Opus Publicum -

October 12, 2015 Eastern Catholicism

Andrew Continues to Speak to the Synod

The heir of St. Peter may wish to remain silent, but the successors to the Holy Apostle Andrew will not be dissuaded from speaking the truth. Following on last week’s intervention by Patriarch Sviatoslav of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church, His Beatitude Fülöp Kocsis, Metropolitan Archbishop of the Archeparchy of Hajdúdorog and head of the Hugarian Greek Catholic Church, had this to say to the so-called Extraordinary Synod on the Family:

We must say with clarity that in our very spoilt world the family and the man of good will with good intentions is under attack, under a ferocious and enormous attack. And this attack is of the Devil. We must call these diabolic forces which have a role to play with these phenomena by name because this way we can find some indications even for the research of possible solutions.

“Our battle in fact is not against flesh and blood, but against the Principalities and the Powers, against the dominations of the dark world, against the spirits of evil that live in the celestial regions.” (Ephesians 6, 12)

Thus, we can clearly see that in reality a spiritual struggle is required in order to fight the attacks of Satan in these our times. I would very much see with favor a marked emphasis of this spiritual struggle, even in the final part of the document where the proposals and possible solutions must be formulated.

“Take therefore the armor of God, in order that you may resist in the evil day and remain firm after having overcome all of the obstacles.” (Ephesians 6, 12)

Read the rest of the good bishop’s words over at Voice of the Family.

October 12, 2015 Eastern Catholicism, Eastern Orthodox Church, Liturgy

The Ways of Greek Catholicism in the West – Liturgy

Note: This post is the overdue second part of the fairly subjective reflection I wrote last month, “An Opening Remark on the Ways of Greek Catholicism in the West.” This “installment” concerns liturgy.

October 11, 2015 Eastern Catholicism, Eastern Orthodox Church, Roman Catholic Church, Theology

Some Comments on Taft and Sister Churches

Archimandrite Robert Taft, S.J., retired professor at the Pontifical Oriental Institute and world-renowned liturgical scholar, continues to vex some Catholics (mainly of a traditionalist variety) with his promotion of what he perceives to be Roman Catholicism’s new “Sister Churches” eccesiology. Taft’s most recent restatement of this position, “Problems in Anaphoral Theology,” 57 St. Vladimir’s Theological Quarterly 37 (2013), runs like this:

The Catholic Church considers [the Oriental Orthodox and Eastern Orthodox Churches to be] “Sister Churches,” which despite their rejection of communion with Rome, are ancient Churches tracing their roots, like those of the Roman Communion, to Apostolic Christianity, and are recognized by Rome as possessing the full panoply of what makes them merit the title “Church” as Catholics understand it: a valid apostolic episcopate assuring their apostolic heritage of valid Baptism, Eucharist, and other sacraments and means of salvation to sanctify their flocks.

Note that this new “Sister Churches” designation describes not only how the Catholic Church views those Orthodox Churches. It also represents a startling revolution in how the Catholic Church views itself. Previously, the Catholic Church saw itself as the original one and only true Church of Christ from which all other Christians had separated for one reason or another in the course of history and held, simplistically, that the solution to divided Christendom consisted in all other Christians returning to her maternal bosom. But the Vatican II Council, with an assist from those Council Fathers with a less naïve view of their own Church’s past, managed to put aside this self-centered, self-congratulatory perception of reality.

October 11, 2015 Church

Saving The Remnant

The Remnant, the Matt family apostolate which has provided news and commentary to traditional Catholics for nearly 50 years, is in serious trouble. Last week, regular columnist and lawyer Christopher Ferrara issued an urgent appeal to raise one million dollars to keep the newspaper (and its accompanying website) alive. Whether it will meet that goal or not remains to be seen. Having both contributed an article to the paper and previously subscribed, I can say without reserve that I have no interest whatsoever in seeing it fold. I do believe, however, that its survival, and the survival of many traditional Catholic endeavors, depends on refreshing what Catholic tradition means. Gone are the days when traditionalists can speak fondly of “the good old days”; most now living have no recollection of them. Moreover, simpleminded dismissals of certain theological and liturgical currents in the name of keeping alive a conception of both which is historically and intellectually untenable no longer flies. But most important of all, it is time for Catholic tradition to be presented in a positive, upbuilding manner, free of polemical potshots, hyperbole, and useless griping. Yes, the Church is in the midst of a grave crisis and our society has fallen into darkness, but neither abysmal fact provides any soul the right to suspend fundamental Christian charity.

