November, 2015 - Opus Publicum

November 6, 2015 Church

A Small Suggestion for the Year of Mercy

With the Year of Mercy fast approaching, allow me to make a suggestion. Use the sacrament of Confession liberally, and when you do, make sure it is with a priest of the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX).

In fact, let me be so bold as to suggest that you should only confess to an SSPX priest during the coming year. Given how eager faithful and orthodox Catholics are to show that they are 100% behind Pope Francis, what better way to demonstrate fidelity to the Pontiff than to embrace mercy from the only priestly society he singled out for it? Imagine. Instead of having to do a sit-down, face-to-face “confession” with a priest who will interrupt to say, “Oh that’s not a sin . . .” you can unburden your soul to a classically formed cleric willing to walk you through your struggles and apply an appropriate penance. And since you went through the trouble of going to a Society chapel to receive absolution, why not stay for Mass? Granted, there will be no guitars or extraordinary ministers present, but there will be the Holy Sacrifice; the Mystery of our Redemption; and Jesus Christ—Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity—on the altar, waiting to be received by those who approach with faith, reverence, and fear.

Pope Francis has offered a great gift to all the faithful. He has unburdened the consciences of a billion souls concerning the trivial question of the validity/invalidity of absolutions granted by SSPX priests. The question is, “Will you embrace the pathway to mercy the Pope has provided?” Perhaps the Sovereign Pontiff himself will take time in the next year to make a visit to Menzingen or Econe to be shriven. And maybe, just maybe, social media won’t explode with reminders that the Society is “schismatic.” What a mercy that would be.

November 5, 2015 Law

Metrojet Flight 9268 – A Preliminary (Legal) Remark

As most longtime readers are aware, I know a thing or two about international aviation law and have even ventured to comment on it from time to time (see, e.g., posts related to the Malaysia Airlines tragedy). News has now broken that Russian air carrier Metrojet Flight 9268 (7K9268), which crashed over Sinai last week, was likely brought down by a bomb planted by the so-called Islamic State (ISIS) or one of its affiliates. Nothing is 100% official yet, though United States and United Kingdom intelligence services are backing this conclusion. Russia and Egypt are not so sure.

It should come as no surprise that the apparent attack on 7K9268 is a crime under international law. The 1971 Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts Against the Safety of Civil Aviation (1971 Montreal Convention) expressly prohibits any act which endangers, damages, or destroys an international carrier, though arguably earlier air-crimes treaties and customary international law proscribed such actions as well. One of he purposes of the 1971 Montreal Convention was to ensure that air criminals would be either prosecuted or extradited, no matter where in the world they are apprehended (the classic principle of aut dedere aut judicare). Despite the hype around the air-crimes treaties, none of them impose an unbreakable obligation on their respective state parties to prosecute or extradite. Any state can have recourse to its national laws governing extradition to block the obligation. So, for example, a country which has a law prohibiting extradition to any state which imposes torture or the death penalty can evade the obligation. As for prosecution, that is left up to national authorities; they can take a walk if they so desire.

What this means is that there is no guarantee under international law that the perpetrator(s) of the 7K9268 attack will be brought to justice even if apprehended. While there would no doubt be intense diplomatic pressure for any apprehending state to comply with the principle of aut dedere aut judicare, it’s uncertain that it will, particularly if the domestic political costs for doing so are high. The only reliable recourse Russia has is to use its own resources, including military force, to track down and kill or capture those responsible.

I will likely write more on this as further information comes to light.

November 4, 2015 Church, Eastern Orthodox Church, Roman Catholic Church, Spirituality

Comparison: Russian Orthodox Eucharistic Discipline

With Eucharistic discipline being on the forefront of many Catholics’ minds these days, I thought it might be helpful—for the sake of some perspective—to take a brief look at the normative prescribed practice of the Russian Orthodox Church and her heirs. Although the Orthodox do not embrace a “clean distinction” between mortal and venial sin, serious sin has always been an impediment to receiving Holy Communion in the East. This is why those who regularly receive the Eucharist are encouraged, if not directed, to make frequent use of the sacrament of Confession and to spiritually prepare themselves in advance (more on this in a moment). In previous centuries, the demands of preparation, coupled with popular Eucharistic piety, meant that few people, other than monastics and clergy, took Communion more than a couple of times a year. During the course of the 20th Century, this situation began to change as (primarily Russian émigré) theologians like Fr. Alexander Schmemann began promoting the centrality of the Eucharist in the life and mission of the Church. Even before Schmemann’s time, however, St. John of Kronstadt—perhaps Russia’s first religious celebrity to gain worldwide notice—had begun encouraging the faithful to attend the sacraments more frequently in order to nourish themselves on the long journey to Heaven. While conservative Orthodox critics bemoaned what they saw as an erosion of discipline in the Church, today regular (though not necessarily weekly) Communion is commonplace.

