Don't let the door hit you... (conservative Catholic journalist joins Orthodox Church)

Cafeteria is Closed ^ | October 12, 2006 | Gerald Augustinus

[NYer]

Roman Sacristan tells me that Rod Dreher, a right-wing writer (Dallas Morning News, National Review) who used to be Catholic (convert) has jumped ship and joined an Orthodox church (personal take: for me it'd be absurd to join, say, the Russian Orthodox church without being Russian). On Beliefnet, Mr. Dreher explains himself in quite a pitiful manner, citing the sex scandals and dissent in the Church - only to offer up dissent himself.

Back in 2001, when I first started writing about the child sex-abuse scandal in the Church, Father Tom Doyle, the heroic priest who ruined his own career by speaking out for victims, warned me, "If you keep going down this path, you are going to go to places darker than you can imagine." I thought I understood what he meant, but I didn't. Even if I had, by then, I couldn't have stopped. What brought me in touch with Fr. Doyle was my having stumbled upon a cell of clerical molesters at a Carmelite parish in the Bronx. They had preyed on a teenage immigrant boy who was troubled, and whose father was back in Nicaragua. His mother sent him to the priests for counseling, thinking that maybe being around some men of God would do the boy some good. The priests ended up molesting him. When the boy's father arrived in the States and found out what had happened, he went to the Archdiocese of New York to tell them what happened. They offered to cut him a check if he'd sign a paper agreeing to let the Archdiocese's attorneys handle the matter.

And that's how it began for me. At the time, as the father of a young boy, I couldn't shake the thought What if this had happened to my family? Would we be treated this way by the Archdiocese? ...

The sex-abuse scandal can't be easily separated from the wider crisis in the American Catholic Church, involving the corruption of the liturgy, of catechesis, and so forth. I've come to understand how important this point is, because if most other things had been more or less solid, I think I could have weathered the storm. But I found it impossible to find solid ground.
...

After months, we finally made a decision: we would visit an Orthodox parish. As Catholics, we knew at least that the Sacraments there were valid. Though we couldn't receive communion, we could at least be in the presence of the Eucharistic Christ, and worship liturgically with them, and draw close to God on Sunday morning, however imperfectly. I can hardly express the burden of guilt I felt when I crossed the threshold of St. Seraphim's parish that morning. But you know, it was a wonderful place. The liturgy was breathtakingly beautiful. The preaching orthodox. And the people -- half of them Russian, most of the others converts -- could hardly have been kinder and more welcoming. As a new Episcopalian friend told me a couple of weeks ago after he visited St. Seraphim's, "There is life there."

We kept going back, and finally got invited to dinner at the archbishop's house. I feared it would be a stiff, formal affair. I was astonished to turn up at the address given, to find that it was the shabby little cottage behind the cathedral. We went in, and it was like being at a family reunion. Vladika's house was jammed with parishioners celebrating a feast day with ... a feast. There was Archbishop Dmitri in the middle of it all, looking like a grandfatherly Gandalf. I had never in all my years as a Catholic been around people who felt that way about their bishop. The whole thing was dizzying -- the fellowship, the prayerfulness, the feeling of family. I hadn't realized how starved I was for a church community.

Over time, we got to know the people of the parish. They became our friends. It was a new experience for me to be in a parish where you can be openly small-o orthodox, and the priest and the people support you in that. In "Crunchy Cons," the Orthodox convert (from RCism) Hugh O'Beirne says that Catholics new to the Orthodox Church may find it surprising that they don't have to be on a "war footing" -- meaning the culture wars don't intrude into worship. People are on the same page, and if they're not, they're not out trying to get the Church to change her position on abortion, gay marriage, inclusive language, and all that. As someone who more or less is on the front lines of the culture war every day in my job as a journalist, I found it a new and welcome experience to be able to go to church on Sunday and get built back up for the struggle ahead, instead of to find mass the most debilitating hour of the week.

Julie and I could see what was happening to us: we were falling in love with Orthodoxy. On several occasions, we stopped to check ourselves. But we couldn't bring ourselves to leave this place, where we were back in touch with Christ, and learning to serve Him in community, to return to what we had experienced as a spiritual desert. I know this is not every Catholic's experience, but this was ours.
......

