Modern Russian Ascetics

By Rod Dreher • April 6, 2012, 7:30 AM

The Russian Orthodox Church has been caught airbrushing a $30,000 watch off Patriarch Kyrill’s wrist, and doing so badly. More:

Russian bloggers have published rumors that the patriarch has a large country house, a private yacht and a penchant for ski vacations in Switzerland, though none of this has been proved.

The watch, on the other hand, has been an object of fascination for years, and there is little question of its existence. It was first sighted on the patriarch’s wrist in 2009 during a visit to Ukraine, where he gave a televised interview on the importance of asceticism. [Emphasis mine -- RD]

A Breguet watch “is virtually a sine qua non of any depiction of the aristocracy, the bourgeoisie or, quite simply, a life of luxury and elegance,” the company says, noting that its products have been worn by Marie Antoinette and Czar Aleksandr I and cited in works by Dumas and Hugo.

A Russian emigre friend who is devoutly Orthodox told me last year he has no use for the Russian hierarchy because of its wealth and connections to state power. This, I suppose, is a small but telling sign of what he was talking about.

43 Responses to Modern Russian Ascetics

Sam M says:

April 6, 2012 at 8:03 am

The Russian Orthodox Church has a fancy watch. It also has churches like this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_of_Christ_the_Saviour

I am not sure how much of a role asceticism plays.

This is no knock on the religion. I am Roman Catholic, after all. I would not be surprised to see the Pope wearing expensive things. Once you accept the pointy hat and the golden scepter and the Sistine Chapel, a nice watch or an expensive pair of sneakers or some such don’t seem all that shocking.

I always wondered: If the Pope opened up the vault at the Vatican and had an auction, how much would they actually make? I suspect that instead of passing the plate to collect money at mass, they could probably distribute cash for a while.

Probably do wonders for attendance.
Josh Brown says:

April 6, 2012 at 8:15 am

Russian Orthodoxy has always struck me as rather intriguing, especially now that I am reading Tolstoy’s “The Kingdom of God Is within You”. While there is little/no doubt that the Church establishment has connections to state power, it is still seen as the binding force that keeps the people of Russia together. Very odd and very intriguing.
Andy says:

April 6, 2012 at 8:18 am

“The church apologized for the deception on Thursday and restored the original photo to the site, but not before Patriarch Kirill weighed in, insisting in an interview with a Russian journalist that he had never worn the watch, and that any photos showing him wearing it must have been doctored to put the watch on his wrist.”

So he lied too.
Rod Dreher says:

April 6, 2012 at 8:56 am

Russian Orthodoxy has always struck me as rather intriguing

Oh, it is. You should no more make a definitive judgment on Orthodoxy by the conduct of the patriarch than you should definitively judge Catholicism by the conduct of the Pope. I don’t have an opinion one way or the other about Patriarch Kyrill. I just found this interesting, in light of the intense criticism Kyrill has received for being BFFs with Putin, a friendship that has had its rewards. As Sam said, this isn’t anything new, in the East or in the West. Still, it’s interesting.

BTW, if you want a really good, readable (compelling so, to my taste) introduction to Orthodox spirituality, you can’t do much better than “The Mountain of Silence” by Kyriacos Markides.
Fran Macadam says:

April 6, 2012 at 8:59 am

These churches, as entities that exist to pretend to buttress state authority and power with divine authority, in the tradition of Constantine and then the national Princes of the Protestant Reformation, have always identified with rulers. A patina of Christianism over a tribal war god religion of self-interest.

Solzhenitsyn, a Christian himself, noted that under the Soviets, ostensible atheists, the Russian patriarch was nevertheless their willing stooge.

At the lowest point for the USSR in World War II, Stalin sought – and received – the support of the Russian Orthodox Church.

As General Smedley Butler put it, war is a racket. Even if it is the health of the state. Why wouldn’t religious charlatans feed at its trough seeing the benefits for both church and state?
Bruce G says:

April 6, 2012 at 9:19 am

“So he lied too.”

