren to take classes in religion or secular ethics, the Associated Press reported.

Medvedev said pre-teen students at about 12,000 schools in 18 Russian regions would take the classes. They will be offered the choice of studying the dominant Russian Orthodox religion, Islam, Buddhism or Judaism, or of taking an overview of all four faiths, or a course in secular ethics.

The proposal is believed to be part of a Kremlin effort to teach young Russians morals in the wake of a turbulent period of uncertainty following the collapse of the officially atheist Soviet Union.

Patriarch Kirill, leader of 100 million Orthodox Christians in Russia has praised the proposal and said, “All the concerns society has expressed will be addressed by this freedom of choice,” reported Reuters.

Russian Orthodox Church has been pushing the idea of introducing religious education in schools though church and state are officially separate under the post-Soviet constitution.

Three years ago some regions have taken the initiative on their own and required courses in Russian Orthodoxy, stirring protests that they were infringing on constitutional boundaries.

Brushing aside the concerns of some non-religious peoples who fear that it is a way of imposing Orthodox Church ideology, Medvedev said, “Students and their parents must be allowed to choose freely,” while addressing top clerics and officials at his residence outside Moscow.

“Any coercion, pressure will be absolutely unacceptable and counterproductive,” he said.

The President also insisted that the proposal is “only” the four faiths excluding other faiths, especially Roman Catholicism and Protestantism, which the Orthodox Church accuses of proselytising.

Medvedev said the national program would begin next year as a pilot project in 18 regions, covering about 20 percent of Russia's schools.

Over 80 percent Russians are believed to be members of the Russian Orthodox Church, however according to CIA world fact book said only about 15 to 20 percent as practicing Orthodox Christians. And minorities Christians like Roman Catholics and Protestants have often complained of not being able to practice their faith freely.

Earlier this year, the appointment of Aleksandr Dvorkin as chair of Expert Council on Religious Studies raised concern for non-Orthodox Christians, fearing that Russia might return to a “Soviet era” persecution of Christians.

Dvorkin, who is critical of non-Orthodox Christians was given “unprecedented powers” by the Ministry of Justice, according to the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF).

The move prompted USCIRF to add Russia to its watch list for the first time despite having monitored the country’s religious freedom for ten years.

Orthodox Church Elects Modernizer as Patriarch

Reconciliation sought with Roman Catholics

From The Washington Times
By Mansur Mirovalev ASSOCIATED PRESS

The interim leader of the Russian Orthodox Church, seen as a modernizer who could seek a historic reconciliation with the Vatican and more autonomy from the state, was overwhelmingly elected patriarch Tuesday.

Metropolitan Kirill received 508 of the 700 votes cast during an all-day church congress in Moscow's ornate Christ the Savior Cathedral, the head of the commission responsible for the election, Metropolitan Isidor, said hours after the secret ballot was over.

Read the rest of this entry >>

Russian Orthodox Patriarch Dies

The Russian Orthodox Patriarch, Alexei II, died this morning at the age of 79.

• Russian Orthodox Church Patriarch Alexy II dies (AP)

• His Holiness the Patriarch: Biography (Moscow Patriarchate)

• Death of Alexy II a tragic and sorrowful event – Putin

• Russian Orthodox Church Council to elect Patriarch within six months

• Medvedev expresses condolences on Patriarch's demise

• Gorbachev shocked by Alexy II death

• Holy Synod to hold emergency session on Saturday

• Patriarch expected to be buried in Epiphany Cathedral in Moscow as he wished

Solzhenitsyn and the Struggle for Russia's Soul

From Stratfor

By George Friedman

There are many people who write history. There are very few who make history through their writings. Alexander Solzhenitsyn, who died this week at the age of 89, was one of them. In many ways, Solzhenitsyn laid the intellectual foundations for the fall of Soviet communism. That is well known. But Solzhenitsyn also laid the intellectual foundation for the Russia that is now emerging. That is less well known, and in some ways more important.

Solzhenitsyn’s role in the Soviet Union was simple. His writings, and in particular his book “One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich,” laid bare the nature of the Soviet regime. The book described a day in the life of a prisoner in a Soviet concentration camp, where the guilty and innocent alike were sent to have their lives squeezed out of them in endless and hopeless labor. It was a topic Solzhenitsyn knew well, having been a prisoner in such a camp following service in World War II.