I had to admit that I had never seriously considered the case for Orthodoxy. Now I had to do that. And it was difficult poring through the arguments about papal primacy. I'll spare you the details, but I will say that I came to seriously doubt Rome's claims. Reading the accounts of the First Vatican Council, and how they arrived at the dogma of papal infallibility, was a shock to me: I realized that I simply couldn't believe the doctrine. And if that falls, it all falls. Of course I immediately set upon myself, doubting my thinking because doubting my motives. You're just trying to talk yourself into something, I thought. And truth to tell, there was a lot of that, I'm sure.

But what I noticed during all this Sturm und Drang over doctrine was this: we were happy again as a family, and at peace. Julie said one day driving home from liturgy, "Isn't it great to look forward to going to church again?" ... Here I was beginning to live a more Christ-like life as a fellow traveler of Orthodoxy, and knowing that if I went back to full-fledged Catholicism, I would be returning to anger and despair. What does it mean to live in the Christian truth in that situation? How would I feel if I approached the Judgment Seat and said to God, "I lived as a depressed and embittered man, lost my children to the Christian faith, and was a terrible witness to your goodness. But Lord, thanks to you, I never left Catholicism."

It was not an abstract question for me. I wondered: is the point of our life on earth to become like Jesus, or is it to maintain formal affiliation with the Roman Catholic Church? ...

I can look back also and see that my own intellectual pride helped me build a weak foundation for my faith. When I converted to Catholicism in 1992 (I entered the Church formally in 1993), it was a sincere Christian conversion. But I also took on as my own all the cultural and intellectual trappings of the American Catholic right. I remember feeling so grateful for the privilege and gift of being Catholic, but there was a part of me that thought, "Yay! I'm on the A-Team now, the New York Yankees of Christianity. I'm on Father Neuhaus's team!" ...

A few weeks back, I mentioned to Julie on the way to St. Seraphim's one morning, "I'm now part of a small church that nobody's heard of, with zero cultural influence in America, and in a tiny parish that's materially poor. I think that's just where I need to be."
...

As far as tradition goes, I have moved with my family to a church that I believe stands a much better chance of maintaining the historic Christian deposit of faith over time. To be more blunt, I have moved to a church that in my judgment within which I and my family and my descendants will be better able to withstand modernity. Basically, though -- and this is as blunt as I can be -- I'm in a church where I can trust the spiritual headship of the clergy, and where most people want to know more about the faith, and how we can conform our lives to it, rather than wanting to run away from it or hide it so nobody has to be offended.

Unmanly. Consumerist.

So he left the Church because of the scandals...and his own dissent - let's not overlook that part. Luther complained about scandals...and dissented. One can only hope his small church doesn't have a scandal, where'd he hop to next?

He joined a societally irrelevant, small church. No wonder they all agree. Small size, smaller problems. It's similar to running off to the SSPX - hey, it's 50 of us and we're all USDA Prime orthodox, baby! In the end, the logical consequence would be to start a "church of one". No one else around, no one to disagree with! It's a lot more courageous to stay with a huge Church.

For a conservative he sounds a lot like a member of the "me" generation. Is this a new trend, right-wingers joining Orthodox churches ?

It seems to me that he joined the "American Catholic Right", not the Catholic Church, in the first place.

[kawaii]

Well. If a false or non-existent union was blessed would that create a union that here-to-fore didn't exist?

[kawaii]

My impression was that adultery must be the grounds but is defined somewhat loosly... (The OCA site goes so far as to consider dedication to say alcohol over the family to be a form of adultery).

[ElPatriota]

"If you keep going down this path, you are going to go to places darker than you can imagine." I thought I understood what he meant, but I didn't. Even if I had, by then, I couldn't have stopped. What brought me in touch with Fr. Doyle was my having stumbled upon a cell of clerical molesters at a Carmelite parish in the Bronx. They had preyed on a teenage immigrant boy who was troubled, and whose father was back in Nicaragua. His mother sent him to the priests for counseling, thinking that maybe being around some men of God would do the boy some good. The priests ended up molesting him. When the boy's father arrived in the States and found out what had happened, he went to the Archdiocese of New York to tell them what happened. They offered to cut him a check if he'd sign a paper agreeing to let the Archdiocese's attorneys handle the matter...