Yes, Andy, this possibility made the story twice as disturbing to me.
Polichinello says:

April 6, 2012 at 9:29 am

Christ the Savior Cathedral serves two purposes. First, it represents a resurrection of the Church after the original Cathedrals barbaric demolition in 1931. I’m an atheist myself, but the destruction of the historic churches and synagogues during this period was a horrid act of cultural vandalism. Second, it acts a national focus of spirituality. It’s sort of like St. Paul’s Cathedral is to England.

As for opening of the vaults of the Vatican and selling off the contents, that, too would be something of an act cultural vandalism. The Church plays a number of roles. It already does a great deal of charity by providing health care and food. Another role it has is to act a repository for western and Christian civilization. Why spit on our luck at having this place to act as a safe house? I don’t see how many other government would have done any better over a period of some 1,500 years.
Polichinello says:

April 6, 2012 at 9:34 am

At the lowest point for the USSR in World War II, Stalin sought – and received – the support of the Russian Orthodox Church.

Would you have had them back the Nazis, Fran? That’s interesting.

There’s always been two levels to the Russian church. There’s an official level, which functions with the state, and then there’s the church that acts out among the masses, the monasteries and the priests. The two levels are often in conflict (sometimes violent), but their conflict is inevitable as they are human.

It’s rare that you find someone like the Metropolitan Philip, who threw Ivan the Terrible out of a liturgy, because it takes a lot of balls to do something like that. So you make accommodations and modus vivendis, so you can preserve a structure in evil times. Often it’s that or extinction altogether.
Extollager says:

April 6, 2012 at 9:43 am

Rod wrote, “BTW, if you want a really good, readable (compelling so, to my taste) introduction to Orthodox spirituality, you can’t do much better than ‘The Mountain of Silence’ by Kyriacos Markides.”

I’m reading it now, and I have to agree with the comment on this book that is included in the annotated bibliography at the end of Dionysios Farasiotis’s “The Gurus, the Young Man, and Elder Paisios,” about the intrusion of Markides’ point of view. As far as I have read (about the first 50 pages), Markides’ view seems to be: “These Mt. Athos monks are really interesting — why, they’re like a orthodox Christian version of the other masters whom I’ve studied!!” If you are a dedicated fan of comparative spirituality, Markides’ book will be Just Right. But I’d recommend Farasiotis over Markides for a committed intro to Orthodox spirituality couched in a very readable narrative. The human story is more compelling there, too: the relationship between Farasiotis and the luminous Elder Paisios (whom Markides’s Maximos can only look back on with reverence) was truly a spiritually intimate one.

Read Farasiotis sometime, Rod, and compare the books.
Rod Dreher says:

April 6, 2012 at 9:50 am

Agreed, Extollager, completely. I’ve read the Faratosis book twice — it’s an excellent book to read as a companion to the Markides. One reads the Markides book for what Father Maximos has to say.
PDGM says:

April 6, 2012 at 9:52 am

If he were wearing a pectoral cross by Faberge, I’d be more prone to be okay with it. But it’s not a pectoral cross in silver gilt with enamel and semi precious stones; it’s a boogie watch!

To be fair, in Orthodoxy, there has been in the past a tension between the monastic communities and the hierarchical church and its prelates. The monastics are supposed to help keep the hierarchical, institutional church in line. I’ve heard Orthodox worry that the US, with its relatively new Orthodoxy, does not have such a tradition because it lacks the critical mass of monks and nuns necessary for such a corrective role.

Paradoxically, Kirill is, of course, a priest monk, being a bishop (b/c bishops come from the ranks of unmarried clergy, generally also monks).

Which in turn reminds me of a joke/story told about Catholicism. In the Renaissance, a Jewish man converted and became a Catholic after visiting Rome. Later, he was asked why he converted. His questioner said, “Did the holiness in Rome impress you so much?”

The former Jew replied: “No; Rome was so incredibly corrupt that I decided God must protect his church; otherwise it would have passed from this earth long ago.”
John E. says:

April 6, 2012 at 10:27 am

Looks to me like there is one principle that almost all religious leaders can agree on – “Live as I preach, not as I do.”
Fran Macadam says:

April 6, 2012 at 1:10 pm

“‘At the lowest point for the USSR in World War II, Stalin sought – and received – the support of the Russian Orthodox Church.’

