Contra Beeler’s Gross Inaccuracies

I have never met nor had much communication with John Beeler (“The Young Fogey”). Sometimes I would glance at his web-log, A Conservative Blog for Peace, or peruse the comments he would make here on Opus Publicum, but that’s about it. So imagine my surprise when I noticed a trickle of traffic coming my way from a post which attempts to both make fun of me and criticize views I simply do not hold. Although I have endeavored to ignore the public commentary on Beeler’s moral and psychological shortcomings, I find it difficult to ignore his intellectual ones in this instance. For those uninterested in cross-blog arguments, feel free to ignore the rest of this post. However, aside from setting Beeler straight, I hope that it will clarify some of my views—views which I admit have been subject to revision, correction, and realignment over the years thanks to thoughtful and intelligent criticism from friends and strangers alike.

A Comment on “Unia”

Strange I never saw it before, but a friend directed me to an apparently defunct blog, The Holy Unia. The title pretty much gives away the game in terms of its orientation and, to be frank, much of the content isn’t terribly inspiring. Although the blog disclaims any affiliation with the Society of St. Pius X or its eastern affiliate, the Society of Josaphat, the tone is similar—which is fine. What’s less fine, or at least less clear, is what, if anything, is to be made of the site’s “mission.” It seems that there is still an inclination on the part of some to see “Uniatism,” that is, the incremental reunification of Eastern churches through the establishment of parallel sees, as the only acceptable model of bringing Catholicism and Orthodoxy (Eastern or Oriental) together. That hasn’t exactly been the way of things for some time now. No, the Balamand Statement does not carry much (or any) magisterial heft for Catholics, but as a “policy paper” it effectively put an end to “Uniatism.” So what then is the next step? If one follows the line proposed by Fr. Robert Taft to its logical conclusion, it would seem that what the Catholic Church “should do” is simply recognize the Orthodox Church as a true, particular church; offer full reciprocal communion to any local Orthodox church that will accept it; and lay aside almost every substantive theological disagreement the two parties have (or at least think they have). It’s a radical vision, and not one likely to come into being any time soon. Not only are most local Orthodox churches unlikely to accept such an offer, but Roman chauvinism isn’t dead—just ask the Eastern Catholics.

The Difficult Path to Unity

Despite some hopes last week that the three Assyrian churches may be on the path to unity following an open letter from Chaldean Catholic Patriarch Louis Raphael offering to resign his patriarchal title, it seems there is still a long way to go. Byzantine Texas has posted the Assyrian Church of the East’s detailed, firm, but charitable response. Anyone with any interest in East/West relations or, more accurately, Catholic/Oriental (or Catholic/Orthodox) relations should pay It a careful read.

I make mention of it here not to ignite pointless bickering but because I believe the letter does a splendid job articulating the real barriers that lie in the way of full ecclesial communion between the See of Rome and the separated Eastern churches. Too often these discussions (at least online) devolve into nitpicking over trivial matters with no deep-rooted doctrinal significance. Far too many Orthodox, and not a few traditional Catholics, relish this. Why? What is to be gained? No, the truth should never be compromised — a point the Assyrian Church repeats several times in the aforementioned letter. However, the pursuit of truth could stand to come packaged with a lot more humility from all sides.

I sincerely hope and pray for the day when the Assyrian churches will find unity just as I hope and pray for the day when Catholics and Orthodox lay down their arms, repent of past sins, and restore full ecclesiastical communion. With God, all things are possible.

Schmemann on Orientalium Ecclesiarum

The late Fr. Alexander Schmemann’s wry remarks to the New York Times following his return from the Second Vatican Council are well known. Less well known, it seems, are his thoughts on the Council’s Decree on Eastern Catholic Churches (Orientalium Ecclesiarum). The full text of the decree with Fr. Alexander’s response is available online here. For those interested only in Schmemann’s words, I have taken the liberty of quoting them in full below. My brief remarks follow.

Blessed Holy Friday

The-Taking-down-from-the-Cross

I want to take this opportunity to wish all of my Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, and Eastern Catholic readers celebrating according to the Julian Calendar a blessed Holy Friday. May this time of sorrow prepare you for the unspeakable joys of Pascha and the new life we all seek to find through our Lord’s Glorious Resurrection from the dead.

Sunday Remarks on “Ukrainian Fascism,” Catholicism, and Russian Orthodoxy

Put “Ukraine” and “fascist” into Google (or Bing) and prepare for a torrent of hyperbolic hits, and a few sane ones as well. There is no shortage of “well-sourced stories” from mainstream news sites, Leftist rags, and, of course, Eastern Orthodox web-logs claiming that Ukraine, or at least all of Ukraine except the “Holy Russian” eastern portion of the country, is in the hands of fascists. Take for instance Alex Gordon’s latest contribution to the socialist news source The Morning Star. Although the headline indicates that the article concerns NATO’s role in fostering Ukrainian fascism, the actual product amounts to little more than smear journalism that fails to make elemental distinctions between far-right, fascist, and Neo-Nazi political movements and positions. Granted, in the murky world of Eastern European politics the lines sometimes blur easily, but not so easily that movements which are consciously nationalistic are automatically racist or genocidal. Gordon’s article also contains manifest untruths, such as claiming that Stepan Bandera, a Ukrainian nationalist hero and Greek Catholic, “murdered thousands of Ukrainian Jews and Poles during World War II.” He did nothing of the sort and was, in fact, interned in a Nazi concentration camp when Ukrainian-backed atrocities took place in the country.

