Month: May 2009

RIA Novosti is running a series on Russia’s religious sects. The news service takes a look at the history of some of these groups and their leaders, and also asks “why Russia has proved such fertile ground for the growth of new and bizarre beliefs.” Part one:

MOSCOW, (RIA Novosti’s Marc Bennetts) – Russia has seen a colossal number of sects and fringe religions throughout its long history, from the 18th-century self-castrating Skoptsy to the modern-day doomsday cult whose members threatened to burn themselves alive in the Volga Region last year.

Up until the mid 17th century, the Russian Orthodox Church enjoyed complete spiritual authority. However, in 1666, Patriarch Nikon decided to bring the Russian Church in line with Greek Orthodoxy, and ordered the rewriting of ecclesiastical tomes.

His move, in a country where dogma and tradition had always played a large role in religious life, caused an uproar.

Nikon’s assertion that Orthodox believers should use three fingers instead of two to cross themselves led to him being labeled the Antichrist by opponents of his changes. Pious Russians had long feared the year 1666, with its satanic associations, and Nikon’s actions seemed to them to be a sign that the Apocalypse was fast approaching.

The Old Believers subsequently fled to Siberia and other remote areas of Russia to escape persecution and await the end of the world. Some of the groups cut themselves off so effectively that isolated communities that knew little of developments in the modern world were still being found in the 1960s and 1970s by Soviet geological expeditions.

This 17th century rejection of the Church’s authority laid the roots for a subsequent explosion of sects and cults, many of them fixating on a single piece of scripture, or an interpretation of scripture, and basing their entire belief system around it. Continue reading →

At the National Press Club yesterday, the Catholic University of America hosted a discussion on “The Obama Administration and the Sanctity of Human Life: Is there a common ground on life issues? What is the right response by ‘Pro-Life’ Citizens?”

One of President Obama’s most prominent pro-life opponents, Robert P. George, engaged in a debate with one of his most prominent pro-life supporters, Douglas W. Kmiec. Public Discourse published an adapted version of George’s remarks, excerpted below. You can watch a video of the George-Kmiec debate on the C-SPAN Web site here.

Robert George:

Because the President does not believe in the profound, inherent, and equal dignity of every member of the human family; because he does not believe that babies acquire human rights until after birth; because he does not see abortion as tragic because it takes the life of an innocent human being, he is utterly and intransigently unwilling to support even efforts short of prohibiting abortion that would plainly reduce the number of abortions. Moreover, he is adamantly in favor of funding abortions and abortion providers at home and abroad, and has already taken steps in that direction by revoking the Mexico City Policy and proposing a budget that would restore publicly funded abortions in Washington, D.C.—despite the well-documented and universally acknowledged fact that when you provide public funding for abortion, you get more abortions. Continue reading →

The “Companion to the Greek Orthodox Church,” edited by Fotios K. Litsas, was published by Greek Orthodox Archdiocese in 1984 as a guidebook to various topics in Church life. The book included the article “Orthodoxy in the United States” by Rev. Thomas FitzGerald, now dean of Holy Cross Greek Orthodox School of Theology, and an expert on American Orthodoxy. Fr. FitzGerald closed his 1984 article with a bold prediction:

Orthodoxy in the United States may no longer be viewed simply as a diaspora composed primarily of immigrants intent upon returning to their homeland. Rather, Orthodoxy in the United States can only be viewed properly as an emerging local Church comprised primarily of American citizens of a wide variety of racial, ethnic, and religious backgrounds.

In due course, with the guidance of the Holy Spirit, the various Orthodox jurisdictions in the United States will be united into an autocephalous Church which will be officially recognized as such by the Ecumenical Patriarchate and the other autocephalous Orthodox Churches.

In the same article, Fr. FitzGerald notes:

Viewed from the perspective of Orthodox ecclesiology, the proliferation of parallel and often competing jurisdictions on the same geographical territory is a serious anomaly. The establishment of “ethnic” and even “political” dioceses rather than territorial dioceses may have served the short-term needs of the immigrants. However, the ecclesiastical requirements for canonical order, integrity, and the unity of the episcopacy in a given region were sacrificed. This led to an undue emphasis upon a policy of “congregationalism” which is alien to Orthodoxy, and to an attitude of phyletism, both of which have greatly diminished the mission and salutary message of the Orthodox Church in the United States until very recently.

