Sunday, July 17, 2005
I DON'T GET IT
From the pen of Sandro Magister:
As for Moscow, which was at daggers drawn with the previous pope, Benedict XVI sent Cardinal Walter Kasper there to check out the situation ahead of time. However, he was not able even to meet with Patriarch Alexei II. The most critical point here is Ukraine. With more than five million faithful, the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church wants to transfer its headquarters from Lviv to the capital, Kiev, before the end of the year. The plan is to consecrate a new metropolitan cathedral there in October, which would have jurisdiction over almost the entire country. The Orthodox patriarchate of Moscow – most of whose faithful, vocations, and money are in Ukraine – sees this as an intolerable affront and is demanding that Benedict XVI block the move.
If unity can be brought about, wouldn't the Ukraine problem go away since both Russian Orthodox and Roman Catholic would then be sort of in the same Church?
It seems to me that the Orthodox argument here depends upon an assumption that the churches will continue a rivalry even after unity has been accomplished. I guess that assumption would be based on the relationship between the various Patriarchates, but isn't that difficulty expected to be resolved once unity is accomplished? Do I detect here an Orthodox assumption of business as usual even after official documents have been signed, meaning that a de facto schism will still be maintained?
But hey...I'm a babe in the woods where politics are concerned, as I've admitted on several occasions.
