The Parish in Transition

For most of the last 10 years, I’ve served Orthodox parishes in transition. Having done this 7 or 8 times, I thought it might be helpful to offer for consideration some of what I’ve learned.

The most important thing I learned is that, somewhat counter to what had been my initial expectations, the particular reason while a given community is in transition is always secondary. What matters most is the fact that they find themselves betwixt and between what they were and what they are becoming. In fact, and again this is counter intuitive, focusing on the particulars will more often than not result in the community failing to make the transition successfully.

Cultural anthropology has a technical term (liminality) that has helped me understand the needs of the parish in transitions and while tempting to do so, focusing on the reasons for the transition is not the best way to help the community in transition. Continue reading

VN:F [1.9.17_1161]
Rating: 0.0/10 (0 votes cast)
VN:F [1.9.17_1161]
Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
Print Friendly

Tradition and Human Flourishing

Here some of Robert George’s major theoretical points underlying his argument in a recent court case about the federal Defense of Marriage Act (you can read the whole thing here):

Laws characteristically embody and reflect moral judgments. This is true of the law of contract and the law of murder, and it is no less true of the law of marriage. Laws should be made carefully so that they embody sound understandings of good and bad, right and wrong, justice and injustice; but as careful thinkers about law from Aristotle in ancient Greece to Dr. Martin Luther King in our own time have made clear, laws cannot be morally neutral, nor should we try to make them so. Efforts to mask the moral judgments embodied and expressed in our laws have no effect other than to wrap those judgments in a cloak of obscurity—creating a mere illusion of neutrality.

In the case currently before your honor, the Court is being invited to replace the moral understanding at the heart of the historic conjugal conception of marriage with a competing moral understanding according to which marriage would be redefined as sexual-romantic domestic partnership—thus rendering sexual-reproductive complementary unnecessary and irrelevant. Marriage, on the new moral understanding, would be an emotional union—a union of hearts and minds—but not a bodily union of the type made possible by the biological complementarity of husband and wife.

However, this Court should not choose between the competing moral understandings on offer from supporters of the conjugal conception of marriage and the revisionist conception. This is because nothing in the Constitution settles the issue between them. It is left, rather, to the people acting on their own in referenda and initiatives in states that provide for those decision-making procedures, and through their elected representatives in the state legislatures and the Congress. It is up to the democratic process, not the courts purporting to act in the name of the Constitution, to make the moral judgment that marriage should be retained as a conjugal partnership, or to make the competing moral judgments that would redefine marriage, whether to accommodate polygamous, polyamorous, or same sex partnerships.

Shifting our focus from civil society to the life of the Church, George’s argument reminds us that whether we are concerned with canon law, administrative procedures, or pastoral care (more on this last point later) these are all expressions of both a moral vision and a particular understanding of what it means to be human (anthropology). In other, in church law, administration, and pastoral ministry we are pursuing one or more goods that both reflects and reinforces our vision of human flourishing. This is done as far as it goes but it carries with it a certain level of risk. The risk is not simply that of a practical failure. We all of us fail. While our failures can be useful to the degree that we are willing to change there’s a real danger.

Typically I am only intuitively aware of the moral and anthropological models that those my practical decisions. Put another way, my life is structured around assumptions which, even if objectively true, may not be applicable to the situation. Consequently I am often undone because I give the right answer to the wrong question. Learning to ask the right questions is hard work. It is the work of not just my lifetime but of several life times. This is why tradition is essential as a guide to human living.

It is important to keep in mind that fidelity to tradition is no guarantee to a life of human flourishing. This is not because tradition is untrustworthy–though it may be–but because there may not be a correspondence between tradition and situation. This lack of fit between tradition and situation can be especially wide in practical matters. For this reason tradition generally serves us better as a guide for what NOT to do then what to do. Thus isn’t to criticize tradition or the traditional life. Rather it is, I hope, a sober acknowledgement of the occasional complexity of human life. While tradition is essential for human flourishing it is as the foundation not the goal of such a life. What is required along with tradition is creativity. But more on this in a later post.