The book was published in the Soviet Union during the reign of Nikita Khrushchev. Khrushchev had turned on his patron, Joseph Stalin, after taking control of the Communist Party apparatus following Stalin’s death. In a famous secret speech delivered to the leadership of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, Khrushchev denounced Stalin for his murderous ways. Allowing Solzhenitsyn’s book to be published suited Khrushchev. Khrushchev wanted to detail Stalin’s crimes graphically, and Solzhenitsyn’s portrayal of life in a labor camp served his purposes.

It also served a dramatic purpose in the West when it was translated and distributed there. Ever since its founding, the Soviet Union had been mythologized. This was particularly true among Western intellectuals, who had been taken by not only the romance of socialism, but also by the image of intellectuals staging a revolution. Vladimir Lenin, after all, had been the author of works such as “Materialism and Empirio-Criticism.” The vision of intellectuals as revolutionaries gripped many European and American intellectuals.

These intellectuals had missed not only that the Soviet Union was a social catastrophe, but that, far from being ruled by intellectuals, it was being ruled by thugs. For an extraordinarily long time, in spite of ample testimony by emigres from the Soviet regime, Western intellectuals simply denied this reality. When Western intellectuals wrote that they had “seen the future and it worked,” they were writing at a time when the Soviet terror was already well under way. They simply couldn’t see it.

One of the most important things about “One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich” was not only that it was so powerful, but that it had been released under the aegis of the Soviet state, meaning it could not simply be ignored. Solzhenitsyn was critical in breaking the intellectual and moral logjam among intellectuals in the West. You had to be extraordinarily dense or dishonest to continue denying the obvious, which was that the state that Lenin and Stalin had created was a moral monstrosity.

Khrushchev’s intentions were not Solzhenitsyn’s. Khrushchev wanted to demonstrate the evils of Stalinism while demonstrating that the regime could reform itself and, more important, that communism was not invalidated by Stalin’s crimes. Solzhenitsyn, on the other hand, held the view that the labor camps were not incidental to communism, but at its heart. He argued in his “Gulag Archipelago” that the systemic exploitation of labor was essential to the regime not only because it provided a pool of free labor, but because it imposed a systematic terror on those not in the gulag that stabilized the regime. His most telling point was that while Khrushchev had condemned Stalin, he did not dismantle the gulag; the gulag remained in operation until the end.

Though Solzhenitsyn served the regime’s purposes in the 1960s, his usefulness had waned by the 1970s. By then, Solzhenitsyn was properly perceived by the Soviet regime as a threat. In the West, he was seen as a hero by all parties. Conservatives saw him as an enemy of communism. Liberals saw him as a champion of human rights. Each invented Solzhenitsyn in their own image. He was given the Nobel Prize for Literature, which immunized him against arrest and certified him as a great writer. Instead of arresting him, the Soviets expelled him, sending him into exile in the United States.

When he reached Vermont, the reality of who Solzhenitsyn was slowly sank in. Conservatives realized that while he certainly was an enemy of communism and despised Western liberals who made apologies for the Soviets, he also despised Western capitalism just as much. Liberals realized that Solzhenitsyn hated Soviet oppression, but that he also despised their obsession with individual rights, such as the right to unlimited free expression. Solzhenitsyn was nothing like anyone had thought, and he went from being the heroic intellectual to a tiresome crank in no time. Solzhenitsyn attacked the idea that the alternative to communism had to be secular, individualist humanism. He had a much different alternative in mind.

Solzhenitsyn saw the basic problem that humanity faced as being rooted in the French Enlightenment and modern science. Both identify the world with nature, and nature with matter. If humans are part of nature, they themselves are material. If humans are material, then what is the realm of God and of spirit? And if there is no room for God and spirituality, then what keeps humans from sinking into bestiality? For Solzhenitsyn, Stalin was impossible without Lenin’s praise of materialism, and Lenin was impossible without the Enlightenment.