“Would you have had them back the Nazis, Fran? That’s interesting.”

Well, let’s see… I haven’t backed any Nazi or Communist ideologies, myself… but, the Vatican DID have that Concordat and Lutherans and Catholics by the millions did enthusiastically back Adolf. Of course, old Martin hadn’t put any brakes on this happening when he called for the Jews to be burnt out of home and synagogue in Germany a few centuries earlier.

On the other hand, since World War II, our wars of choice have seen six million or so perish, with our own Christianists in the forefront of every Caesar rendering lives to every other Caesar.

So, the truth of faux religion’s support of and willing reliance on secular power is interesting, though a travesty.

I don’t believe the moral equivalent of “I was just following orders” to survive leaves any residue of spiritual authority.
Dee says:

April 6, 2012 at 1:26 pm

The Russian Orthodox Church is beginning to smell funny with Kirill at the helm. He seems very much in bed with Putin. It begins to look as though these perks are part of the equation. Are you family with the activist group “Pussy Riot”. Check out this piece I just came across on Real Clear. Paints quite a picture of Patriarch Kirill:
http://www.realclearreligion.org/articles/2012/04/05/the_patriarch__putin_have_a_pussy_riot.html
Christopher Herman says:

April 6, 2012 at 1:36 pm

You may have heard of the controversy in which a female Russian punk band called Pussy Riot, whose members include observant Russian Orthodox, entered a Moscow church to protest the hierarchy’s relationship with Putin in mock song. Arguably was they did was blasphemous, but then so is the relationship between the Patriarch and the “little Antichrist” that Putin is.
Paul Simon Bar Sinister says:

April 6, 2012 at 1:41 pm

I got an Ikon camera
I love to fake a fotograf
So Father don’t take my Kodokrom away
tmatt says:

April 6, 2012 at 2:05 pm

I think it’s simplistic to clump all the Russian bishops together. The reality is more complex than that.

http://www.tmatt.net/2000/11/22/candlestick-holders-in-russia/
Dave D. says:

April 6, 2012 at 2:10 pm

Heh, all those western intellectuals who converted to Orthodoxy. You wanted a medieval church, you got it, straight down to medieval collusion with the state, and medieval corruption. At least Rod is honest to a fault: the temptation for others to band around it and be apologists for it is going to grow.

That watch was paid for by others. That’s the lesson of the televangelist scandals that devastated the Pentecostal movement, and you cannot take a soft line with stuff like this. It destroys faith.
Aaron Hinkley says:

April 6, 2012 at 2:23 pm

As an Orthodox Christian, I often find myself amazed at the stupid things the hierarchy in Russia, Greece, and elsewhere do or as a somewhat more pressing example, even the support of the patriarchate of Antioch in Syria for the Syrian government of the Assads (not that I support the rebels, but the Syrian government is clearly killing and torturing civilians at least as much as the rebels are). However, what one must realize is that we live in a fallen world – where even the clergy and the hierarchy are sinners who often do and say thoughtless and awful things. It is the Church itself that lives in the Truth, but that doesn’t guarantee that any particular member, or indeed leader, won’t do things that are bad or dishonest.
Thomas says:

April 6, 2012 at 7:26 pm

Stuff like this is always overblown — he likely received it as a gift from some incredibly rich Russian oligarch.

I wonder when people are going to start asking why he didn’t sell the watch to give to the poor? Or even better, “Why wasn’t this fragrant oil sold for 300 denarii and given to the poor”?
MattSwartz says:

April 6, 2012 at 10:50 pm

What is it with Russians and the photo-airbrush?

During the Cold War, airbrushing now-purged party ops was S.O.P., and now this from the Church? It seems like airbrushing away undesirable parts of photos is a uniquely Russian exercise. Can’t they at least compel their media to use Photoshop to make images more desirable, as we do in the West?
Rjak says:

April 6, 2012 at 11:10 pm

In re: Kyriacos Markides -

I’ve read two of his books, first “Mountain of Silence,” a few years back, and, more recently, “Riding With the Lion,” which was his first foray into writing about Orthodoxy, written a while before the vastly-superior “Mountain of Silence.”