In Christ,

+Fr Gregory

Enhanced by Zemanta
VN:F [1.9.17_1161]
Rating: 0.0/10 (0 votes cast)
VN:F [1.9.17_1161]
Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
Print Friendly

Video: The False Promise of Green Energy

For PowerBlog readers, we’re posting the video from Andrew Morriss’ April 26 Acton Lecture Series talk in Grand Rapids, Mich., on “The False Promise of Green Energy.” Here’s the lecture description: “Green energy advocates claim that transforming America to an economy based on wind, solar, and biofuels will produce jobs for Americans, benefits for the environment, and restore American industry. Prof. Andrew Morriss, co-author of The False Promise of Green Energy (Cato, 2011), shows that these claims are based on unrealistic assumptions, poorly thought out models, and bad data. Rather than leading us to an eco-utopia, he argues that current green energy programs are crony capitalism that impoverishes American consumers and destroys American jobs.”

Morriss, an Orthodox Christian, begins with a quote from Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I of Constantinople, the Istanbul, Turkey-based hierarch. Bartholomew said this in response to the March 2011 tsunami in Japan and the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster that followed:

Our Creators granted us the gifts of the sun, wind, water and ocean, all of which may safely and sufficiently provide energy. Ecologically-friendly science and technology has discovered ways and means of producing sustainable forms of energy for our ecosystem. Therefore, we ask: Why do we persist in adopting such dangerous sources of energy?

“The Ecumenical Patriarch and I don’t see eye to eye on this,” Morriss said. “I think he’s asking the wrong questions.”

Also see the PowerBlog post “Green Patriarch: No Nukes.”

In his book, Morriss and his co-authors warn that “the concrete results of following [green energy] policies will be a decline in living standards around the globe, including for the world’s poorest; changes in lifestyle that Americans do not want; and a weakening of the technological progress that market forces have delivered, preventing us from finding real solutions to the real problems we face.” Many of those lifestyle changes will come from suddenly spending far more on energy than we’d like. Green technologies mean diverting production from cheap sources, such as coal and oil, to more expensive, highly subsidized ones, like wind and solar. These price spikes won’t be limited to our electricity bills either, the authors argue. “Anything that increases the price of energy will also increase the price of goods that use energy indirectly.”

The better solution to improving America’s energy economy, the book shows, is to let the market work by putting power in the hands of consumers. But “many environmental pressure groups don’t want to leave conservation to individuals, preferring government mandates to change energy use.” In other words, green-job proponents know they’re pushing a bad product. Rather than allow the market to expose the bad economics of green energy, they’d use the power of government to force expensive and unnecessary transformation.

Morriss is also an editor of the forthcoming Silent Spring at 50: The False Crises of Rachel Carson (Cato, September 2012) with Roger Meiners and Pierre Desroches. The blurb for the Carson book notes that she got a lot wrong:

Widely credited with launching the modern environmental movement when published 50 years ago, Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring had a profound impact on our society. As an iconic work, the book has often been shielded from critical inquiry, but this landmark anniversary provides an excellent opportunity to reassess its legacy and influence. In Silent Spring at 50: The False Crises of Rachel Carson a team of national experts explores the book’s historical context, the science it was built on, and the policy consequences of its core ideas. The conclusion makes it abundantly clear that the legacy of Silent Spring is highly problematic. While the book provided some clear benefits, a number of Carson’s major arguments rested on what can only be described as deliberate ignorance. Despite her reputation as a careful writer widely praised for building her arguments on science and facts, Carson’s best-seller contained significant errors and sins of omission. Much of what was presented as certainty then was slanted, and today we know much of it is simply wrong.

Morriss is the D. Paul Jones, Jr. & Charlene Angelich Jones Chairholder of Law at the University of Alabama School of Law. He is the author or coauthor of more than 60 book chapters, scholarly articles, and books. He is affiliated with a number of think tanks doing public policy work, including the Property & Environment Research Center in Bozeman, Montana, the Regulatory Studies Center at George Washington University, the Institute for Energy Research, and the Mercatus Center at George Mason University. In addition, he is a Research Fellow at the New York University Center for Labor and Employment Law. He is chair of the editorial board of the Cayman Financial Review. His scholarship focuses on regulatory issues involving environmental, energy, and offshore financial centers. Over the past ten years he has regularly taught and lectured in China, Greece, Guatemala, Hong Kong, and Nepal.