How incredible and sad at the same time... but more incredible is the fact that many so called "Catholics," already accept the concept of homosexualism and pedophilia as being ok in the church... of course, JUST KEEP IT QUIET!... Don't talk about it...just look the other way and everything will be fine.

I have learned to my surprise that there seem to be a large group of pro-homosexuals here in FR!... and I would not be surprised if the same group is trying to make the CC more "progressive."

If there is one thing in all these culture arguments the that CC stands out for..is their SILENCE.

ok, I am ready.. let me have it :)

[Mrs. Don-o]

The following are the most recent figures (based on U.S. population) from Pew Research, June 2006 :

All Christians 84% (all includes Mormon, Orthodox, etc.)
Protestant 52%
Catholic 24%

So Catholics are 24% of all Americans, or 28% (24/84) of all Christians.

Similarly, according to the CIA World Factbook:

Protestant 52%, Roman Catholic 24%, Mormon 2%, Jewish 1%, Muslim 1%, other 10%, none 10% (2002 est.)

According to these 2002 statistics, Christians are 78% of the U.S. population (Catholic + Protestant + Mormon), and Catholics are 24% of the U.S. population, or 31% of the total U.S. Christian population.

So in the U.S., Catholics are 28 - 31% of all Christians, not 50%.

[Rutles4Ever]

So it's more merciful to just wish someone well when they walk away from the sacraments?

How many disciples walked away from Christ after the scandal of being crucified? Those who hung in there and rolled with the worst civic punishments and persecution imaginable received glory in heaven. Dreher, as a journalist, has access to some of the greatest minds in the Church. He is not leaving for lack of exposure to the teachings of the Church - and therein lies the danger to his soul. Is that prejudice? No. The Church has stated clearly that salvation comes only through the Catholic Church, and "to whom much is given, much is expected". That doesn't mean non-Catholics can't be saved, but for those of us who ARE Catholic, leaving - with full understanding of Church doctrine - is spiritual suicide.

The point is, no one wants Dreher to make this terrible mistake. In the end, it's up to him, but scandal is not exactly something new (Judas, anyone?), and the Church has proven itself everything Jesus promised it would be.

[Rutles4Ever]

There's a grand canyon between an Eastern "rite" Catholic Church (Armenian, Byzantine, Chaldean, Maronite, etc.) and Eastern orthodox - it's called the "primacy of Peter". Dreher stated that he cannot accept this. So be it. But to say he's making a lateral move is nonsense when he is removing himself from the flock of Peter.

[Mrs. Don-o]

"...only a small percentage of priests have been accused of abuse."

Yes, this is certainly true; but over 60% of the Bishops admittedly transferred known abusers from parish to parish without any warning that he was a pedophile (or ephebophile or "gay guy who liked the young stuff" or whatever you want to call it.)

Look, I don't condone Dreher's decision to leave the Catholic Church. But to say he is "ignoring the good done by the rest of the clergy" is simply false--- he has not done this at all; and to assume he is "self-righteous" is a rash judgment: falsehood and rash judgment both being moral offenses which could use some careful examination.

This may give you a more accurate and at the same time more merciful view. Read recent entries on Dreher's blog, especially "Gratitude" and "Ave Maria, Gratia Plena."

Peace to you.

[Mrs. Don-o]

"One thing the priest said to us before our marriage was that the church doesn't create a marriage, they bless an existing union. I'm not sure what the Catholic stance is on that."

The Catholic Church teaches that the bride and the groom are the ministers of the Sacrament of Matrimony; they confer it upon each other. The priest is there to be the Church's witness and to give the blessing.

[kawaii]

It's not far off then...

[Rutles4Ever]

I know this is going to sound really trite, but if you value your spiritual life so much... why don't you move to wear the spiritual food is being served?

