Orthodoxy

, , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Podcast: The New York Times misses some key voices as Ukraine prepares for Pascha

, , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Podcast: The New York Times misses some key voices as Ukraine prepares for Pascha

I have said it before and I will say it again: If I could pick a major event from my life and live it over again — knowing what I know now — it would probably be the trip that I took to Moscow in 1991, arriving the week after the events that ended the Soviet Union.

There were still flowers on the sidewalks (near our hotel) where protesters were killed by Soviet tanks. There were Orthodox icons, as well. I was an evangelical Anglican, at that time, and really didn’t grasp the importance of many of the Orthodox people and places I encountered during that stay. I was there as part of the Moscow Project, an effort to help the emerging Russian Bible Society print 4 million Bibles.

One moment, in particular, was relevant to our discussion during this week’s belated “Crossroads” podcast (CLICK HERE to tune that in), which focused on a New York Times report about Ukraine and tensions in global Eastern Orthodoxy heading into this weekend and the holiest day on the Christian calendar — Pascha (Easter in the West).

I was visiting with a veteran Orthodox priest who was active in the Moscow Project. We were talking about the future of Russian Orthodox Church and the realities that would shape the next few decades. This is from an “On Religion” column on the topic. He said:

It’s impossible to understand the modern Russian church … without grasping that it has four different kinds of leaders. A few Soviet-era bishops are not even Christian believers. Some are flawed believers who were lured into compromise by the KGB, but have never publicly confessed this. Some are believers who cooperated with the KGB, but have repented to groups of priests or believers. Finally, some never had to compromise.

“We have all four kinds,” this priest said. “That is our reality. We must live with it until God heals our church.”

I bring this up, of course, because of the firestorm surrounding the words and actions of Patriarch Kirill, the current leader of the Russian Orthodox Church. In KGB documents, it appears that his codename was “Mikhailov” during the years before the 1991 coup.

How would Kirill be classified, using this priest’s typology?


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , , , , ,

Ukraine war savagery will loom over this year's World Council of Churches Assembly

, , , , , , , ,
Ukraine war savagery will loom over this year's World Council of Churches Assembly

If Russian invaders continue their current aggression, how much of Ukraine will be turned to rubble and how many innocent civilians will be dead by August 31?

That's opening day for the 11th global Assembly in the 74-year history of the World Council of Churches (WCC). COVID willing, the delegates from 352 Protestant and Orthodox church bodies will be joined by thousands of observers, including Catholic and evangelical Protestant representatives.

The WCC has gotten little media ink in North America during recent times, but 2022 sparks obvious news interest in how the organization deals with the Ukraine imbroglio at the Assembly, which runs through Sept. 8 in Karlsruhe, Germany.

Media that do original international reporting and have the money should be laying plans to staff the event, which The Guy knows from covering the 1975, 1983 and 1998 Assemblies supplies numerous trend stories and features alongside the spot news. Reporters unable to attend in person should be lining up contacts to help interpret the goings-on long distance.

This is a critical moment for the WCC, Orthodoxy and global Christian unity. The Russian Orthodox Church, some of whose leaders have made public statements hacking Vladimir Putin's war, is by far the WCC's biggest member — claiming 113.5 million parishioners plus another 30 million in its Ukraine jurisdiction and with ties elsewhere. That compares with the WCC's reported over-all church constituency of 580 million.

On Sunday, former Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams all but demanded that the WCC expel the Russian Orthodox Church from membership:

“The riot act has to be read. When a church is actively supporting a war of aggression, failing to condemn nakedly obvious breaches in any kind of ethical conduct in wartime, then other churches have the right to raise the question and challenge it — to say, unless you can say something effective about this, something recognizably Christian, we have to look again at your membership.”

Also last week, Bishop Rob Schenck of America's Dietrich Bonhoeffer Institute in Washington, D.C., took to Religion News Service to promote a Ukraine petition campaign. It urges the WCC to expel the Russian Orthodox from membership over Moscow Patriarch Kirill's "unholy compact" with Russian dictator Putin.


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Updates in the journalism style bible: Appropriate 'cult' advice and other tweaks

, , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Updates in the journalism style bible: Appropriate 'cult' advice and other tweaks

If you know anything about the nuts and bolts of reporting and editing, then you know that the Associated Press Stylebook is the bible — that’s with a lower-case “b” — of journalism.

It’s also a great place to chart tensions inside the news business. Consider, for example, the decades of debate about “pro-life” and “pro-choice,” as opposed to “anti-abortion” and “pro-abortion rights.” Will the next major revision of the AP manual need to include an updated definition for the suddenly controversial word “woman”?