Morriss earned an A.B. from Princeton University and a J.D., as well as an M.A. in Public Affairs, from the University of Texas at Austin. He received a Ph.D. in economics from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. After law school, Morriss clerked for U.S. District Judge Barefoot Sanders in the Northern District of Texas and worked for two years at Texas Rural Legal Aid in Hereford and Plainview, Texas.

He was formerly the H. Ross and Helen Workman Professor of Law & Professor of Business at the University of Illinois College of Law and the Galen J. Roush Profesor of Business Law & Regulation at Case Western Reserve University School of Law.

Source; Acton Institute PowerBlog

VN:F [1.9.17_1161]
Rating: 8.2/10 (5 votes cast)
VN:F [1.9.17_1161]
Rating: +3 (from 5 votes)
Print Friendly

The Cultural Vocation of the Church

An interesting comment on culture by Metropolitan George Khodr:

…Christianity is the religion of the Incarnation and that the faithful are not performing their duty to God if they are satisfied to work for their own salvation apart from the salvation of culture. Christ is the Savior of the world and thus the Savior of civilization, which is part of the world. This does not mean that the Church should dominate culture from without, in the way that the Western Church dominated it during the Middle Ages. God must become indeed Master of civilization, but from within by means of the spirituality that we sew in our creative, cultural activity. Orthodoxy does not know external dominance over the world and it deplores clerical authoritarianism. It believes in the culture of its free spirit which liberates man from all the enslavements of history and submits him to truth. Culture grows through its free natural faculties, but our natural movements have no life if they are not transfigured by divine grace. This grace enlightens the human intellect from within and through its light the features of Christian culture are produced (read the rest here).

While I think Metropolitan George is wrong to speak in such absolute terms about the relationship of the Church of Rome to the culture of  the Middle Ages, I think he is spot on in his assertion that as “the Savior of the world” Christ is also, and necessarily, “the Savior of civilization.” Continue reading

VN:F [1.9.17_1161]
Rating: 0.0/10 (0 votes cast)
VN:F [1.9.17_1161]
Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
Print Friendly

The Orthodox Church and Public Policy Debates

With a few changes here and there, the following passage from John Finnis’s essay “Catholic Positions in Liberal Debates” (Collected Essays of John Finnis, Vol. V: Religion and Public Reasons, pp. 113-26) is equally applicable to the Orthodox Church as the Catholic Church. Read on and discuss among yourselves:

We should not be nostalgic for, and do not need to defend, the paternalism defended by Plato and Aristotle, or the religious intolerance of the mediaeval and post-mediaeval Catholic (not to mention Protestant) states. Nor should we accept other package deals, in which Catholicism might be yoked to a restorationist politics of conservatism or a liberationist politics of socialism or state capitalism, or whatever. So far as anyone can see, the Catholic Church is still near the beginning of its long journey to the end of the ages; its Augustinian, mediaeval, and subsequent experiments with harnessing state power were no more than a passing phase in which faith and benevolence were harnessed together without sufficient attention to differentiations which the faith itself suggests and, when developed, ratifies. If we make and insist upon those differentiations, we can peacefully and without even implicit threat affirm, in our own reflections and when and as appropriate in public, that the centre of human history is the life and teachings of Jesus Christ, and that the truths which his Church conveys, even in periods when it is humanly speaking as decayed, confused, and weak as it at present is, are the true centre of the culture which can and should direct political deliberation in western liberal as much as any other kind of political society. The disarray within the Roman Catholic Church is surely a substantial cause (as well as a consequence) of the disarray within these societies, even those societies which for many centuries have had no reason to think (or have made it their business not to think) of Catholics as other than virtual strangers.