October 10, 2015 Eastern Catholicism, Eastern Orthodox Church, Roman Catholic Church

Four Uncontroversial Paragraphs for Saturday

The ongoing dispute among traditionalist Roman Catholics concerning the background of one Bishop Ambrose Moran (see here, here, and here) has brought back into the open how little some (perhaps many) traditionalists understand the Christian East—Catholic or Orthodox. While some traditionalists revel in referring to the Orthodox as “schismatics,” it is worth noting that no official papal decree, at least from the time of Blessed Pius IX’s 1846 letter to the Eastern Christians to the present day, uses that expression. Moreover, anyone with at least cursory knowledge of East/West relations since 1054 knows—or ought to know—that the “Great Schism” was not a singular event which neatly split the Church of Christ in two. For centuries following the Schism, Catholics and Orthodox continued to intercommune in various parts of the world up to the point when Constantinople fell to the Turks. And even after that cataclysmic event, “on the ground” cooperation and intercommunion continued in parts of the Middle East. The past century of strife in Eastern Europe, starting with the Soviet Revolution and continuing with the present crisis in Ukraine, Catholics and Orthodox have found themselves ministered to by each other’s clergy. Although none of this obviates the sad fact that Catholics and Orthodox are not in visible communion, this history is worth keeping in mind before proceeding to speak “authoritatively” on the status of Orthodoxy, the nature of its disagreements with Rome, and the disposition of the Orthodox faithful.

October 8, 2015 Eastern Catholicism

Andrew Has Spoken Through Sviatoslav

As we witness the fruits of the Extraordinary Synod on the Family blossom, fertilized in no small part by the dung of neo-Ultramonantism, let us not forget that the Church of Christ has been provided with more than just one successor to the Apostles.

Today I have to affirm that, in the past, the family defended and preserved the Church. Today the Church has a sacred duty to protect and preserve the family; the family as the faithful, fruitful, and indissoluble union between a man and a woman.

My faithful asked me to appeal to the Synod Fathers to remember that we, the bishops are not the masters of the revealed truth about the family, but rather its’ servants. Today, our people expect from us to confirm and emphasize the Church’s teaching on the family, clarified and summarized by blessed Pope Paul VI and Pope John Paul II.

Holy and devout families, strengthened in faith, find, on their own, the most creative ways to answer the challenges of modern society and teach us how to show mercy to those who are experiencing difficulties. We can not solve all the problems with which the world is trying the family, but we can preach the Gospel Truth about the family and help the next generation, with God’s help to go forth along the path to holiness.

– His Beatitude Sviatoslav Shevchuck, Patriarch of Kyiv-Halych and All Rus, Remarks to the Synod Oct. 6, 2015

October 6, 2015 Eastern Orthodox Church, Roman Catholic Church

Two on Orthodoxy and Catholicism

Two fresh items on Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy recently caught my eye, so I thought I might call attention to them both.

The first, Fr. Mark Drew’s Catholic Herald article “What Catholics Can Learn From Orthodox Synods,” covers in detail a topic I dealt with in Crisis last year, namely synodality. Fr. Drew is less skeptical toward the synodal model than I, though my position on the matter has softened due to current events. Some disparage the Orthodox synodal model as too decentralized, limited in scope, and ineffective. However, in the light of ongoing Extraordinary Synod on the Family in Rome, there are no doubt more than a few Catholics praying for a muted outcome to the proceedings. Where I disagree with Fr. Drew is how much Orthodoxy—or, for that matter, Catholicism—really needs centralization, at least in its current Roman manifestation. It is far from clear that Pope Francis truly believes in synodality, and his role as the guardian of the Faith has come under scrutiny in light of numerous statements (some, admittedly, off-the-cuff) which seem freighted with doctrinal confusion. Moreover, given the vast number of bishops in the Roman Church who routinely fail to uphold the Church’s indefectible teachings, providing them with greater doctrinal authority would be highly imprudent at this juncture. Of course, the Orthodox have largely left doctrine alone for the past millennium, which has not been an entirely bad thing at all.

Second, my friend Elliot Milco has written a thoughtful reply to my recent tweet asking why Catholics choose not to convert to Eastern Orthodoxy. I should note that the point of my tweet was not to challenge Catholics on this, but rather to gain a better understanding of the matter. Not too long ago many Catholics I knew who had seriously contemplated Orthodoxy claimed that the absence of a central authority figure (the pope) and Orthodoxy’s approach to remarriage compelled them not to leave. Now, however, Pope Francis has cleared the way for what some are calling “Catholic divorce” with a process which appears to be less exacting than what certain Orthodox jurisdictions follow when granting marriage dissolutions. As for the papacy, it’s hardly breaking news to point out that many conservative and traditional Catholics are less than thrilled with Francis’s pontificate and the new style of Ultramontanism which accompanies it. Milco addresses these matters and more, and I thank him for taking the time to do so.

