| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
__ FOLLOW UP_____________________________
New Developments on Stories Featured in Catholic World Report
Showdown averted; minister resigns
Vatican Radio stays on the air
Willer Bordon, the environmental minister of the Italian government, had threatened to shut down Vatican Radio by May 12: a date that fell, not coincidentally, just one day before Italy’s general elections. But when the deadline passed, Vatican Radio was still in business, and Bordon was not.
In a political confrontation that had stretched through the spring of 2001, Bordon had threatened to cut off electrical service to the Vatican Radio broadcasting facility, arguing that the station was violating the tight new Italian restrictions on electromagnetic emissions. These emissions, he said, were a threat to public health. The Vatican responded with three arguments:
1) that the station’s broadcasts fell well within the parameters set by European law, if not the stricter Italian standards;
2) the Vatican Radio facility is recognized under Italian law as the property of the Holy See, and therefore falls under the provisions of the Lateran treaty that exempt Vatican territory from Italian law; and
3) in any case, there is no scientific evidence that electromagnetic radiation is a threat to the health of the community.
Early in April, as the Church-state dispute continued, Vatican spokesman Joaquin Navarro-Valls said it was unfortunate that “alarmist” statements clouded the issues, but pointed out to reporters that Vatican Radio had reduced the strength of its broadcast emissions by 50 percent. He added that a joint commission of Italian government representatives and Vatican officials continued to discuss the matter, and the Vatican broadcast station is “committed to reducing the duration of emission—to take into account the thresholds established by ministerial decree.”
Bordon immediately rejected that argument, saying that Vatican Radio’s offer to cut the strength of the electromagnetic signals was “absolutely insufficient.” He announced that he would cut off electrical supplies to the station if the broadcasters did not comply with the new regulations. But other members of the ruling coalition were less anxious for a confrontation with the Holy See. Prime Minister Giuliano Amato postponed the showdown, announcing that his government would not enforce Bordon’s deadline.
Later in April, as Bordon and his allies continued their propaganda campaign against Vatican Radio, an explosive device was discovered on the grounds of the broadcasting facility. Although Vatican officials chose to remain silent about the bomb—which was apparently a dummy, not rigged to explode —Italian newspapers revealed on Friday, April 27, that the device had been found on Vatican Radio property a week earlier.
In an unsigned message to Italian newspapers claiming responsibility for having planted the bomb, an anti-Catholic group said the device was intended as a “warning” to Vatican Radio, as well as a protest against the “arrogance” of the broadcaster.
If the bomb threat illustrated the depth of hostility toward the Vatican among environmentalist extremists, the persistence of Willer Bordon reminded Italian Catholics that the same sort of hostility could be found within the country’s ruling coalition. The environment minister set a new deadline at the end of April, and as the month ended he visited the neighborhood of the Vatican Radio facility to announce that the broadcasting station “is still violating the law,” and to call for “drastic” action against the facility.
On May 4, after a series of deadlines announced by Bordon had passed, the Italian Council of Ministers disclosed that the government had reached an agreement with the Holy See, essentially accepting a proposal from Vatican Radio to reduce the length and strength of its broadcast signal.
Willer Bordon, once more branding the Vatican offer as “absolutely unsatisfactory,” announced his resignation from the cabinet. One week later, the government he had served was soundly defeated in Italy’s national elections, and the dispute over Vatican Radio broadcasts seemed likely to recede into its proper place as a minor footnote in Italian political history.
Skirmishing continues before Pope’s visit Orthodox leaders vie for power
As Pope John Paul II prepares to visit Ukraine in June, the latest developments in that country underlined the ecumenical disputes which the Holy Father will be forced to address. The Russian Orthodox Patriarchate of Moscow renewed its support for one of the three different groups vying for recognition as the authentic voice for the Orthodox faithful of Ukraine. And Pope John Paul II made his own bid to ease Orthodox hostility toward his visit.