From Solzhenitsyn’s point of view, Western capitalism and liberalism are in their own way as horrible as Stalinism. Adam Smith saw man as primarily pursuing economic ends. Economic man seeks to maximize his wealth. Solzhenitsyn tried to make the case that this is the most pointless life conceivable. He was not objecting to either property or wealth, but to the idea that the pursuit of wealth is the primary purpose of a human being, and that the purpose of society is to free humans to this end.

Solzhenitsyn made the case — hardly unique to him — that the pursuit of wealth as an end in itself left humans empty shells. He once noted Blaise Pascal’s aphorism that humans are so endlessly busy so that they can forget that they are going to die — the point being that we all die, and that how we die is determined by how we live. For Solzhenitsyn, the American pursuit of economic well being was a disease destroying the Western soul.

He viewed freedom of expression in the same way. For Americans, the right to express oneself transcends the content of the expression. That you speak matters more than what you say. To Solzhenitsyn, the same principle that turned humans into obsessive pursuers of wealth turned them into vapid purveyors of shallow ideas. Materialism led to individualism, and individualism led to a culture devoid of spirit. The freedom of the West, according to Solzhenitsyn, produced a horrifying culture of intellectual self-indulgence, licentiousness and spiritual poverty. In a contemporary context, the hedge fund coupled with The Daily Show constituted the bankruptcy of the West.

To have been present when he once addressed a Harvard commencement! On the one side, Harvard Law and Business School graduates — the embodiment of economic man. On the other side, the School of Arts and Sciences, the embodiment of free expression. Both greeted their heroic resister, only to have him reveal himself to be religious, patriotic and totally contemptuous of the Vatican of self-esteem, Harvard.

Solzhenitsyn had no real home in the United States, and with the fall of the Soviets, he could return to Russia — where he witnessed what was undoubtedly the ultimate nightmare for him: thugs not only running the country, but running it as if they were Americans. Now, Russians were pursuing wealth as an end in itself and pleasure as a natural right. In all of this, Solzhenitsyn had not changed at all.

Solzhenitsyn believed there was an authentic Russia that would emerge from this disaster. It would be a Russia that first and foremost celebrated the motherland, a Russia that accepted and enjoyed its uniqueness. This Russia would take its bearings from no one else. At the heart of this Russia would be the Russian Orthodox Church, with not only its spirituality, but its traditions, rituals and art.

The state’s mission would be to defend the motherland, create the conditions for cultural renaissance, and — not unimportantly — assure a decent economic life for its citizens. Russia would be built on two pillars: the state and the church. It was within this context that Russians would make a living. The goal would not be to create the wealthiest state in the world, nor radical equality. Nor would it be a place where anyone could say whatever they wanted, not because they would be arrested necessarily, but because they would be socially ostracized for saying certain things.

Most important, it would be a state not ruled by the market, but a market ruled by a state. Economic strength was not trivial to Solzhenitsyn, either for individuals or for societies, but it was never to be an end in itself and must always be tempered by other considerations. As for foreigners, Russia must always guard itself, as any nation must, against foreigners seeking its wealth or wanting to invade. Solzhenitsyn wrote a book called “August 1914,” in which he argues that the czarist regime had failed the nation by not being prepared for war.

Think now of the Russia that Prime Minister Vladimir Putin and President Dmitri Medvedev are shaping. The Russian Orthodox Church is undergoing a massive resurgence, the market is submitting to the state, free expression is being tempered and so on. We doubt Putin was reading Solzhenitsyn when reshaping Russia. But we do believe that Solzhenitsyn had an understanding of Russia that towered over most of his contemporaries. And we believe that the traditional Russia that Solzhenitsyn celebrated is emerging, more from its own force than by political decisions.

Solzhenitsyn served Western purposes when he undermined the Soviet state. But that was not his purpose. His purpose was to destroy the Soviet state so that his vision of Russia could re-emerge. When his interests and the West’s coincided, he won the Nobel Prize. When they diverged, he became a joke. But Solzhenitsyn never really cared what Americans or the French thought of him and his ideas. He wasn’t speaking to them and had no interest or hope of remaking them. Solzhenitsyn was totally alien to American culture. He was speaking to Russia and the vision he had was a resurrection of Mother Russia, if not with the czar, then certainly with the church and state. That did not mean liberalism; Mother Russia was dramatically oppressive. But it was neither a country of mass murder nor of vulgar materialism.