As Rod notes above, you don’t read “Mountain of Silence” to hear from Markides. You read it to hear from Fr. Maximos, who fortunately is often given pages at a time to discourse freely. Markides has a few useful things to say, but equally often throws in needless or silly comments from his New Age perspective.

Reading “Riding With the Lion” a few months back was a very different experience, much more painful, but also instructive in its own way. Instead of being a book-length engagement with Orthodoxy, “Riding” tells the story of what lead up to Markides’ first (adult) contact with the Orthodox faith. The first 200 pages or so (and also, sadly, the last 25) are comprised of dull, spiritually dry-as-dust accounts of New Age thinking. The intervening 125 pages, however, stand out like a light shining in the darkness (and the darkness does not overcome it, although in this case it sure does seem to try). They tell of Markides’ visit to Mt. Athos, and the interactions he has with the monks on the Holy Mountain. It is truly beautiful. What is even more striking is the contrast with the rest of the book – it could not *be* any more readily apparent. One philosophy is dust and bones, and the other is a roar of life, love, and joy! And that is Christianity at its best.
Dimitry Aleksandrovich says:

April 6, 2012 at 11:44 pm

Rod you seem to have a problem with the Russian Church. I would agree that wearing a Patriarch wearing a $30,000 watch isn’t quite in keeping with a vow of poverty that clerics are supposed to take to walk in the footsteps of Christ. However I whole heartedly believe that the resurgence of the Russian Orthodox Church in Russian society including in public life is not only a good thing but something essential for Russia to continue on as a nation and a people. Also we should take the beam out of our own eyes and check out the watches on the wrists of American clerics (including American Orthodox clerics) before we pick at the splinter in the eyes of our Russian Orthodox brothers.
Charles Curtis says:

April 7, 2012 at 3:30 am

Speaking of the behavior of the pope, he apparently wears an Erhard Junghans Tempus Automatic, which is a $3200 timepiece.

http://www.dieter-philippi.de/en/ecclesiastical-fineries/the-watch-of-pope-benedict-xvi

Only one tenth the cost of the patriarch’s watch, and no attempt at obfuscation concerning it. But not cheap. Popes must keep up worldly appearences, I guess..

So much for ecclesiastical asceticism.
Charles Curtis says:

April 7, 2012 at 3:43 am

I just noticed that if you scroll down the page I link to above, they cite an article on the pope’s watch.. you’ll notice that the patriarch’s watch earns an honorable mention when compared to the pope’s. They speculate the pope’s watch is either a Junghans or a Patak Phillippe Calabara. They mention the second costs 10k euro, and the patriach’s 20k, without mentioning that the Junghans cost only 2400, which omission naturally puts the pope in the worst light possible. Whatever.
Extollager says:

April 7, 2012 at 9:12 am

Fran Macadam, I read Uwe Siemon-Netto’s The Fabricated Luther: Refuting Nazi Connections and Other Modern Myths (2nd edition) recently and recommend it to you and anyone else who assumes a connection between Luther and Nazi Germany.
Geoff G. says:

April 7, 2012 at 12:01 pm

Sam M

I always wondered: If the Pope opened up the vault at the Vatican and had an auction, how much would they actually make? I suspect that instead of passing the plate to collect money at mass, they could probably distribute cash for a while.

There’s a difference between accepting luxurious and expensive personal gifts and creating expensive and beautiful churches and holy places to worship in and dedicating them to God.

Catholicism (and Orthodoxy, from what I understand) seeks to create sacred spaces where one can experience the divine and transcend the world. And aesthetics absolutely plays a huge role in helping to achieve that. And good aesthetics are not cheap.

Ideally, yes, people ought to be able to experience God in any setting. But most of us have a very hard time doing that. Speaking for myself, I’ve only very rarely been able to have any kind of mystical experience, and when I have it’s generally been either in a natural setting or in a church. Beauty is the conduit that opens me up to higher things.