Our GetReligion patriarch, Richard Ostling, recently sent me an interestingly list of some of the religion-beat terms in the latest revisions to this AP bible. He served as a consultant on that revision project and, thus, doesn’t want to make any comments about the results. Here is one of the updates that is sure to lead to newsroom discussions:

cult (new)

A loaded term to be used with caution.

Yes, indeed — proceed with caution. I totally agree that this is a “loaded term” that journalists should avoid whenever possible.

The problem, however, is that this is a term that religious leaders, activists and even scholars are going to use every now and then and it will be hard to avoid the term when it is used in important direct quotations. Thus, editors need to know the various ways that informed people use the word — the key is sociology vs. theology — so that these loaded quotes can be placed in context for readers. Then there are activists of various kinds who throw this term around like a verbal hand grenade.

Readers can tell, with a quick glance at the venerable Merriam-Webster dictionary, that this is a complicated subject. Here are several of the definitions:

cult

noun, often attributive …

Definition of cult

1: a religion regarded as unorthodox or spurious (see SPURIOUS sense 2) also : its body of adherents


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , , , , , , , , ,

This is still a question that scholars debate: Why did early Christianity rise so rapidly?

, , , , , , , , , , , ,
This is still a question that scholars debate: Why did early Christianity rise so rapidly?

THE QUESTION:

Why did early Christianity rise so rapidly?

THE RELIGION GUY'S ANSWER:

New religions appear all the time, nowhere more than in the United States, but very few ever achieve prominence and permanence. Christianity is a rare and dramatic case of a faith that triumphed. The tale is told in Rodney Stark's classic "The Rise of Christianity" with this descriptive subtitle in the 1997 paperback edition (still on sale): "How the Obscure, Marginal Jesus Movement Became the Dominant Religious Force in the Western World in a Few Centuries."

Sociologist Stark is now retired as co-director of Baylor University's esteemed Institute for Studies of Religion. The book treats its subject as a puzzle to be explained by objective social science scholarship and does not consider whether Christian teachings are true.

Though we lack reliable census data, Stark's best estimate was that only 7,530 Christians existed at the close of the apostolic era in A.D. 100 [which conflicts with Acts 2:41]. He said the total exceeded 1 million by 250 when systemic persecution by the Roman empire was reaching its peak. The Edict of Milan in 313 allowed the faith to exist without harassment, and as of 350 there were 33.9 million Christians. Stark figured that was a 56.5% majority of the population. Inevitably, by 380 this became the empire's official creed.

What happened? Stark's scenario drew upon more than 300 works plus his own original research, and made heavy use of economic market theory. Let's skim some of what he concluded.

Stark thought Christianity's key advantages included the spread of Greek-speaking Jews across the Greco-Roman world who provided a base to build upon, the failures of rival paganism, attractive charitable efforts (especially during ruinous epidemics), innovative respect for women, high birth rates, good organization, close fellowship, demanding and respected moral standards, the inspiring example of martyrs willing to die rather than renounce their faith and positive doctrines that were attractive to new city dwellers coping with chaos and squalor.


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , , , , , , ,

No longer a Ukraine news sidebar: Pope Francis asks if combat can ever be moral

, , , , , , , , , ,
No longer a Ukraine news sidebar: Pope Francis asks if combat can ever be moral

As Russia's invasion sought to erase Ukraine from the map, Moscow's Orthodox Patriarch Kirill, a key ally of dictator Vladimir Putin, met via video last week with Pope Francis.

The Religion Guy had planned to propose a wartime sidebar about the theological justifications for combat that could run any time, but suddenly the theme has gained timely mainbar status.

That's because an official Vatican release reported that Francis stated this at the meeting: "There was a time, even in our churches, when people spoke of a holy war or just war. Today we cannot speak in this manner. A Christian awareness of the importance of peace has developed. Wars are always unjust, since it is the people of God who pay."

Francis' 2020 encyclical Fratelli Tutti declared similarly that "it is very difficult nowadays to invoke the rational criteria elaborated in earlier centuries to speak of the possibility of a 'just war'."

Francis deplores the bloodshed in Ukraine, but did not publicly castigate Putin or Russia by name, presumably in case a neutral papacy could help negotiate an end to the conflict. (That argument is used to explain Pope Pius XII's silence during Nazi Germany's Holocaust against European Jewry.)

Journalists can, at this point, ask several logical questions:

* Is Francis declaring dead the church's "just war" teaching, first formulated in the 5th Century by St. Augustine?