In mid-April, a spokesman for the Russian Orthodox Church announced that the Moscow Patriarchate would be willing to grant independent status to the Ukrainian Orthodox bishops who are affiliated with Moscow. In an interview with the Italian daily Avvenire, the official said that the Moscow Patriarchate could foresee “an evolution leading to autocephalous status for the Ukrainian Church.” That development would be “normal and justifiable,” said Nikolai Balashov.
However, the Russian official also observed that the Orthodox bishops of Ukraine are “not unanimous” in their support for independent status. Some bishops wish to remain under the jurisdiction of the Moscow Patriarchate, Balashov said. The Orthodox Church in Ukraine is currently split into three factions. The Moscow Patriarchate recognizes only one of these factions, and characterizes the other two—which do not recognize the leadership of the Moscow Patriarchate—as “schismatic.” Balashov’s remarks involved only the Orthodox bishops who remain loyal to Moscow.
There are about 12 million Orthodox believers under the leadership of Metropolitan Vladimir of Kiev, the prelate recognized by Moscow as spiritual leader of the Ukrainian faithful. His chief rival, Patriarch Filaret of Kiev, has about 6 million followers. There are also nearly 6 million Catholics in the country, most of them members of the Byzantine-rite Ukrainian Catholic Church.
Questioned by Avvenire about Moscow’s opposition to the scheduled June visit by Pope John Paul II to Ukraine, Balashov remarked:
No one denies the Pope’s right to visit any country, but if the head of the Church of Rome meets with the schismatic representatives of the Orthodox Church in Ukraine, that would have a negative affect on the community of Orthodox faithful.
Catholic initiatives
Later in April, the Holy See published the text of a message from Pope John Paul II to Orthodox Metropolitan Vladimir of Kiev, proposing a joint Catholic-Orthodox commission to resolve tensions between the two churches.
The Pope’s letter, written on March 26, was conveyed to the Orthodox prelate by Cardinal Roberto Tucci, SJ, who handles advance planning for papal trips. It was a response to the message which Metropolitan Vladimir sent in January, in the name of the Ukrainian Orthodox bishops loyal to the Moscow Patriarchate, asking the Pontiff to postpone his plans for a June visit to Ukraine. Pope John Paul wrote that he would like to meet with Metropolitan Vladimir during his visit—which, the Vatican has made clear, will go ahead as scheduled on June 23-27.
However, on his official web site, Metropolitan Vladimir announced that a meeting with the Pope would be “impossible.” Metropolitan Vladimir said that he told Cardinal Tucci that he could not meet with Pope John Paul because the Orthodox synod opposes the papal visit. Meanwhile, Patriarch Filaret of Kiev (who has denounced, and been denounced, by the Moscow Patriarchate), has indicated that he will be ready and willing to welcome Pope John Paul.
The Pope has emphasized that the purpose of his visit is to “meet the Ukrainian Catholics—very numerous and well established in the country—and confirm them in their faith.” Tensions between Ukrainian Catholics and their Orthodox neighbors have been keen in recent years, especially since the fall of Communism allowed the Byzantine-rite Ukrainian Catholic Church to emerge from years of repression. Orthodox leaders—especially those who are recognized by the Moscow Patriarchate—have bitterly complained that Ukrainian Catholics are attempting to gain converts and seize church buildings in traditionally Orthodox areas. Ukrainian Catholics respond that they are merely trying to reclaim the property that was confiscated by the Stalinist regime.
Cardinal Lubomyr Husar, the leader of the Ukrainian Catholic Church, believes that the June visit to his country by Pope John Paul II will bring positive results. Cardinal Husar, whose Major Archdiocese of Lviv is the center of the Byzantine-rite Ukrainian Catholic Church, hopes that the Pontiff will meet with Orthodox Patriarch Filaret of Kiev during his visit.
Despite opposition to the papal trip among the Orthodox affiliated with the Moscow Patriarchate, the Ukrainian Catholic leader predicted: “the majority of Orthodox are disposed to dialogue, and will not slam the door in the Pope’s face.”