What your asking for is basically the same thing as those who would throw the contemplative orders out into the world in order to do the same kinds of charitable works to meet a practical need, as other orders do. But both are needed, and a balance (or even a creative tension) between the two is a sign of health.

Fran MacAdam

At the lowest point for the USSR in World War II, Stalin sought – and received – the support of the Russian Orthodox Church.

You could say the same about us.

Nevertheless, the point is well taken. And this is generally the problem with a lot of the Eastern Orthodox Churches; they are founded on the Byzantine model, which has led to a tendency to submit to the secular authority and become a tool for its use.

Of course, the same is often true of Catholicism and other churches in the West as well, but to nowhere near the same extent; religious independence is something the papacy has fought tenaciously for over much of its history.
VikingLS says:

April 7, 2012 at 1:06 pm

I worked in Russia long enough to say, well that whole thing is typical of Russian organizations accross the board. “It’s not there, it didn’t happen, ok it did happen but it wasn’t our fault, the problem has been corrected, nothing to see here, move along.” (This also describes every school or university I’ve worked for or attended.)

Now having said that…

Unless the communists or a group like Liminov’s National Bolsheviks (close allies of Gary Kasparov) come to power the church is going to be close to the exectutive in Russia. The three official religions, Orthodox Christianity, Judaism and Islam all recieve state support. If you want separtion of church and state you’ve got it here, but don’t expect it to flourish elsewhere.

I think my experience as an Orthodox Parishoner in Russia was typical. I didn’t go to church for political reasons, they didn’t talk politics while I was there and the people I was interested in were the people there and the people I was praying for.

The Cathederal of Christ the Savior is the largest church in one of the largest cities on earth. It is fully functional and regularly attended. Trust me next week it’s going to be really really full for Pascha. I’ve been there many times and it is used for services like any other church. I fail to see what the problem is with it unless one objects to ornate churches existing at all in which case Orthodoxy is not the religion for you.

Rod if you’re so interested in Russia you really ought to be going there, not France.
Peter says:

April 7, 2012 at 3:33 pm

The watch in question was a gift and one given years ago (in 2009)- it’s old news being dredged up again in order to attack the Patriarch after the total humiliation visited upon Putin’s adversaries in the previous election. The “airbrushing” job was obviously an amateur trying to impress the Danilov. I could have done a better job on my laptop. Finally, I’ve given gifts to my priest, and frankly if I wish to use my hard earned money to make such a gift (of money, or a watch, or whatever) I fail to see how it is any business of yours.

As for the popular opinion of Patriarch Kirill, let me gleefully point out that His Holiness is routinely listed among the most trustworthy, popular, and influential figures in all of Russia http://nationalinterest.org/commentary/spring-the-patriarchs-4786.

As for the Patriarch’s support of President Putin, the reasoning for that should be obvious. Under Putin Russia has reintroduced religious education to the nations schools, supported the rebuilding of more than 20,000 churches and monasteries, cracked down on rampant abortions and out of control alcohol consumption, passed laws to defend the traditional family etc. etc.etc. I understand that some (or all) of these actions may be disagreeable to a Western, liberal audience. That they are greeted with delight and support by the Russian Orthodox Church should surprise no one.

Have a nice day
John E. says:

April 7, 2012 at 3:40 pm

I wonder when people are going to start asking why he didn’t sell the watch to give to the poor? Or even better, “Why wasn’t this fragrant oil sold for 300 denarii and given to the poor”?

Seems like a perfectly reasonable question to ask.

You guys are the ones making the claim that Pope and/or Patriarch are in some way – either symbolically or literally are in some sense stand-ins for Christ here on Earth.

Here’s a thought experiment – try to imagine Jesus just stone-cold, no big deal wearing a watch that was worth the equivalent of a years income for a Working Poor family…when proclaiming The Sermon On The Mount.