It must also be remembered that when Solzhenitsyn spoke of Russia, he meant imperial Russia at its height, and imperial Russia’s borders at its height looked more like the Soviet Union than they looked like Russia today. “August 1914” is a book that addresses geopolitics. Russian greatness did not have to express itself via empire, but logically it should — something to which Solzhenitsyn would not have objected.

Solzhenitsyn could not teach Americans, whose intellectual genes were incompatible with his. But it is hard to think of anyone who spoke to the Russian soul as deeply as he did. He first ripped Russia apart with his indictment. He was later ignored by a Russia out of control under former President Boris Yeltsin. But today’s Russia is very slowly moving in the direction that Solzhenitsyn wanted. And that could make Russia extraordinarily powerful. Imagine a Soviet Union not ruled by thugs and incompetents. Imagine Russia ruled by people resembling Solzhenitsyn’s vision of a decent man.

Solzhenitsyn was far more prophetic about the future of the Soviet Union than almost all of the Ph.D.s in Russian studies. Entertain the possibility that the rest of Solzhenitsyn’s vision will come to pass. It is an idea that ought to cause the world to be very thoughtful.

Christian Leaders Should Not Advocate Sharia Law - Moscow Patriarchate

Geneva, February 14, Interfax - The values of other religions, just as secular ones, should not be advocated by the heads of Christian Churches, said Bishop Hilarion of Vienna and Austria, who represents the Russian Orthodox Church at European international organizations.

"Our role is not to protect Sharia law, to glorify an alternative style of behavior or to preach secular values. Our sacred mission is to announce what Christ announced, to teach what his disciples taught," Bishop Hilarion said at the opening of a session of the World Council of Churches (WCC)'s Central Committee in Geneva.

He was commenting on a recent statement by Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams that it was inevitable that several aspects of Sharia law will have to be included in British law. His speech caused a public uproar in the UK.

"Many Christians around the world are looking up to Christian leaders with hope that they will defend Christianity against all the challenges it faces," Bishop Hilarion said.

He also criticized ‘liberal’ and ‘politically correct’ Christianity which Protestant and Anglican communities started promoting several dozens years ago. The Russian Church’s representative said that the gap between ‘traditional’ and ‘liberal’ Christianity grows so dramatically that today it's impossible to speak about one moral system preached by all Christians.

‘Politically correct Christianity will die. We have already been watching the process of liberal Christianity’s gradual decline as newly introduced moral norms lead to splits, discrepancies and confusion in several Christian communities,’ the bishop said.

Moscow Patriarchate Criticizes "Politically Correct" Christianity

Vienna, January 22, Interfax - The Russian Orthodox Church's representative to the European International Institutions believes it important to preserve Christian traditions in today’s liberal world.

"Christianity, empty inside, lacking inner power, Christianity that has renounced itself, will not be able to oppose challenges of the modern world," Bishop Hilarion of Vienna and Austria said at a meeting organized by the Ecumenical Council of Churches in Austria dedicated to its 50th anniversary.

The Russian Church’s representative stressed that "we should be afraid of giving up spiritual and moral teaching accumulated by the Christian Church for centuries and surrender to the influence of liberal ideas and secular moral standards."

"When some Christian communities start revising theological or moral teaching of Christianity in order to ‘update’ it or to make it more ‘politically correct’, it is a direct way to spiritual collapse," the bishop added.

According to him, "Christians are powerful only when they follow the testament of Christ rather than when they start building their life by the rules of secular world."

PUTIN: STATE WILL REPAY DEBT TO RUSSIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH, OTHER DENOMINATIONS

Valday, Novgorod region, January 14, Interfax - Russian President Vladimir Putin has said the government is indebted to the Russian Orthodox Church and has promised to facilitate the revival of religion in Russia.

Speaking at a prayer ceremony on the sanctification of the Assumption Cathedral at the Valday Iversky Monastery in the Novgorod region, Putin said that both he and those who work with him "represent a state which has done a lot over the previous decades to undermine the roots of our history and culture, including the spiritual one."