On Owen White to Orthodoxy

Despite many requests, I have never finished drafting a piece concentrating on why I chose to leave Eastern Orthodoxy for the Catholic Church four years ago. Some of my reasons have been woven into various blog posts, comboxes, e-mail exchanges, and Facebook threads, though I have kept several things to myself. When asked, either in person or privately online, to say a few words on the topic, I am usually willing to do so unless I get the sense that it’s nothing more than an invitation to a pointless back-and-forth. There may come a time when it is appropriate to write in more detail on what happened during Lent 2011, just as there may come a time to engage the more complicated questions about why I fell away from Catholicism in college, how I came back to Christianity, and what brought me to the Orthodox Church in the first place. The only reason to discuss those matters at all is if it might be of benefit to someone who is struggling to hold on to their faith amidst a storm of understandable, though ultimately unpersuasive, doubts. As for the question of choosing Rome over Constantinople (or Moscow), that’s harder to engage in a fair-minded manner. Most conversions occur for reasons which are neither easily explained nor objectively clear. Some compensate by peppering their tales with store-bought piety. Others opt for boldness, claiming that their intellectual rigor has brought them to the indisputable truth of Catholicism (or Orthodoxy). Maybe that’s happened a few times since the Great Schism, but I have my doubts.

Feria Quinta infra Hebdomadam II in Quadragesima

A priest—an Eastern Orthodox priest—once told me that the devil rides us extra hard during Lent. It is an observation I have repeated many times, probably because it is the most accurate thing any cleric has ever told me. All of my Orthodox Lents save one were difficult personally and professionally. That was enough to ensure I reaped very little spiritually during the 40 Days plus Holy Week. Then came Holy Saturday, the Book of Jonah, a long nap on the couch, and, finally, the Paschal Homily of St. John Chrysostom. If my spirit didn’t lighten at that moment, it did shortly thereafter amid cries of Christ is risen! (English, Greek, Slavonic, etc.) and the chanting of “The Angel Cried.” Each year I would think to myself how wonderful it would be if, by next Lent, I might be that man from the homily who labored from the ninth or sixth hours rather than the eleventh. It never quite happened that way. I may have started out at the first hour, but it was inevitable that I’d go AWOL for a time before the gate was shut. And then one Lent, some four years ago, I went missing and never came back. The gate—the eastern gate that looks particularly wide and inviting compared to all the other eastern gates—was shut, never to be opened to me again.

Second Sunday

Liturgical calendars across rites and usages are such a bother to follow, but knowing something about them helps spare one such terrible embarrassments like wishing an Orthodox friend, “Blessed feast of St. Gregory Palamas!” when, in fact, yesterday was “Triumph of Orthodoxy” Sunday. By the liturgical light of those Eastern Catholics who hold to both the Byzantine Rite and the Gregorian calendar, Palamas was up for praise over the weekend; processing with icons had already come and gone.

A Postscript on St. Gregory of Narek and the New Coptic Martyrs

All good things must come to an end, including my accidental series of posts on St. Gregory of Narek and the 21 New Coptic Martyrs (see here, here, and here). Before taking leave of this topic, I must state in no uncertain terms that neither my belief that the 21 men murdered by the Islamic State over a week ago are genuine martyrs, nor my unwillingness to descend into hysterics over St. Gregory of Narek’s elevation as a Doctor of the Church, is indicative of indifferentism. That all of the Apostolic churches — Orthodox and non-Orthodox — should be one with the See of St. Peter is a point of hope and prayer from which I have never reneged. The failure of some to draw a simple distinction between how the Catholic Church treats matters related to these separated churches and, say, Protestant and non-Christian sects is baffling. As Fr. Aidan Nichols, O.P has argued in Rome and the Eastern Churches (2d ed. Ignatius Press 2010) and elsewhere, the Orthodox — and by extension the other Oriental churches — should be Rome’s primary ecumenical partner. Although I remain critical of the way in which Rome has, at times, approached one or more of these separated churches, particularly when these approaches have come at the expense of the sui iuris Catholic churches already in full communion with her, I see no point in waging an endless polemical battle against the Orthodox and Oriental churches. Yes, there are genuine doctrinal, theological, and ecclesiological disagreements which have to be dealt with. Yes, some of these are more complicated than others. However, if real progress toward reunification is to be made, it must be made with charity and humility, not invective and triumphalism.