——

Also, are you seriously asserting the example of the spontaneous breaking of the fragrant oil, by Mary the sister of Lazarus – whom Jesus had recently RAISED from the DEAD, which (if that in itself wasn’t enough) we all know to be a literal or literary foreshadowing symbolic of the burial anointing of the Crucified Christ – -

- – as a reason for why it is okay for fellows who have taken very public Vows of Poverty to walk around with that kind of bling?

Because I think that would be equating two very different Sorts of Things.

——
cecelia says:

April 7, 2012 at 4:02 pm

yeah and it seems the Pope wears Prada too – LOL – Prada shoes. Hardly expect to see Jesus in prada shoes but then again neither the Patriarch or the Pope is Jesus – they are men and prone to failings. Personally – I prefer my clergy to live more modestly but again – they are human.

As to opening the vaults – I guess you mean the Vatican museums and libraries? I agree with Polinchiello – the history of western civilization lies in those vaults – and has been kept safe there and available to those who visit the museums. I’d say keep it there rather than in some rich person’s private collection – unavailable to the rest of us to see.
Hector_St_Clare says:

April 7, 2012 at 4:54 pm

Rod,

In the last analysis, you’re not going to find a perfect church. You can choose whether you prefer the advantages and the disadvantages of Orthodoxy, or Roman Catholicism, or maybe Anglicanism or Lutheranism or some other church, but there’s always going to be problems of some sort wherever you go.

My own church certainly has its problems, but that’s part of why I’m not going anywahere, at least for the time being.
VikingLS says:

April 7, 2012 at 4:59 pm

John E the Patriach of Moscow is not the Vicar of Christ on Earth in the way one would talk about the Pope.

I can’t really say what I think Jesus would say to somone who was given a 30k watch as a gift. I guess he’d ask if he’s wearing the watch because of it’s monatary value or because of who gave it to him.
Fran Macadam says:

April 7, 2012 at 5:15 pm

Extollager, on April 7th, 2012 at 9:12 am said:

“Fran Macadam, I read Uwe Siemon-Netto’s The Fabricated Luther: Refuting Nazi Connections and Other Modern Myths (2nd edition) recently and recommend it to you and anyone else who assumes a connection between Luther and Nazi Germany.”

It’s impossible to truthfully refute the historical existence of Luther’s severely anti-Semitic “The Jews and Their Lies” and “Of the Unknowable Name and the Generations of Christ” as well as sermons published in “Luther’s Works.” Some of these were reprinted five times in his own lifetime.

Luther called for expulsion of Jews refusing to become Lutherans and said that authorities were actually remiss in not slaying them.

None of this has been denied by the modern Lutheran churches; in fact they have apologized for it.

I might add that Luther’s unchristian intolerance was often directed against Christians too – he called for violent extermination of the anabaptist Christians who refused to participate in violence against anyone – either Catholics, Protestants or Jews.

Again, the modern Lutheran church has apologized for liquidating Anabaptist Christians in Luther’s era and for the false propaganda justifying it in the intervening centuries.

Denying Luther’s virulent anti-Semitism is tantamount to the same cognitive dissonance inherent in Holocaust denial. Luther was, of course, not a Nazi – but the Nazis loved to quote him and 400 years of Lutheranism predisposed Germans and others to accept Nazis’ Final Solution. It must be admitted, too, that firebombing of German cities and civilians by the Allies helped drive fanatical German desires for revenge to be visited on the only scapegoats they had handy and were already abusing, through incinerating them.

Personally, I cannot conceive that Martin Luther was a follower of Christ. The Spirit of the Lord would in no way allow one to approve of what he said or did in these matters, regardless of the number of inkpots thrown at a Devil (who Luther was always ready to say was the co-conspirator of whomever he was disagreeing with.)
MH - Secular Misanthropist says:

April 7, 2012 at 5:21 pm

Wrist watches are 20th century http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2010/11/a-new-wrinkle-in-time/8249/ and I imagine this sort of thing won’t be a problem around 2050.
JonF says:

April 8, 2012 at 10:08 am

Re: And this is generally the problem with a lot of the Eastern Orthodox Churches; they are founded on the Byzantine model,