November 4, 2015 Roman Catholic Church

Fortescue and the Centralized Papacy

You know, we have stuck out for our position all our lives—unity, authority, etc. Peter the Rock and so on. I have, too, and believe it, I am always preaching that sort of thing. And yet is it now getting to a reduction ad absurdum?

Centralisation grows and goes madder every century. Even at Trent they hardly foresaw this kind of thing. Does it really mean that one cannot be a member of the Church of Christ without being, as we are, absolutely at the mercy of an Italian lunatic?

. . . .

We must pull through even this beastliness somehow. After all, it is still the Church of the Fathers that we stand by and spend our lives defending. However, bad as things are, nothing else is possible. I think that when I look at Rome, I see powerful arguments against us, but when I look at the Church of England or Matthew or anyone else, I see still more powerful arguments for us. But of course, saving a total collapse, things are as bad as they can be. Give us back the Xth century Johns and Stephens, or a Borgia! They were less disastrous than this deplorable person.

– Fr. Adrian Fortescue, Letter to Herbert Thurston (Nov. 5, 1910), discussing Pope Pius X

November 3, 2015 Eastern Orthodox Church, Roman Catholic Church

A Brief Remark on Political Affiliation, East and West

The Pew Research Center has issued a new report, U.S. Becoming Less Religious. Go figure. Chapter 4 of the report, “Social and Political Attitudes,” contains some interesting numbers on shifts in Catholic and Orthodox political-party affiliation since 2007. The short and the long of it is that Catholics have begun stepping away from the Democratic Party to align with Republicans while the Orthodox have defected from both parties (albeit mostly from the Democrats) to become more independent or have no affiliation. Both Catholics and Orthodox have increased their support for smaller government . . . and same-sex marriage. There are other interesting factoids to glean from the report; those are the ones that jumped out to me.

Broadly speaking, Catholics and Orthodox match-up fairly well when it comes to contemporary American liberal values. In other words, both confessions are packed full of dissenters from fundamental Christian morality. Although I have repeatedly stated that, on average, American Orthodox bishops and priests are less heterodox than their Catholic counterparts, it doesn’t appear to have significantly influenced their faithful. Why that is the case is difficult to say, but a fascinating question nonetheless.

November 3, 2015 Eastern Orthodox Church, Roman Catholic Church

Speak of the Pope

Ethika Politika (EP) has undertaken a full-court press on behalf of Pope Francis. Yesterday, Andrew Haines, EP’s lead editor, laid into Catholics who are less-than-impressed with the recently concluded Extraordinary Synod on the Family and the direction in which Francis is taking the Church. Today, another EP editor, David Mills, chastises his coreligionists about their public (or even private) attitude toward the Pope. While Mills is right to observe that some of the negative rhetoric concerning Francis’s pontificate is extreme, he may be going too far in assuming that those who criticize the Pope strongly are only doing so in order to score sanctimony points. Many faithful Catholics are genuinely worried, if not panicked, about what Francis has allowed to transpire over the past two years because it is hindering the Church’s divine mission. Mills expresses worry about what non-Catholics might think when they hear sons and daughters of the Church speaking ill of Francis, but does he worry about what those same non-Catholics think when the Pope appears to undermine Catholic doctrine while failing to discharge his duties seriously?

Very few, if any, of my Eastern Orthodox friends and acquaintances are impressed with this Pope. Instead of seeing a man who is supposed to seriously lead 1.2 billion Christians to the Kingdom of Heaven, they find an inept chairman of the world’s largest and most dysfunctional NGO. His off-the-cuff remarks to pressmen and individual Catholics are oftentimes confusing, if not scandalous. His liturgical style is grotesque, not to mention anti-traditional, and his priorities seem to be directed at accommodating the Church to the ways of the world rather than saving souls. Although the Orthodox are not without their own faults, can anyone imagine Patriarch Kirill of Moscow—head of the world’s largest Orthodox jurisdiction—wagging his finger at those in his flock attached to traditional doctrine, liturgy, and piety? Is there a single Orthodox patriarch in the world—save Bartholomew of Constantinople—who behaves like Francis? Heaven forbid.