"Therefore, it is too early to thank us for anything," the president said in response to Patriarch Alexy II of Moscow and All Russia's greeting words, in which he thanked Putin for helping the revival of the Iversky Monastery.

Putin said he perceived the gratitude "exclusively as a hope that the state will repay its debt to the Russian Orthodox Church and other traditional denominations and its debt to the Russian people."

Russian Orthodox Celebration of the Feast of the Epiphany

The Final Liturgy of Christmas - The Feast of Epiphany

January 6

This video, part of a series presenting the Russsian Orthodox liturgy for the Feast of the Epiphany, features the Moscow Chamber Choir and the Monastery Choir of Trinity St Sergius accompanying the Epiphany procession at the Monastery of New Jerusalem, and the great blessing of the waters.

"Praise the name of the Lord" (Cristov)

Praise ye the name of the Lord
Praise Him, O ye servants of the Lord
Alleluia, alleluia, alleluia
Blessed is the Lord from Zion
Who dwelleth in Jerusalem
Alleluia, alleluia, alleluia

O give thanks unto the Lord
For He is good
And His mercy endureth for ever
Alleluia, alleluia, alleluia

O give thanks unto the God of heaven
His mercy endureth for ever
Alleluia, alleluia, alleluia

Alexy II: Catholics and Orthodox Must Stand Together

Paris (AsiaNews) – In the modern society a new “persecution” of the Church is (at hand) and so Catholics and Orthodox are called to stand together in defence of Christian values.

Patriarch Alexy II of Moscow and All Russia believes the Orthodox and the Catholics should seek answers to today’s challenges together. The highest ranking spiritual leader of the Russian Orthodox Church is currently in France, where on October 2nd he spoke to the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe in Strasbourg and yesterday visited the Cathedral of Notre-Dame to venerate the relics of Our Lord’s crown of thorns, in the presence of Archbishop André Vingt-Trois of Paris and numerous faithful.

Meeting with the president of the French Bishops Conference Cardinal Jean-Pierre Ricard, Alexy II denounced modern society, particularly in Europe, “attempts are made to bring in a worldview that, in its destructive force, can well be compared to the external persecution against the Church”. “In a situation where any external persecution seems to be absent, a threat has emerged for religion in general and Christianity in particular to be marginalized”. This is why we must remain united on some fundamental questions (abortion, family, bioethics, secularization); issues which seem to be the basis on which the new reconciliation between the two Churches is being built.

“We Christians – he declared in the Parisian cathedral yesterday evening – we must find possibilities to witness together the truth of the Gospel and its eternal moral values. In fact, we see that contemporary society is losing its ethical base and is following false values. It is being increasingly dehumanised and becoming a cruel generator of conflicts not only between people but between communities”.

At the European Parliament Alexy II criticised the “new generation of rights” of humanity “which are in contrast with morals” and in various interviews with global press spoke of a meeting with Benedict XVI in the next couple of years.

Prospects Improve for Pope-Patriarch "Summit"

Moscow, Aug. 07 (CWNews.com) -

After an August 7 meeting with Russian Orthodox Patriarch Alexei II, Cardinal Roger Etchegaray said that the prospects for a "summit meeting" between the Orthodox prelate and Pope Benedict XVI are steadily improving.

The cardinal cautioned that no plans were underway for a summit meeting, but important steps were being taken to strengthen the ties between Rome and Moscow, particularly through cooperative efforts to affirm the role of Christianity in European society. The veteran Vatican diplomat said that a meeting between the Pope and the Patriarch would likely be the fruit of these cooperative ventures.

Cardinal Etchegaray went on to say that Pope Benedict has cultivated a personal friendship with Patriarch Alexei, even at a distance. During his meeting with the Russian prelate he handed over a personal letter from the Roman Pontiff, which Alexei read. The Russian Orthodox leader expressed his thanks for the Pope's thoughts and promised a full reply.

Cardinal Etchegaray stopped in Moscow to meet with Patriarch Alexei as he traveled to Siberia, where he will participate in ceremonies marking the 10th anniversary of a Catholic cathedral in Novosibirsk. The French-born cardinal has frequently carried out sensitive diplomatic assignments for Holy See since retiring from his post as president of the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace. As he approaches his 85th birthday he continues to be a valued papal envoy.