No, its more complicated than that. The Byzantine model was “Symphony”, Church and State were to be co-equal, each sovereign in its sphere, but working together for the common good. Now that was the theoy, and in practice it was open to a lot of abuse and distortion: strong bishops riding roughshod over weak emperors, and strong emperors subjecting the Church to their personal whims (e.g., iconoclasm). This was the case in old Russia too, though with the added factor that under the Mongols, and again during the horrendous Time of Troubles (Think: “A Game of Thrones” in Russian), the Church was the bulwark of Russia and the last bastion of its existence; the Romanov dynasty emerged out of the Church as Philaret Romanov was patriarch and placed his son teenage son Michael* on the vacant throne thereby ending the Troubles. Now Peter the Great toured the West and found himself enamored of many Western ways including the manner in which the various Prorestant churches were subject to state rule in England, Sweden etc. So among his reforms he subjugated the Russian church in like manner insofar as he dared. He could not pull a Henry VIII and make himself literal head of the Church, but for three centuries the Church was an organ of governance in Russia, freed from this vassalage only by Nicholas II late in his disastrous reign. The “Russian model” is not so much traditional Byzantine as it is 17th century state Protestant.

* Philaret had been an ordinary though powerful nobleman but was forced to divorced his wife Marfa and both were exiled to distant monasteries and took vows; Philaret became first abbott and then a bishop and then was raised to Patriarch; Michael was raised by his mother in her convent.
Anthony says:

April 8, 2012 at 9:08 pm

“Neither the Pope nor the Patriarch are Jesus”.
But that’s just the problem here, in different ways the Romans and Russians do claim that the Pope and the Patriarch and the bishops under them represent Jesus on earth and they are given the authority and special charisms to do so. Indeed, the efficacy of the sacraments performed in local churches is dependant on the local priests being in communion with the bishops and ultimately the Pope or Patriarch. It seems to me then that Rod’s Russian emigre friend can’t dismiss the hierarchy so easily without raising profound questions of ecclesiology.
dcs says:

April 9, 2012 at 11:49 am

Here’s a thought experiment – try to imagine Jesus just stone-cold, no big deal wearing a watch that was worth the equivalent of a years income for a Working Poor family…when proclaiming The Sermon On The Mount.

He wore a robe of such fine quality that soldiers gambled over who would be able to keep it.
Eric says:

April 9, 2012 at 9:46 pm

From my perspective as a member of neither church, it looks like the image of Catholicism as a faith suffers enormously in the public mind from the failings of the Roman Catholic hierarchy, while the image of Orthodoxy as a faith does not suffer similarly from the missteps of any member of the Orthodoxy hierarchy. I don’t know if this is because:

a) the Roman Catholic Church is more centralized than Eastern Orthodox Churches,

b) Orthodoxy is just not prominent enough in the West for scandals among its clergy to get serious attention,

c) Some combination of the two, or

d) I am just completely misreading the situation.

What do those of you who identify with either church think of this?
Fran Macadam says:

April 9, 2012 at 10:59 pm

“He wore a robe of such fine quality that soldiers gambled over who would be able to keep it.”

If the Patriarch or Pope were sarcastically mocked and arrayed in finery as kings, by their tormentors, while being thrown to the lions, into the Gulag or on their way to Cuba to be tortured, by having eyes gouged out or limbs amputated… no doubt photos of that would be air-brushed if not top secret classified, to avoid creating martyrs…
joe Mc Faul says:

April 10, 2012 at 7:38 pm

What Bible are you reading?

The robe was seamless and couldn’t be easily divided.

The Romans handled it the way we would flip a coin for an old pocketknife.
Old Whig says:

April 11, 2012 at 8:09 am

The Church was perfect til God allowed those pesky humans to join and help run it.

O.W.
Ottaviani says:

April 13, 2012 at 11:01 am

The Pope, for the record, does not wear prada. The media, however, speculated that he did.

His shoes are actually made by a Roman cobbler. But hey, I guess the Pope really ought to be buying cheap shoes made in Chinese sweat shops to make y’all happy rather than patronize local craftsmen.

http://www.cathnews.com/article.aspx?aeid=7862