Will Patriarch Kirill meet with Pope Francis again?

What can the Orthodox expect from a new meeting between the Patriarch of the Russian Orthodox Church and the Pope? Photo: UOJ

On October 4, 2021, the head of the Department for External Church Relations (DECR) of the Moscow Patriarchate, Metropolitan Hilarion (Alfeyev) of Volokolamsk, took part in a meeting of representatives of world religions, scientists and experts on the topic "Faith and Science: Towards COP 26" in the Vatican, where he voiced the position of the Russian Orthodox Church on environmental issues.

Patriarch Bartholomew also took part in the same event, which per se causes certain confusion in the minds of believers. Explaining this circumstance, Metropolitan Hilarion said, “Thirty-four religious leaders took part in the meeting, of which only two represented the Orthodox Churches – Patriarch Bartholomew and I. If it were not for me, he would have been the only representative of World Orthodoxy." That is, he kind of took credit for the fact that Patriarch Bartholomew was deprived of the opportunity to be the only participant in this event from Orthodoxy. But on the other hand, the question is quite pertinent: why did other Local Orthodox Churches choose not to send their representatives to the Vatican? Maybe, they are just more thorough in their approaching the issue of participation in joint globalist events, notably those organized by the Vatican?

On October 6, 2021, Pope Francis gave an audience to Metropolitan Hilarion in the Vatican, its centerpiece being, as it turned out, the organization of a new meeting between Patriarch Kirill and Pope Francis. During the audience, the head of the DECR, according to the Vatican News, “noted that since the meeting of the heads of the two largest Christian Churches in the world in Havana, their bilateral cooperation has been burgeoning. The active cooperation makes it possible to implement a considerable number of joint projects concerning the aid to persecuted Christians, defence of traditional values, social service in areas of education and culture."

Immediately the next day, on October 7, the Italian edition Corriere della Sera published an interview with Metropolitan Hilarion, in which he declared that the result of his negotiations with Pope Francis was an agreement to have another meeting of the pontiff with Patriarch Kirill, somewhere in neutral territory. At the same time, the head of the DECR said that preparations for this meeting were being conducted in the same secrecy regime as for the first meeting. “I think this meeting will take place, but we will only announce it a month or several months before the event. After all, the most important thing is not a meeting itself, but its results. The previous one bore good fruit,” Metropolitan Hilarion said, adding that the public learned about the Havana meeting only a week before it was held. Therefore, the head of the DECR explained such secrecy by his concern over the outcome of the meeting.

In the same interview, Metropolitan Hilarion said that at the first meeting in Havana, the Patriarch and the Pope opposed the union as a way of integrating confessions, which caused surprise and indignation among Ukrainian Greek Catholics: “And it is no coincidence that Ukrainian Greek Catholics were very unhappy with the meeting of the Pope and Patriarch and those words that sounded from their lips." It looks like an excuse for the first meeting, saying that it is a diplomatic victory for the Moscow Patriarchate. Let us recall that the joint statement following the results of the Havana meeting on the Uniates reads as follows: “We hope that our meeting will contribute to reconciliation where there are frictions between Greek Catholics and Orthodox Christians. Today it is obvious that the ‘Uniatism’ method of previous centuries, which presupposes bringing one community into unity with another by separating it from its Church is not the way to restore unity. At the same time, church communities that have emerged as a result of historical circumstances have the right to exist and do whatever is necessary to satisfy the spiritual needs of their faithful, striving for peace with their neighbors. Orthodox and Greek Catholics need reconciliation and finding mutually acceptable forms of coexistence."

The "Uniatism" method implies that the church community, passing to another confession, adopting a different doctrine and other rules of spiritual practice, retains the external forms of religiosity: architecture, vestments, liturgical regulations, etc. If one ponders over the words of the Joint Statement, it becomes clear that “Uniatism” is rejected as a way of “restoring unity”, but the very desire for unity is not rejected. In this phrase, one can even pick up the desire to look for other ways.

If one ponders over the words of the Joint Statement, it becomes clear that “Uniatism” is rejected as a way of “restoring unity”, but the very desire for unity is not rejected. In this phrase, one can even pick up the desire to look for other ways.

If you think about the words of the Joint Statement, it becomes clear that “Uniatism” is rejected as a way of “restoring unity”, but the very desire for unity is not rejected. In this phrase, you can even catch the desire to look for other ways.

This understanding is confirmed by the Greeting Message of Pope Francis on the occasion of the 30th anniversary of the establishment of apostolic administrations for Catholics of the Latin Rite in Russia, which they celebrated on October 10. Regarding the desire to come to unity, the Pope wrote the following: “In your space of the Eastern Christian tradition, it is important to continue to walk together with all Christian brothers and sisters, persistently asking the Lord for help in order to deepen our knowledge of each other and step by step to get closer to unity."

Results of the Havana meeting

The meeting of the heads of the Russian Orthodox Church and the Vatican in Havana took place on February 12, 2016 in Cuba, in the building of the Havana International Airport, and became the first in the history of the Russian Orthodox Church and the Vatican. Following the talks, a Joint Statement was adopted, in which the Patriarch and the Pontiff called for peace throughout the world and especially in the Middle East and for an end to the persecution of Christians. They also expressed concern over the development of biotechnology, spoke in favor of strengthening the family, and so on.

