PDA

View Full Version : Russian Orthodox official hopeful for a prompt beatification



Randy Fermo
06-04-2005, 03:09 AM
Aloha Ohana,

Praise Da Lord....at least someone interested with peace . I am more interested with love than hate and pride. I think hate and pride will not get anywhere... lets move for braddahood...



Date: 2005-04-05

Russian Orthodox Official Hopeful for a Prompt Beatification

A Great Pope, Bishop Hilarion Says of John Paul II

VIENNA, Austria, APRIL 5, 2005 (Zenit.org).- At least one Russian Orthodox Church official thinks John Paul II will soon be beatified and canonized by the Catholic Church.

Bishop Hilarion Alfeyev of Vienna and Austria, representative of the Russian Orthodox Church to the European Institutions, delivered to ZENIT a comment on the late Pope.

"He was a great Pope, perhaps one of the greatest in the entire history of the Roman Catholic Church," Bishop Hilarion wrote. "There is no doubt that he will soon be beatified and canonized by the Church to which he dedicated his entire life."

"He was the most influential religious leader of modernity, and he made an impact on the entire human civilization," he added. "Indeed, his influence went far beyond the Roman Catholic Church, which he headed for more than a quarter of a century.

"His message was heard and appreciated by millions of people all over the world, not only Catholics, but also Orthodox, Protestants, Anglicans, Jews, Muslims, people of other faiths and, what is perhaps even more remarkable, by people of no faith."

Bishop Hilarion continued: "In the time when secular politicians in most Western countries work hard to expel religion from the public sphere, to reduce it to the realm of private devotion, to ban it from schools, universities and from the mass media, John Paul II was a public figure of such magnitude that his every voyage was widely covered and his every pronouncement was commented by the mass media worldwide."

"He was an 'orthodox' Pope in the sense of preserving traditional attitude of his Church to dogma and morality," the Russian Orthodox stated. "His stand on moral issues, such as marriage and family, abortion, contraception, euthanasia and many others, very often evoked criticism on the part of those who wanted traditional values to be replaced by secular ones, and who attempted to oppose humanism to religion.

"By being traditional, however, the Pope was by no means less humane, being able to develop a universal humanism based on spiritual values as opposed to the atheist version of humanism."

"For many years he contested atheism in his own country, Poland, and he played part in the collapse of atheist totalitarian regimes in Eastern Europe, but he also contributed enormously to the rediscovery of faith by many of those who lost it because of liberalism and relativism prevailing in democratic Western societies."

Bishop Hilarion further commented: "His life coincided with enormous geopolitical changes which altered forever the face of Europe. These changes, unfortunately, led not only to the introduction of religious freedom in those Eastern European countries where it had previously been violated, but also to the aggravation of the interconfessional situation in some regions of Eastern Europe.

"A number of problems arose, in particular, between the Orthodox and the Catholics in Russia and Ukraine, which prevented the leaders of the Orthodox Church in both countries from meeting with the Pope. These problems still await their solution.

"I met with the Pope twice, on both occasions delivering to him a message from the patriarch of Moscow, Alexy II. On January 21, 2002, which was our second and last meeting, I was entrusted with a somewhat delicate mission of explaining to the Pope the conditions on which his meeting with the primate of the Russian Orthodox Church would have been possible."

"He was, of course, well aware of these conditions, which had never been made a secret. Among them were an explicit rejection of all forms of proselytism on the canonical territory of the Moscow Patriarchate, and the recognition of the fact that 'Uniatism' could no longer be considered as a way towards Christian unity.

"It is to be hoped that these principles will be reflected in a common declaration of the primates of the Roman Catholic and the Russian Orthodox Churches, once a meeting between them does take place. Such a meeting may pave the way to a new page in the relations between these two traditional Churches, whose common and united testimony to the world would be so crucial and so timely."

Elias Young
06-04-2005, 06:19 PM
Mr. Ohana:

In your "love/hate/pride" dialectic and rastafarian style you seemed to overlook the "truth".

Another poignant instance of style over substance. It is said by some that the Antichrist will be the most influential man who ever lived.

elias

***

Aloha Ohana wrote:
Praise Da Lord....at least someone interested with peace. I am more interested with love than hate and pride. I think hate and pride will not get anywhere...lets move for braddahood...

Date: 2005-04-05
Russian Orthodox Official Hopeful for a Prompt Beatification A Great Pope, Bishop Hilarion Says of John Paul II...He was the most influential religious leader of modernity...

Bp. Ioan (Lightoller)
21-04-2005, 10:49 AM
Oh please tell me I am NOT reading this! Bp. Hilarion WANTS the Roman Pontiff canonised? Roll over in your reliquary, St. John Maximovitch!

Edward Henderson
21-04-2005, 08:05 PM
I do not think Bishop Hilarion is calling for the Orthodox Church to glorify John Paul II, rather he says, "There is no doubt that he will soon be beatified and canonized by the Church to which he dedicated his entire life." I think it is more of a prediction. To add, I saw an interview with the Roman Catholic Cardinal in charge of Catholic parishes in Russia and he said the movement had already begun for this. I actually know Bishop Hilarion personally. He used to serve at the OCA Representation Church in Moscow before he was made a bishop. He is involved in interfaith and inter-religious dialogue but he is not a syncritist. He even told me that while he does dialogue, he does not pray with them. Now that he is the Bishop of Vienna and the Moscow Patriarchate's representative to the European Leader, ofcourse the spotlight is on him since John Paul II's death. Do you think anyone in such a position would go and say, "oh Pope John Paul II was a horrible man, whom I am sure in burning in Hell because of his heretical, un-Orthodox beliefs...."?