* Should 1.36 billion Catholics shift to pacifism, which excludes support for all wars?

* Is Ukraine wrong to take up arms to defend its existence as a sovereign and democratic nation?

Nearly all Christian commentators agree that Russia's aggression is evil and Ukraine's military defense against it is justified.


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , , , , , , ,

Podcast: Why would journalists want to edit St. Patrick's voice out of stories about his feast?

, , , , , , , , , ,
Podcast: Why would journalists want to edit St. Patrick's voice out of stories about his feast?

When you think of St. Patrick’s Day, what leaps to mind?

Maybe I should ask the question like this: When you think about mainstream-press news coverage of St. Patrick’s Day, what leaps to mind?

Green beer? Corned beef and cabbage (during Lent)?

Great masses of people — primarily in big cities in the Acela Zone and the Rustbelt — going more than a little crazy? Politicians trying to march next to the Catholic archbishop of New York, when they disagree with him on most hot-button issues? Lawsuits about LGBTQ groups demanding to march in a parade that, once upon a time, had something to do with Christian hero?

Questions like these were at the heart of this week’s “Crossroads” podcast (CLICK HERE to tune that in), which got rather personal — since my family embraced the Celtic saints when we converted to Orthodox Christianity. My patron saint is St. Brendan and my daughter’s is St. Brigid (more on this later).

The Big Idea of this podcast was quite simple: It is totally valid for journalists to focus on civic celebrations of St. Patrick’s Day and other modern variations on the veneration (not worship) of the great Celtic saints. The problem is when they leave readers in the dark about the details in the lives of these saints (along with debates about those details), along with the prayers and rites linked to them.

For example, when you think about St. Patrick do these words come to mind?

My name is Patrick. I am a sinner, a simple country person, and the least of all believers. I am looked down upon by many. My father was Calpornius. He was a deacon; his father was Potitus, a priest, who lived at Bannavem Taburniae. ... His home was near there, and that is where I was taken prisoner. I was about sixteen at the time. At that time, I did not know the true God. I was taken into captivity in Ireland, along with thousands of others.

That’s the first few lines of the Confession of St. Patrick, a document that historians take quite seriously — in part because it focuses on the faith and history of this great missionary bishop, while ignoring all kinds mythological details that came later.


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , , , , , , , , ,

Beyond the Orthodox questions: How might the Ukraine war scramble world Christianity?

, , , , , , , , , , , ,
Beyond the Orthodox questions: How might the Ukraine war scramble world Christianity?

Russia's invasion of Ukraine has potential to be "the most transformational" European conflict since World War II, writes New York Times foreign policy columnist Thomas Friedman.

Will it be transformational for Christianity?

There's a slim chance peace could be restored, but at this writing Russian dictator Vladimir Putin appears committed to doing whatever it takes to demolish the independence of his once-friendly neighbor and its young democracy. We might see Russian military occupation, a puppet regime, persistent armed resistance by furious Ukrainians, ongoing aid by the West and at some future point a humiliating defeat and withdrawal -- a replay of the decade-long occupation of Afghanistan that played into the Soviet Union's collapse and therefore to Ukraine's independence.

Russia faces accusations of war crimes amid mass killings of innocent civilians, and bombardment of homes, hospitals, schools and infrastructure, with attendant suffering.

The contours of world Christianity could be scrambled, as a result of all of this. This religious aspect seems a mere sidebar for the news media just now.

But long term, the Russian Orthodox hierarchy has fused the church's stature with a regime hit by widespread moral condemnation, sagging influence and rising economic and diplomatic isolation. Opprobrium comes not just from the U.S. and western allies. In a United Nations vote, 141 nations denounced the "aggression" while only four problematic regimes backed Russia. Even China abstained.

The media should be alert to the following possible scenarios.

The starting point for discussion is a current church split within Ukraine, whose Orthodox population is second only to the massive church of Russia. See detail here in a previous Memo.

In 1686, the Ecumenical Patriarch, "first among equals" who lead Orthodoxy's independent "autocephalous" branches, granted the Moscow Patriarch the jurisdiction over Ukraine that it still exercises. But after national independence, a rival Orthodox Church of Ukraine now led by Metropolitan Epiphanius arose, and Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew — with the sympathy of western leaders — formalized its autocephalous status in 2019.


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , , , , , , ,

Podcast: What's next for Russian priests who asked if Putin will be damned for invading Ukraine?

, , , , , , , , , ,
Podcast: What's next for Russian priests who asked if Putin will be damned for invading Ukraine?