True, as a diplomatic victory, the DECR MP can take the credit for the following:

• the already mentioned statement about the Uniates;
• reference to the conflict in Donbas without mentioning specific parties with an appeal to believers not to participate in it;
• actual non-recognition of Ukrainian schismatics from the UOC-KP and the UAOC by Catholics.

But if you ask the question if these words were followed by concrete actions on the part of the Catholics, then the answer will be negative.

First, the Uniates continued to seize the churches of the UOC. Of course, the scale that we saw in the 90s is no longer there, but pinpoint raids continue. Suffice it to recall the impudent raiding in Kolomyia.

Secondly, the Uniates did not stop their creeping expansion through the territory of Ukraine. Their permeation into the authorities of various levels only grew. They expanded their cooperation in the field of spiritual care for military personnel, in the field of secondary and higher education and others. Moreover, the head of the UGCC, Sviatoslav Shevchuk, said that the Pontifical Council was incompetent in matters of international politics and "sensitive issues of Russian aggression in Ukraine."

Thirdly, nothing has changed about the conflict in Donbas since the Havana meeting. The Ukrainian Catholics of the Orthodox rite and personally Sviatoslav Shevchuk continue their narrative that we do not need peace at any cost, in fact calling for the continuation of the war. Suffice it to recall Shevchuk's statement that those who are tired of the war think only how to save their skin. The conflict in Donbas escalated or faded when the powers that be needed it, so they couldn’t care less about the statement of the Patriarch and the Pope.

If you ask the question whether the Catholics implement the Joint Declaration of the Pope and the Patriarch, then the answer will be negative.

Fourth, the schism in Ukraine was not only unsettled in accordance with the canons, but was completely legalized by Patriarch Bartholomew. The OCU was created from the UOC-KP and the UAOC, and Sviatoslav Shevchuk expressed great joy on this occasion, repeatedly met with its head Sergei (Epiphany) Dumenko, declared cooperation and expressed hope for future unification. The supporters of the OCU engaged in the seizure of the churches of the UOC, the beating of believers and priests and other unlawful acts, which did not cause a single note of condemnation with the Greek Catholics. In 2016, in Havana, the Patriarch and the Pope said, "We express the hope that the split among the Orthodox believers in Ukraine will be overcome on the basis of existing canonical norms, that all Orthodox Christians in Ukraine will live in peace and harmony." Today these words sound like mockery.

Actually, the Havana meeting did not bring any results in all other aspects: the war in the Middle East did not stop, Christians are still killed and expelled from their homes, biotechnology continued to develop, families did not cease to be destroyed, and so on. In February 2021, in an interview with the Russia 24 TV channel, Metropolitan Hilarion, summing up the five-year results of the Havana meeting, stated that they were zero. Here is a verbatim quote: “This meeting took place in Havana, and the conversation was not of a theological nature, but was devoted primarily to the situation of Christians in the Middle East. Five years have passed since then. It cannot be said that the position of Christians in the Middle East has changed for the better, with the possible exception of Syria, where, thanks to the actions of the Russian army, it was possible to expel terrorists from the main territory of the country. Together with the Catholic side, we are developing projects in the field of charity, social service, the cultural sphere ..." Consequently, there are no results even in these amorphously named areas, projects are still in the pipeline. And this is in five years!

Caution – ecumenism!

The absence of the results of the Havana meeting on the issues for which it was held (at least, it was declared so), exposed Patriarch Kirill to criticism from Orthodox people and the accusation of ecumenism. These accusations were quite harsh in form and sometimes even rude, sometimes of a clearly pronounced destructive nature, but were still not entirely unfounded. Thus, in the first paragraph of the Joint Statement it is said: “We have met with joy as brothers in the Christian faith ...” The question of "brotherhood" between Catholics and Orthodox is controversial, notably "according to the Christian faith." After all, the Catholic doctrine contains a number of heretical statements, and the holy Apostle Paul commands: "Warn a divisive person once, and then warn them a second time. After that, have nothing to do with them. You may be sure that such people are warped and sinful; they are self-condemned" (Titus 3: 10-11). Saint Basil the Great says in his interpretation of these words that one should “treat them as you would a pagan or a tax collector” (Matthew 18:17), although, on the other hand, we can always say that heretics are our brothers, only lost.

In paragraph 5, the Patriarch and the Pope speak of the separation as follows: “Despite the common Tradition of the first ten centuries, Catholics and Orthodox Christians have been deprived of communion in the Eucharist for almost a thousand years. We are separated by the wounds inflicted in the conflicts of the distant and recent past, separated by the differences inherited from our predecessors in understanding and expressing our faith in God, one in Three Persons – 
 the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. We grieve about the loss of unity, which was the result of human weakness and sinfulness ...”