From the Catholic news service Zenit, which strained a bit for a news angle with this headline:

Orthodox Priest Says Faith Is Not Dead in Russia

PAMPLONA, Spain, MAY 28, 2009 (Zenit.org).- The Moscow Patriarchate’s secretary for ecumenical relations is affirming that relations between the Orthodox Church and the Catholic Church in Russia are progressing, and that it is an important step for evangelizing the world.

In an address at the University of Navarra in Spain, Father Igor Vyzhanov stated that the two Churches “seem to understand each other better now than before.”

His conference titled “Relations Between the Russian Orthodox Church and the Catholic Church: The Current Situation” noted signs of the Churches’ collaboration.

The priest affirmed a shared responsibility of Orthodox and Catholics to “renew the Christian roots of Europe” and to preach the message of Christ to the world.

He explained the challenges of the Orthodox Church in the task of evangelization, faced to Russia’s history of enforced atheism.

Nonetheless, Father Vyzhanov said, “the Russian people did not lose their faith,” although the communist regime tried to take it away.

He added that in the communist era, “the faith was hidden, not dead, and after the changes in our country many people converted to the faith.”

Now, the priest added, the principal challenge is to help people deepen in this faith, a project in which there is a “great future” for collaboration with the Catholic Church.

The Associated Press has a story out of the World Council of Churches about deliberations toward a common date for Pascha/Easter. The story was based, in part, on this release from the WCC. From the AP:

Under the plan the unified Easter usually falls as it would under the Gregorian calendar used by Catholics and Protestants, said Dagmar Heller, an ecumenical professor in Switzerland heading the council’s faith and order commission.

In the next 15 years, the only time Western churches would have to change Easter is in 2019 from April 21 to March 24. The bigger adjustment would be for the Orthodox Church, which has experienced several schisms in its history over the question of dates.

“There are of course some fundamentalist Orthodox who say ‘The Julian calendar is our tradition and it was used in Jesus’ lifetime so we cannot change,'” Heller said, adding that some Eastern theologians might fear more breaks in their church as a result of a date change.

“And, of course, it’s an issue because the astronomical data is closer to the Gregorian calendar, which was introduced by a pope,” she said, referring to Pope Gregory XIII’s reform of the calendar in 1582. It only slowly replaced the calendar named for Julius Caesar, who introduced it in 46 B.C.

Some Orthodox representatives at the meeting appeared to back the plan. French Orthodox theologian Antoine Arjakovsky acknowledged that the astronomy was closer to the Gregorian calendar, but noted that Catholic and Protestant churches were also compromising by “accepting that the date of Easter should be established on the basis of a cosmic calendar rather than by a fixed date.”

More detailed information on these talks, free of WCC spin, is available from the Religious Information Service of Ukraine, which reported on “A Common Date of Easter – Possible: The 1997 Aleppo Consensus,” a conference held earlier this month at the Ukrainian Catholic University in Lviv. Snip:

Expressing joy that such an important theme had been raised in the seminar, Metropolitan Andriy Horak mentioned that such a detailed answer from the Orthodox representation concerning the Aleppo proposals could be received only after a Pan-Orthodox consultation and, eventually, a council. It is worth mentioning that Fr. Milan Zust, S.J., representative for the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity, said that the Roman Catholic Church is waiting for a response from the Orthodox churches and he thinks that if the Orthodox would accept the Aleppo recommendations, then there would be no problems with establishing one, common date of Easter. If some remarks would come from the Orthodox representation or if they were to propose another variant, then the question would definitely need to be reviewed.

Dr. Konstantine Sigov, chief director of the publishing firm Spirit and Letter, who spoke in the name of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church (Moscow Patriarchate), mentioned that it is of huge importance to spread information about the possibility of establishing a common date for Easter – especially within an academic environment as well as among the broader public.

See the Orthodox Wiki entry on Old Calendarists.