Weigel on Russia and Rome

I thought I would never find myself writing this . . . but three cheers for George Weigel! His latest piece at First Things, “Ecumenism and Russian State Power,” speaks forcefully in defense of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church against the half-truths and outright lies of the Moscow Patriarchate while calling on Rome to serious rethink ecumenical ties with the present representatives of Russian Orthodoxy. From the article:

No “dialogue” is worth the appeasement of aggression abetted by falsehood. Nothing is accomplished in terms of moderating Russian Orthodoxy’s historic deference to Russian state power (be that tsarist power, communist power, or the “managed democracy” of Mr. Putin) by giving Hilarion a platform like the Synod. And despite the fantasies of some Western pro-life and pro-family activists, there is nothing to be gained for those great causes in tandem with the current leadership of Russia, or of Russian Orthodoxy.

Stemming and then reversing the tide of Western decadence cannot be done by compromises with the truth.

Although I have some reservations concerning the Western-liberal lens through which Weigel views current events in Ukraine, his other piece, “Ukraine Rising,” at National Review Online is also worth reading.

Eastern Christian Books

My contributions to this web-log may be a bit spotty this week. As such, let me take a moment to highlight another corner of the blogosphere where you can direct your reading time: Professor Adam DeVille’s Eastern Christian Books. (You can read a brief profile on DeVille over at the Ochlophobist’s blog here.) Whether you’re trying to keep tabs on the latest Eastern Christian scholarship or looking for suggestions for your Christmas wish list, ECB is the place to go. ECB contains not only reviews of new Eastern Christian titles, but also interviews, commentaries, and pieces of DeVille’s own scholarship. Go forth and spend hours there.

Missing East

Given the heavier nature of the previous three posts, I thought I would post something more relaxed while also striving to answer a question that several people have posed to me over the years, namely, “Don’t you miss the Orthodox liturgy?” (Admittedly, this question has been pitched in various ways, some more “polemical” than others.) That question, when it comes from the Orthodox, is usually bound up with their not-incorrect sense that the Church of Rome, at this point in her storied and sometimes tumultuous history, is by and large a liturgical wasteland with only a handful oases to sustain the faithful.

Viewing the Lines Accurately

Isidore_of_Kiev

In my earlier post, “Weekly Reading,” I made mention of Metropolitan Hilarion Alfeyev’s (Russian Orthodox Church (ROC)) recent comments to the ongoing to the Catholic Church’s “Extraordinary Synod on the Family.” Instead of staying on point concerning the need for Catholics and Orthodox to hold a common front against modern secular culture, the good bishop of Russia used his address to attack the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church (UGCC) — a common theme for Russian prelates these days (see, e.g., here and here). An Orthodox friend of mine humorously likened Hilarion’s words to “a drunken best man saying something wildly inappropriate during the toast.” The Catholic web-log The Rad Trad posted a facetious agreement with Hilarion’s call to abolish “Uniatism.”

Regrettably, however, there still exists an unfortunate number of traditional Catholics (and some neo-Catholics) who have no compunction about fawning over the ROC and “Neo-Holy Russia.” Granted, there are some wonderful things about the ROC, particularly its liturgical patrimony and iconographic tradition. I have known — and still know — a good number of fine folks who belong to either the ROC or one of its “relative churches.” They may not see eye-to-eye with me on ecclesiastical and theological matters, but they are far from being promoters of xenophobia and bigotry. That’s true of many Orthodox Christians I know. As such, I want to make clear that when I write of the missteps, nay, idiocy of the ROC, I do not intend it as a swipe against faithful Orthodox believers. At the same time, however, it is necessary to make clear that the ROC is not a friend of the Catholic Church and will not be a friend of the Catholic Church until such time as it ceases its mad assault against our brethren in Ukraine. While we should hope and pray for the day when East and West, including the separated Oriental churches, are one, that is not a license for false romanticism. The ROC has drawn its line in the sand. Catholics now know where it stands without question. Are we sure we know where we stand?