There is annoyance at this "inconvenient" legacy, which boils down to "differences in understanding and explanation" of the doctrine of the Holy Trinity. However, Orthodoxy has always considered the Catholic doctrine of the procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father and the Son (filioque) not "differences in understanding", but a pernicious heresy and denounced it in rather harsh terms. For example, “Whoever, being a child and baptized in the Eastern Orthodox Church, does not confess in heart and mouth that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father alone, essentially and hypostatically, as Christ says in the Gospel; but in time from the Father and the Son, such will be excommunicated from our Church and anathematized” (Local Council of the Church of Constantinople, 1583). "The main heresy of the Latins is the Procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father and the Son" (Great Moscow Cathedral 1666-1667 with the participation of the Alexandrian and Antiochian patriarchs). Similar opinions can be found also among many of the holy fathers.

However, the divisions between Orthodox and Catholics are not limited only to the filioque heresy, they also relate to the Catholic dogmas of "purgatory", the Immaculate Conception of the Most Holy Theotokos, the doctrine of the legal theory of salvation, and the super-deserved merits of saints. The discrepancies are very significant in teaching about prayer practice, about delusions caused by extreme pride, about holiness, and so on. Patriarch Kirill and Pope Francis diplomatically kept silent about all this, but meanwhile, all these Catholic innovations and delusions are the huge array that Catholics must abandon in order to return to the faith that was common to them and the Orthodox in the first millennium. Are they ready to give up? The question is more of a rhetorical one.

In paragraph 6 of the Joint Statement, the Patriarch and the Pontiff declare: “Realizing the many obstacles to be overcome, we hope that our meeting will contribute to the achievement of the God-commanded unity for which Christ prayed. May our meeting inspire Christians all over the world to invoke the Lord with renewed zeal, praying for the complete unity of all His disciples." But after all, this God-commanded unity is not achieved at meetings where each of the interlocutors is sure of his righteousness, but it comes naturally when those who have backslid into schism repent of delusions and heresies.

From the above quotation, we can conclude that the meeting of the Patriarch of Moscow and the Pope of Rome is viewed by both of them as a contribution to the process of ecumenical unification. But then the next meeting announced by Metropolitan Hilarion will also have to become a contribution to this process? Furthermore, if we recall the protests on the part of some hierarchs and the church community regarding the first meeting with its zero results and ecumenical statements, then isn’t it consistent to assume that the response to this second meeting may be even more negative than to the former one? Why is Patriarch Kirill willing to take such a risk?

Patriarchate of Constantinople factor

The scheduled meeting of the Patriarch and the Pope is even more perplexing in view of the so-called “Phanar factor”. This factor is that the Patriarchate of Constantinople is currently concerned with solving two tasks: promoting its Ukrainian project of the OCU and uniting with the Vatican. The OCU project was created by Phanar on the initiative and with the active support of the US State Department, by violating both the canons of the Church and elementary common sense by Phanar. The implementation of this project brought suffering to the believers of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church and an actual split in Orthodoxy. Quite rightly and justifiably, the ROC and the UOC broke off Eucharistic communion with the Patriarchate of Constantinople. But at the same time, the Phanariots continue to actively promote the union with the Vatican. The dates for a possible unification have already been announced – the year of 2025, when the Church will celebrate the 1700th anniversary of the First Ecumenical Council.

In this context, for the ROC to engage in ecumenism with the Vatican, albeit not on such a scale as the Phanar, means supporting the course of development followed by the Patriarchate of Constantinople, pouring water on the mill of Patriarch Bartholomew. For the sake of what this is being done, it is not yet entirely clear.

Conclusions

First, answering the question in the title of the article, we can say that since the meeting between Patriarch Kirill and Pope Francis was announced at such a high level as the head of the DECR MP, this meeting is likely to take place.

Secondly, within the ROC, this meeting will cause a backlash, and Patriarch Kirill himself, not to mention Metropolitan Hilarion, will once again be accused of ecumenism. Moreover if the text of the future joint statement speaks again about the desired unity, about brothers in faith or about “Sister Churches", then this negative response can take on rather harsh forms.

Thirdly, in the UOC, the new meeting between the Pope and Patriarch Kirill will most likely be perceived with bewilderment. The reasons are the same – the previous one did not bring any success in "pacifying" our Uniates, rather the opposite. Besides, numerous public statements of the Pope and Bartholomew about the desire for unity will also hardly contribute to the understanding of the close relationship between the Primate of the Russian Orthodox Church and the head of the RCC among the Ukrainian believers and the hierarchy.

Fourth, like the previous Havana meeting, it will most likely be fruitless in protecting Christians worldwide, preventing conflicts, establishing peace, cultural, social and other spheres. Another joint statement with beautiful wordings will be adopted on all the above issues, but this is unlikely to bring anything else.

Of course, in church diplomacy (as well as in secular diplomacy), much is hidden from the eyes of ordinary people and not everything can be brought to the public plane. However, this diplomacy should produce results. For five years we have not seen what would be the use of the meeting in Havana, because the new meeting raises many questions. Especially if you remember, above all, that the main thing in any circumstances and events is to firmly preserve the Orthodox faith, its purity and intactness against all sorts of false teachings.

Read also