Warning: The following is not a “whataboutism” comparison between Joe Biden and Vladimir Putin or an attempt to find some kind of moral equivalence between their policies and actions.

What I am doing is making a comment about what journalists can and cannot know about a leader’s public and private religious convictions. This is a key theme in this week’s “Crossroads” podcast (CLICK HERE to tune that in) about religious issues linked to Putin’s invasion of Ukraine. The big idea is that politicians in a variety of cultures are skilled, when it comes to using religious themes and symbols.

First, what do we know about Biden’s Catholic beliefs?

We know that he carries a rosary, knows how to use it and frequently attends Mass, almost always in parishes sympathetic to him. We know that ancient doctrines in Catholic moral theology are important to him when it comes to immigration and social justice issues, but not when it comes to marriage, abortion, sexual ethics and, until recently, the death penalty.

What does this tell us about what he does or does not say during Confession and other crucial issues about the content of his faith? Next to nothing. Thus, his actions are crucial.

Now, what do we know about Putin’s Orthodox beliefs?

We know that he built a chapel near his office, that he knows how to make the sign of the cross and light prayer candles. We know that he believes that Orthodox Christianity is a crucial part of Russian history and that “Holy Mother Russia” is an important concept in Russian identity and nationalism. We know that issues such as abortion and marriage formation were not important to him — until it became clear that Russia is in a state of demographic collapse. Putin has, of course, used major themes from Orthodox history to justify his actions in Ukraine.

We also know that his government and his supporters have poured oceans of money into the rebuilding of Orthodox churches in the post-Soviet era, believing that this is in the national interest. This matters in a nation that endured the most sweeping wave of martyrdom in Christian history, with the closing of 98% of the land’s churches, the murder of 200,000 bishops, priests and nuns and millions of others in death camps, purges, planned famines (in Ukraine, especially) and other forms of persecution. We know that some clergy were crucified on the doors of their churches, slaughtered on their altars or stripped naked, doused with water and left outdoors in winter.

What does this tell us about what Putin does or does not say during Confession and other crucial issues about the content of his faith? Next to nothing. Thus, his actions are crucial.


Please respect our Commenting Policy
, , , , , , , ,

Question for New York Times scribes and others: Did Vladimir Putin dream up the Kievan Rus?

, , , , , , , ,
Question for New York Times scribes and others: Did Vladimir Putin dream up the Kievan Rus?

If you know anything about the New Testament, then you know that St. Paul spend a lot of time and energy in the great cities of Greece.

It would seem logical for one of the ancient patriarchates of Eastern Orthodoxy to be located in Greece, perhaps in Athens, Corinth or Thessaloniki. So who is the patriarch of the Greek Orthodox Church? Why are the great churches of Greece led by archbishops, instead of their own patriarch?

That’s a complicated question (click here for Orthodox Wiki timeline) and, as always, the Orthodox will argue about many historical twists and turns. But the big idea is that over the centuries Constantinople grew to become the great city of the wider Greek world and, thus, the leader of Greek Orthodoxy remains in Istanbul. That’s where the Ecumenical Patriarch’s few remaining churches have faced crushing persecution by the Turks. Consider the plight of Turkey’s only seminary, in Halki, which has been shuttered for half a century. Halki is a tragic and sad place. I’ve been there.

Thus, the archbishops in Greece are powerless and without influence? Tell that to the Greeks.

What does this have to do with a simplistic, laugh-to-keep-from-crying paragraph of unattributed information — written in classic “omniscient anonymous" voice — in another New York Times story about the religious tensions in Ukraine? Here is that paragraph:

The Russian church … has made no secret of its desire to unite the branches under a single patriarch in Moscow, which would allow it to control the holiest sites of Orthodoxy in the Slavic world and millions of believers in Ukraine. The Ukrainian Orthodox Church, for its part, has been slowly asserting itself under its own patriarch, reviving a separate and independent branch of Eastern Orthodoxy, after the independence of Ukraine in 1991.

Where to begin?

If you know anything about Orthodox Christianity in the Slavic world, you know that the story begins in Kiev in 988 with the “Baptism of Rus“ in the waters of the Dnieper River, after Prince Vladimir embraced Orthodox Christianity as the faith of his lands. The famous Lavra of the Kievan Caves was founded in 1051, marking the birth of monasticism in what would become the Russian world.

Kiev was the key city in Slavic Orthodoxy. However, Moscow grew in importance and, eventually, became the base for the Russian Orthodox Church, much as Constantinople became the great city of the wider Greek world.


Please respect our Commenting Policy