When my wife and I bought our first house, we didn't look on the basis of where we would have the most real estate appreciation - we looked based on the parish we wanted to belong to. It took time, but we made God the priority and not our financial or environmental comfort. And to say the least, God has returned our spiritual investment a hundred-fold.

It may take a little bit of hunting, but if you just begin the process, God will lead you to where your family can thrive in the faith. It's a leap of faith, to be sure, but then, we're not called to be timid.

[ELS]

In my old Moral Theology Manual, the exposure to public view of the secret sins of others, especially sins for which they have been forgiven and done penance, is noted as a serious mortal sin.

You bring up a good point. I wonder if Dreher spoke to the priest before he published the details of the priest's past.

[Mrs. Don-o]

"In my old Moral Theology Manual, the exposure to public view of the secret sins of others, especially sins for which they have been forgiven and done penance, is noted as a serious mortal sin."

Seriously, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't detraction the sin of exposure of someone else's serious sins "without sufficient cause"?

Sex abusers have an extremely high rate of recidivism, such that U.S. law requires the registration of those convicted of this crime even after they have served their prison sentence; and clinicians have observed for 40 years that pedophilia is virtually incurable. (Google "sex abuse incurable" to get a range of opinions on this: a range, by the way, but none of them optimistic.)

This being the case, even if this sin has been confessed and forgiven, and the abuser has done penance, he should be permanently prevented from having any contact with children and youth. If the Bishop put this priest in a parish, the faithful who know about the man's background have not just a right, but a duty, to make it known.

Protecting parishioners and their families from a man with a history of sex abuse is "sufficient cause" to blow the whistle.

[Agrarian]

I don't think I agree with the statement that the Church simply blesses a pre-existing union.

This is true of *converts* who have had a legal marriage, church or not, at the time of conversion. When we are married in the Church after conversion, it is helpful to think of it as the blessing of a pre-existing union, since we obviously were not living in sin or fornication just because we weren't Orthodox.

The wicket is stickier with Orthodox Christians who enter into a non-Orthodox marriage -- this is very different, and strictly speaking they are guilty of fornication, with the only question being what level of knowledge they have. Almost by definition, that person will not be spiritually engaged with the Church, and their judgement is impaired as a result.

If someone knowingly thumbs their nose at the Church and marries outside the Church in spite of having been talked to about it, this is very serious.

But I would consider it to be a virtual impossibility for an Orthodox Christian to undergo an Orthodox wedding without it being considered to be a holy union performed by Christ through the Church. There is no pre-existing union to bless, unless they have been living in sin -- and that would be an anomalous situation. And no matter the circumstances, they are married by and in the Church, and one can't pretend that they weren't.

This is excepting gross cases of coercion, as I have said -- which certainly have happened historically and probably happens today. St. Nikolai of Zhicha, writing in the Prologue, condemns the practice of abducting women for marriage. This was written in the 20th c. by a Serb! I would imagine that such "marriages" could be declared null and void. The practical significance of an annulment in the Orthodox Church would be that the "next" marriage would be considered to be the first -- the ceremony is different for subsequent marriages, and only a maximum of three are possible, so theoretically it might matter to someone.

Of course, we consider *every* remarriage to be a falling short of God's will -- even when one is a widow or widower.

[kawaii]

Hmmm trying to find more on the betrothal and what actually is occuring...

[RFT1]

I am not a strict Feenyite, and also the churches of the East have VALID sacraments. Is it a perfect communion, no. But based on what Rod Dreher has been though, I blame the instituional church far more than Dreher himself on why he is leaving.

[Texas_shutterbug]

We did that at several churches for decades. A good friend has a name for this type of parish: "Gobble and Go" - the stampede to leave the church after communion or mass. :( The lack of community and the prevalance of gays hitting on boys in three of our four previous churches has just really destroyed any sense of peace I get there.

[Texas_shutterbug]

I don't know any ex-Catholics who became Episcopalians. They all joined more conservative churches if they joined a church at all. Most Catholics I know left because they were bored silly or were too conservative for their local churches. Our local Catholic church is so liberal I feel like I need to have a "Vote for Kerry" sticker on the back of my car to feel welcome.

[Palladin]

I'm sure you know that Bonhoeffer was a Lutheran.