Melkites at Vatican II

There has been a lot of renewed attention on the Second Vatican Council in recent years, prompted by both its various anniversaries (opening, sessions, closing) and Pope-Emeritus Benedict XVI’s calls to interpret the Council in continuity with tradition. Liberals, conservatives, and traditionalists have all weighed-in, offering up various histories, interpretations, and speculations — some far better than others. While I am sure some will accuse me of bias, I still think, pound for pound, Roberto de Mattei’s The Second Vatican Council: An Unwritten Story is the best of the “new” go-to texts on Vatican II. Some folks don’t like his traditionalist bent, but it’s hard to argue with his results.

With that noted, let me direct you to an older, but no less insightful, work that can contribute to our understanding of Vatican II: The Melkite Church at the Council. The full text, including PDFs of all of the chapters, is available from the Eparchy of Newton here. Originally published in French in 1967, this English-language edition, which came out in 1992, features an “Introduction” from the indefatigable controversialist Fr. Robert Taft. While he has much praise to heap on the Melkite Church for what it did (or tried to do) at the Council, Taft reveals what he wished the Council could have fully accomplished with the following:

Head of UGCC on Ukraine

His Beatitude Sviatoslav, head of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church (UGCC), has issued an open letter concerning the situation in Ukraine and the persecution of Greek and Roman Catholics, along with Protestants and non-Moscow Patriarchate Orthodox, in the so-called “separatist region” of the country. The letter also addresses the stream of invective which has been flowing out of the Moscow Patriarchate (MP) recently. Here is an excerpt:

The Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church Responds to Moscow

Once again, I wish I had more time to devote to this, but the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church (UGCC) has responded to Moscow Patriarch Kirill’s recent letter (discussed briefly here) which foists blame for alleged wrongdoings to Orthodox Christians on the UGCC and the independent Orthodox Kievan Patriarchate. I will leave it to you, dear readers, to compare the tone and contents of both epistles.

The Church of “It’s Everyone Else’s Fault”

The weekend is packed and I have an article to finish, but I couldn’t pass up drawing attention to the Russian Orthodox Church’s latest round of paranoid, hyperbolic criticism of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church (UGCC) and the independent Kievan Patriarchate (KP) of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church. In a letter to the other local Orthodox churches which was posted on, and then later removed from, the Moscow Patriarchate’s official website, Patriarch Kirill offers up a litany of accusations against the UGCC and KP with nary a mention of his own Church’s activities in the recently (and probably illegally) annexed Crimea. Kirill is also silent on the fact his priests have actively supported separatist in east Ukraine and that Russian Orthodox churches have served as ammunition depots for the rebels. You can read the full hypocritical text here

As always, pray for peace in Ukraine and the UGCC. Ask the Blessed Virgin and St. Nicholas — the Patron Saint of Ukraine’s Greek Catholics — for their intercession so that the Church of Christ may continue to prosper and grow in the lands of the Christian East. 

A Note on Latinizations

Today is the Feast of St. Charbel Makhluf, a Maronite monk known for his life of contemplative prayer and Eucharistic Adoration. Were he alive today and inclined to visit certain “Eastern Catholic” or “Byzantine Catholic” websites, he might be surprised to learn that piety toward our Lord in the Blessed Sacrament should not be emulated by Christians of the East, but rather reviled as a “Latinization.” That at least is the fashionable opinion of some Internet loudmouths who stumbled upon Eastern Christianity the day before yesterday and have now anointed themselves adjudicators of the “authentic” when it comes to the theology, spirituality, and liturgy of the Eastern churches in communion with Rome. They’re an obnoxious lot, but it seems their numbers may be on the rise as more and more boutique religious consumers, already bored with the fruits of Summorum Pontificum, seek ever more exotic and mysterious rituals to dabble in before either growing wise to their shallowness or, as has already happened with some notable liturgical fetishists out there, exiting the Catholic Church altogether. A large part of me wants to say, “Good riddance!,” but charity compels me to still hope they’ll recover some sense of what it means to be a Christian once their incense high wears off.