October 6, 2015 Eastern Catholicism, Eastern Orthodox Church

Bishop Ambrose Moran – The Plot Thickens

I apologize (slightly), but I’ve become intrigued by the case of one Bishop Ambrose Moran whose murky background and somewhat preposterous story of being consecrated a bishop by Patriarch Josyf Slipyj has sent several persons — myself included — digging into the complicated history of late-20th Century Eastern Christianity. As I stated in my previous post on the matter, it appears that Ambrose was never a member of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church (UGCC), either as a priest or a bishop. This has not stopped Ambrose from trying to shore up his tale, however. A new web-log, presumably run by the good bishop, has now popped up with photos and documents which superficially appear to support his claim to both UGCC incardination and episcopal consecration. It has been noted, however, that the “William Moran” whose name appears on some of the documents and whose pictures have been used may not in fact be Ambrose Moran, but rather a brother or some other relative. How that all shakes out remains to be seen.

What can be seen right now, however, is Bishop Ambrose (Amvrosij)’s website for the Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church in the USA, which seems to have been his “ecclesiastical home” prior to aligning himself with the Roman Catholic traditionalist movement known as the “Resistance.” Three quick points need to be made here.

First, the Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church in the USA is not the same as either the Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church (UAOC) or the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the USA (UOC-USA). The UAOC is an independent Orthodox church without canonical recognition while the UOC-USA is under the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople. Although there are some who believe Ambrose was, for a time, associated with the UAOC, this information cannot be verified with any certainty at this point.

Second, the mailing address for Ambrose’s Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church in the USA is a PO Box located in Buena Vista, Colorado. Buena Vista is the home of the so-called Genuine Orthodox Church of America (GOCA), a hub for vagante Orthodox bishops. Ambrose was at one time received into the GOCA, though it appears he has parted company with them.

And last, no member of the UGCC I have contacted has ever met Bishop Ambrose, and only one had any knowledge of him period. As more concrete information comes to light, I will be sure to post it in due course.

October 5, 2015 Law, Politics

Augustus Sol Invictus

For a variety of reasons I miss teaching, and not just because I think young and impressionable minds ought to be subjected to my every intellectual whim and fancy. (That’s what blogs are for.) I miss it because teaching provided me with both the chance to sharpen my thinking on the subjects I taught (primarily aviation and trade law) and to interact with a fairly diverse group of students who routinely brought a surprising amount of intellectual energy to the classroom. I know not every professor, former or current, can say that, even at the law school level. Having had the luxury of teaching niche international-law classes which, generally speaking, attracted students with a genuine enthusiasm for the material, I doubt that my five years as a faculty fellow at DePaul University College of Law were in any sense typical. Adding to the atypical dynamic of my time at DePaul were the personalities of certain students, perhaps none more fascinating and offsetting than that of Augustus Sol Invictus. Yes, you read his name right, and if you have been following the news, then you know he is not only running for Marco Rubio’s former U.S. Senate seat, but apparently sacrificed a goat and drank its blood, too.

It is not my intention to speak in any depth on the personality or academic performance of Augustus. The former is apparent enough from his various YouTube videos, interviews, and Internet scribblings; the latter is nobody’s business. What fascinates me is what his “political orientation”—a strange brew of libertarianism and neo-paganism—says about the failure of American political ideology, one which historically took the liberal ethos and attempted to fuse it with Christianity (or, at least, Christian religious symbolism). Based on a perusal of Augustus’s writings, housed at his law firm’s website, it seems he is attaining to libertarianism’s apotheosis, namely the freedom from all reasonable constraint without any horizon or vision. Of course, there exists a tension between Augustus’s libertarian politics and neo-paganism. For while the libertarian wants a life free of demands and full of entertainment—the very thing which nauseated Carl Schmitt enough to come out swinging against liberalism in his seminal work The Concept of the Political (a book Augustus has perhaps read)—the pagan’s (though perhaps not the neo-pagan?) existence has cosmological meaning, albeit of a fated variety. Augustus, the good libertarian, doesn’t want fate; he just wants Lebensraum for guns and narcotics.

This confusion of the spheres is not entirely Augustus’s fault. Having been subjected to a run-of-the-mill undergraduate experience coupled with a “legal education” (I use that expression lightly given the current orientation of most law schools), he’s no doubt been taught how to huff hard the paint-thinner of secular-liberal ideology while embracing his “individuality.” That stab at individualism seems to have decayed ironically into an unspectacular internalization of the worst aspirations of American culture. Many may be nauseated by some of Augustus’s extracurricular activities, to say nothing of his personal beliefs, but he is fighting—or grandstanding—to defend them. He’s doing the same for society’s intermundane desire for six figures, semi-automatic rifles, good coke, 1.3 kids, and a porn-packed iCloud as well. Who are we to judge? We deserve him representing us.