From: Finnis on Catholic Engagement in Public Debates

VN:F [1.9.17_1161]
Rating: 9.0/10 (1 vote cast)
VN:F [1.9.17_1161]
Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
Print Friendly

Environmentalism, Kudzu, and the Next Great Awakening

John A. Baden, Ph.D., Chairman of FREE and Gallatin Writers raises the question of whether or not environmentalism has come to replace–or better supplant–Christianity for many. He writes:

Labels are not right or wrong but rather are more or less useful. I’m turning attention to environmentalism as a religious movement. Whatever its number, perhaps the 4th, it surely is a religious movement and its members seek a great awakening. I’m working on it with this title, “”Environmentalism, Kudzu, and the Next Great Awakening.”

I begin with a question: Is environmentalism the kudzu invader of Christianity in the western world? Most Christians agree green symbolizes the renewal of vegetation and the promise of new life. Southern Baptists in Junior Johnson country may be surprised that green is the liturgical color for more than half the year in many Protestant and Catholic churches.

In sum, green has a rich and honorable tradition in Christianity. Now, however, we see a new shade of Green, one identified with Gaia rather than the Holy Bible. Here is the context.

Nearly every religious denomination has increased its environmental stewardship commitment and initiated “Green” programs in the last decade. A growing number of religious groups view environmental stewardship as an important religious obligation, indeed, one central to mankind’s purpose.

Given the above, an optimist would assume growing complementaries between Christianity and environmentalism. However, there is considerable evidence that for many people, especially the highly educated and well off in Europe, environmentalism has replaced the Christian religion. It may not be the next great awakening, but it surely is a fundamental challenge to American Christians.

Baden, is not the first to suggest this. But it is a question worth asking. Has environmentalism become the religion of choice for at least some baptized Christians?And to be fair, it isn’t just environmentalism that might be a new religion for some. There is likewise the temptations offered  by consumerism (to name but one) and the sexual revolution (to name another) with which churches must contend.

Just thinking out loud here but how many Christian churches–Orthodox, Catholic or Protestant–are really ready to deal with the rise of these new forms of paganism? This is an especially important question to ask given that they often come wrapped in, if not the Gospel, than Christian language.

In Christ,

+Fr Gregory

Enhanced by Zemanta
VN:F [1.9.17_1161]
Rating: 7.3/10 (4 votes cast)
VN:F [1.9.17_1161]
Rating: 0 (from 4 votes)
Print Friendly

Should Libertarians Be Conservatives?: The Tough Cases of Abortion and Marriage

Does personal virtue secure liberty and If so, what does this mean for the role of government? Jay W Richards, Director of the Center on Wealth, Poverty, and Morality at the Discovery Institute, provides the beginning of an answer. He writes:

Over fifty years ago, National Review’s Frank Meyer made the case for “fusionism,” which joined traditional morality with a defense of liberty and free markets. Meyer and others knew that fiscal conservatism needs social conservatism, and vice versa. A free market allows us to exercise creativity and virtue, for instance, but it also needs a reasonably virtuous citizenry. A population of thieves would create anarchy, not freedom. Unfortunately, the very name fusionism implied that that these were separate concerns that needed to be, well, fused

.

Read the rest http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2012/04/5259 .

In Christ,

+Fr Gregory

VN:F [1.9.17_1161]
Rating: 0.0/10 (0 votes cast)
VN:F [1.9.17_1161]
Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
Print Friendly

Charles Colson: 1931-2012. May His Memory Be Eternal

Fr. Johannes Jacobse at AOI has a absolutely lovely and gracious essay about the late Chuck Colson. I have taken the liberty of reproducing the whole of it below. 

In Christ,

+Fr Gregory

Charles Colson died today. He was 80 years old. I first met Colson at a conference at Washington, DC and was struck by his magnanimous character and intelligence. Everyone knows his story. Colson was a ruthless political operative in the Nixon administration, got caught up in the Watergate imbroglio during the Nixon administration and went to jail.

I heard him explain his experience in prison during one of his talks. It was the lowest point in his life where he had lost everything and began to question purpose, decisions, and direction. He was visited by a friend (former Minnesota Governor Al Quie) who shared with him how Jesus Christ came into the world to redeem man. Colson listened, cried out to God for help and, as his life would later prove, God heard him. His repentance was deep and lasting.

Prison opened his eyes not only to God, but the desperate conditions of other prisoners. He founded Prison Fellowship, an organization they helped prisoners while incarcerated, after they got out, and their families. The Russian Orthodox Church called on Prison Fellowship after Communism fell to help them build viable prison ministries in Russia.