Bp. Ioan (Lightoller)
22-04-2005, 06:57 AM
I hope you're right. It would be sad to see Orthodox leaders calling for the canonisation of non-Orthodox, even if by non-Orthodox groups.

Alexis OCA
04-05-2005, 04:31 AM
John Paul was somewhat instrumental in the downfall of communism. He then faded into irrelevance. He had superstar status, but he was also like the kind old uncle who everyone loved but no one really listened to.

George Arnold
20-06-2005, 06:38 PM
Cannonization of the Czar Nicholas pretty much opens up the field to just about anyone.

Vasilis Kirikos
20-06-2005, 07:36 PM
> [Delete this line and type your message here] >

Re:"Cannonization of the Czar Nicholas pretty much opens up the field to just about anyone." The crucifixion and resurrection of our Lord and Savior; His sacrifice for us has pretty much done just that. What is a saint but one who is known to have entered into the kingdom of the Lord. And Christ has made it possible for all to be saved. Vasilis

Olga
21-06-2005, 06:19 AM
Let us not forget that the glorification of Tsar Nicholas and the imperial family was as "Royal martyrs and passionbearers", which is significant. They have been recognised as such by both the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad, which first glorified them, and, more recently, by the Moscow Patriarchate, as having met their internal exile and their deaths with equanimity, and espousing and maintaining their faith despite the establishment of an avowedly atheist regime. Pious, yes, perfect people, no (though who is?), and few would argue that their sanctity is of the same order as the great martyrs, confessors or theologians we are more familiar with as worthy of sainthood.

Edward Henderson
21-06-2005, 10:56 AM
Dear Mr. Arnold,

You ought to be very cautious in such criticisms of the Church. The glorification of the Russian Imperial Family was first done by the Russian Church Abroad. Long before that, Saint John Maximovich openly called them saints. I was fortunate enough to attend the glorification ceremony at Christ the Saviour Cathedral in 2000. There were representatives there from every autocephalous and autonomous Orthodox Church, thus the entire Church now recognizes the sanctity of the last Russian Czar and his family. This was not a political move. When I first came to Russia in 1998, one Priest told me that the Russian people had already glorified the Czar. Even before the official canonization, icons of the Czar could be found in Churches and Church stores in Russia.
I know Russian history pretty well and I am sure we could all focus on Czar Nicholas' blunders and mistakes. I am yet to get a clear answer on the whole Rasputin issue, but I do not question the Church's decision to glorify the Czar and his family. What we do know is that they spent their last days in prayer and repentance and did face a horrible death precisely because of what they represented to the God-hating Bolsheviks.

leandros
21-06-2005, 02:44 PM
Dear Friends,

There were about 2.000.000 Greek-Orthodox martyrs, during almost 500 years of occupation of Greece by Ottomans Muslims, which were executed just for being Christians under Muslim rule. For many of them there are historical documents of their courage and their blessedness as they faced death. They declared their Christian faith in public, or in a court room knowing in advanced the resulted verdict, which was always the death sentence.

But, only few are recognized as saints by the Greek Orthodox Church. The Saints are known as Martyrs of Faith, and the rest are known as National Martyrs. There is a distinction between them. National Martyrs are not presented in Icons in the Church and they are not having a special place in worshiping God through their intermediacy, as Saints of the Church, on the contrary to Martyrs of Faith. They had died both for being Christians, from the same executioners.

The difference is that the Saints – Martyrs of Faith - were glorified members of the Church who died being faithful to Christian Faith, while National Martyrs died being loyal to national ideals. The distinction is thin but it is of great importance. There were many Greek freedom fighters and simple citizens that bravely presented their genuine Christian faith as a political platform of resistance against Muslim occupation forces and for that they were executed. Even Constantin Palaiologos, Last Emperor of the Romans, is not considered as a saint, although he is consider one of our greatest national heroes and he was a true faithful Christian. These persons are respected by every Greek as heroes and patriots and they are honoured every year with major credits but not as saints.

Martyrs of Faith, very few people, are considered as Saints because their death was a testimony of their transcendental experiential relationship with God. Their death and/or their life was not of "this world".

I personally do not have any opinion over sanctification of Russian Royal Family, because I lack the knowledge and the experience that the Russian Church has.

I bow to the Russian Nation for being a model Christian Nation during the 20th century, going through phenomenal pogrom and showing to the rest Christian nations that the phrase of St Paul (Hebrews 13:14 ) “For here we have no lasting city, but we seek the city that is to come” was a living reality that was burning in their blessed hearts.

May God bless as all, through the prayers of His Saints.

Fr Raphael Vereshack
21-06-2005, 03:46 PM
The Royal Family was canonised by the Church precisely due to their martyric Christian attitude towards the suffering which God allowed in their lives. And this suffering was not just personal but also represented the turmoil which already was engulfing Russia and was about to cause her to plunge into the abyss of revolution.
In recent editions of Orthodox Life for example there are excerpts from the diary of the priest who served the Royal Family before they were finally removed from Tsarskoe Selo. This diary presents vividly the suffering the whole family went through those many months when they were basically incarcerated in the palace. It also reveals that the Royal Family had some sort of awareness of what ultimately awaited them. In face of all of this the priest (who heard the continuous confessions of the whole family) was extremely moved by their patience & lack of animosity. Tsar Nicholas also took upon himself responsability for what Russia was enduring.
In all of this one is struck by the amazing way in which the Family faced their ordeal in a truly Christian way. Although it is not stated specifically it is unimaginable that they could have preserved their inner stability to the extent they did without continuous prayer and deepening their lives in Christ. In like conditions of parents with children many of us would have compromised ourselves or suffered something like a nervous breakdown.
In Christ- Fr Raphael