Mills wants Catholics to love the Pope as “their father.” The hard truth is that Francis does not project the authority, leadership, and love of a true father. He is the embarrassing loudmouthed uncle who is begrudgingly invited over on Thanksgiving. He’s family, so you love him; but you still hope your friends never see him.

November 2, 2015 Liturgy

Public Prayer

An acquaintance asked the other day how much of the Divine Office (Chasoslov or Horologion in the East) Orthodox and Byzantine Catholic priests are required to recite each day. My response: None…I think. Although a shell of its former self, the breviary—now commonly referred to as the Liturgy of the Hours (LOTH)—remains the cornerstone of a Latin priest’s prayer life. Failure to recite the office in full each day is a mortal sin, though it seems that some priests aren’t terribly concerned about that. For the Orthodox, the liturgical hours have always been, and remain, a true public work. Although some monastics, clergy, and pious laypersons recite some of the small hours privately as part of their individual prayer rules, the cornerstone offices, such as Matins and Vespers, are almost impossible to recite outside of a proper ecclesial setting. Attempts to make these offices “manageable” for individuals have been made, but not very successfully. Both the old Jordanville Chasoslov, along with the edition published by the Ruthenian Catholics in the 1940s, contain daily votive services that can be “plugged in” to Matins, the small hours, and Vespers each day. The fact that none of these services save one have been translated into English their irrelevancy, at least among Anglophone Orthodox and Greek Catholics.

None of this is to say that Eastern clergy have a “weak” or “lax” prayer life compared to their Latin brethren. The LOTH is not exactly a taxing rule. What the Byzantine Rite has not lost, and the Roman Rite surely needs, is the central importance of public prayer to the life of the Church. For most Catholics, that prayer is the Mass and only the Mass. If there is ever anything “more” it is typically a para-liturgical devotion such as the Rosary or a novena. There is nothing wrong with that per se, but for most of Church history reciting the Divine Office in choir was as natural as serving Mass. Today, unfortunately, that is simply not possible for most parishes to carry out all of the time, but why can’t more Latin churches strive to serve hours like Vespers and Compline at least some of the time? The easy answer is, “Because there’s no demand for it.” But the chances are there will never be a demand unless the clergy, in concert with dedicated members of the laity, create one.

November 1, 2015 Eastern Catholicism, Roman Catholic Church

Two Anniversaries on All Souls Day

According to the Gregorian Calendar as used in the Roman Rite, today, November 1, is the Feast of All Saints. It is also the 45th anniversary of the canonical erection of the Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) and the 71st anniversary of the repose of Venerable Andrey Sheptytsky, head of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church (UGCC) from 1901 until 1944. At the time when God called Venerable Andrey home to his heavenly reward, the Roman Rite—and the Latin Church as a whole—had not suffered the disastrous effects of the Second Vatican Council and the gross liturgical reforms which followed. Although the Slavo-Byzantine Rite as served within the UGCC had undergone some illegitimate deteriorations due to centuries of political and ecclesiastical pressure, Sheptytsky, with prudence and love, directed his church to reembrace its authentic liturgical heritage without attempting to alienate those who had grown accustomed to certain pious practices most commonly associated with Latin Catholicism. Although Sheptytsky’s vision has not yet been fully realized, there can be no doubt that the UGCC would not be where it is today liturgically without Venerable Andrey’s leadership, spiritual influence, and continuing prayers in Heaven.

Similarly, the traditional Roman Rite, long the treasure of Western Christendom, may very well have been lost altogether without the work of the SSPX and its prophetic founder, Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre. Like the Byzantine Rite among the UGCC, the Roman Rite has still not been perfectly restored within the Latin Church, but clear advances have been made, and a new generation of Latin Catholics, eager to build-up what the prior generations discarded so casually, can help complete this work in the light of Catholic tradition. Lefebvre, like Sheptytsky, knew that the heart of the Church is the Eucharist, the Bread of Life, which unites us in Christ and takes away all our iniquities. Without it, what are we? Dead souls in tattered, dirty robes.

Perhaps on this day you may join me in offering prayers for the canonization of both Metropolitan Andrey and Archbishop Marcel, a holy soul whom Pope-Emeritus Benedict XVI called “a great man of the Church.” They were true shepherds of the one Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church. May God send us more like them.