Colson’s work grew to incorporate what he called teaching the Christian World View. He saw that decline in culture was moral in nature and that a return to the values and precepts of the Christian faith were the only hope for cultural renewal. This meant that he had to do the work of an evangelist. It also meant that a deep ignorance among Christians about their own history, the history of Western culture, and the viability of the Christian message in a relativist age needed to be addressed. That led to ecumenical outreach, and it was at one of his ecumenical events that I first met Colson.

I attended a conference with Christian leaders (cultural activists mostly) from all types of Christian communions; the first Orthodox priest ever invited to such a gathering. Most of us were not academics but more of what I call “rubber meets the road” types; people used to debate, interaction, dealing with crisis, and so forth. As such, the conference had a very practical, even edgy feel to it at times. All shared the conviction that the Christian faith has a public dimension and that we should not cede the public square to secularism. Christendom is, well, Christian and no amount of brow-beating, public scorn, the insecurity and impotence of liberal Christianity, or any other malady should stop us from boldly speaking out with intelligence and conviction.

It was there too that I first recognized how much that Orthodoxy has to give the culture. I saw that many Christians of other communions are waiting for us to step to the plate and make our contribution. They welcome us.

Out of that conference came the idea for the Manhattan Declaration, a document asserting that Christians would not forgo the moral mandates of the Christian faith even if the dominant culture or, God forbid, the government demanded that we do. The Declaration was roundly criticized when it was released a year later including in Orthodox circles. However, the recent Obama mandates that attempt to force the Catholic Church to act against its moral teachings show the signers understood the currents of culture better than their critics did.

I spoke with Colson through out the years, most recently last month in Naples where I live. He always had a deep appreciation for Orthodox Christianity and was especially interested in the resurgence of the Church in Russia. The Russian Orthodox Church has shown deep prescience about the Western cultural struggles, much more so than any other foreign patriarchate, and has garnered the notice of the cultural thinkers on the conservative and non-secularist side of the divide.

The late Fr. Richard John Neuhaus said we are more united in the honest expression of our differences than in pretending that no differences exist and he was right. This is what he called an ecumenism of the Holy Spirit. Colson believed that too. He could bring different people together to work in that common and needful commission of restoring the religious and thus moral foundations of culture.

The world has lost a good man. We will miss him. May his memory be eternal.

Enhanced by Zemanta
VN:F [1.9.17_1161]
Rating: 10.0/10 (3 votes cast)
VN:F [1.9.17_1161]
Rating: +3 (from 3 votes)
Print Friendly

The Work in the Work of Prayer

This year I spent Holy Week, Pascha and Bright Week at St Seraphim Orthodox Cathedral (OCA) in Dallas.  On Bright Thursday, his Beatitude Metropolitan Jonah was also at the Cathedral for a priestly ordination on Thomas Sunday. Though a joyful two weeks I would be less than honest if I failed to note that it has been as well a physically exhausting.

For many people, including many Christians, physically demanding prayer is a strange–and even offensive–notion.  Prayer, so the thinking goes, should be restful and restorative and maybe even enjoyable and fun. Save for the last of these this understanding is correct as far as it goes. But prayer is also work–it is the opus Dei, the work of God in us and our work for God in Him.

The laborious quality of prayer reveals to me my own sinfulness. While I am made for communion with God, while the path to self-discovery and self-expression are found only in God, the love of God for me is always an affront to my sinfulness. There is in real prayer something of what economists call “creative destruction.” Even those aspects of my life that are good in themselves need to be brought into an ever closer conformity with the will of God.

In the final analysis, not only is prayer an opus Dei, so am I as well a work of God. Coming to know this, accept it and embody it on an everyday basis is what accounts for the laborious–or maybe better, the asectical–character of even the joyful celebration of Christ’s Resurrection.

Continue reading

VN:F [1.9.17_1161]
Rating: 10.0/10 (2 votes cast)
VN:F [1.9.17_1161]
Rating: +1 (from 1 vote)
Related Posts with Thumbnails
Print Friendly