In this episode Trent sits down Michael Lofton to discuss schism, Eastern orthodoxy, and how to fight over Ukraine is as spiritual and it is political.
Welcome to The Counsel of Trent podcast, a production of Catholic Answers.
Trent Horn:
Hey, everyone. Welcome to the Counsel of Trent podcast. I am your host, Catholic Answers apologist and speaker, Trent Horn. Obviously the biggest thing in the news right now is the Russian invasion of Ukraine. And obviously, there’s a lot to talk about there. But one thing I wanted to focus on today was an article that was published at Catholic Answers Magazine online, written by my friend and colleague, Michael Lofton, on the spiritual war in Ukraine.
Trent Horn:
There’s a lot of geopolitical, historical elements involved in the Russia-Ukraine conflict, and one of the elements of the conflict is religious, specifically dealing with the Eastern Orthodox churches there in Ukraine, in Russia. So we’re going to be talking all of that with someone who knows a lot about that. He is Mr. Michael Lofton, the host of Reason and Theology. He is here with us today to talk about the spiritual war in Ukraine and why that matters. So, Michael, welcome back to the show.
Michael Lofton:
Hey, Trent. Thanks for having me back on.
Trent Horn:
Absolutely. So let’s jump into it. Your article is about the problem of schism in the Eastern Orthodox churches. Now, it’s important for people to understand that when we say Eastern Orthodoxy, it’s not one unified thing like Catholicism. You have Russian Orthodox, Greek Orthodox, Romanian Orthodox, all of these different Orthodox churches under different metropolitans and patriarchs. And so you talk about schism. I think that can be hard for us to wrap our heads around in Eastern Orthodoxy, because when we think of schism, we think of refusing to submit to the Pope and to the bishops in union with the Pope. But how can people make a charge of schism among the different Eastern Orthodox churches?
Michael Lofton:
Yeah, that’s what’s really complex here because as you know, in Catholicism, we have an objective way to define schism, and you can see that in the catechism of the Catholic church or the Code of Canon Law, which effectively notes what you just said, and that is it’s the role of the Papacy. You effectively have bishops that are in communion with the Pope, and if you are not in communion with one of those bishops who is in communion with the Pope, then you’re effectively in schism. So it really centers around that objective point of unity, namely the Papacy.
Michael Lofton:
Whereas in Eastern Orthodoxy, that’s not necessarily the case, and clearly, they are no longer in communion with the Pope. So to determine whether someone is in schism, it’s a little bit more challenging. You will see definitions thrown out like, well, somebody who descends from lawful authority is in schism. But it begs the question, how do you actually know that this person is lawfully in authority? Or what makes it even more complex, perhaps you have a Bishop who is lawful authority, if you will, but then they begin to pray with schismatics or others who are excommunicated.
Michael Lofton:
And there are some canons in orthodoxy that seem to suggest, or at least some might interpret as meaning, well, if you pray with those people, you’re excommunicated yourself. And so now you’re in schism. And that’s at the heart of the dispute right now in Eastern Orthodoxy, where you have the patriarch of Moscow effectively saying that the patriarch of Constantinople and also the patriarch of Alexandria, among some other clergymen, are in schism because they have celebrated the Eucharist with individuals that they believe are schismatic and in fact don’t even have valid consecrations, in the opinion of Moscow.
Michael Lofton:
So they are going to say, “You guys are in schism.” Whereas Constantinople and Alexandria would say, “No, these people are legitimate individuals that we celebrated the Eucharist with, and therefore, we’re not excommunicated. We’re not schismatic. And in fact, you’re separating yourself from the unity of the Orthodox church because now you’re breaking communion with us.” So it becomes very complicated to now determine, okay, well who’s actually in schism from whom?
Trent Horn:
And so that’s why, especially in Catholicism, we see that importance of if I could visualize it for people, it’s like the Pope is the hub of the wheel connecting all of the spokes, so that they’re all connected to one another because they’re connected through the hub, that the Pope becomes that important visible sign of unity for the church. And without it, you have these kinds of disputes.
Trent Horn:
So what’s interesting though, what’s going on with the patriarchs of Moscow and Constantinople. We look at the conflict between Russia and Ukraine, Russia says, “These regions in Ukraine and Ukraine itself, we are liberating them. This is actually a part of Russia. You should be back with us.” And Ukraine would say, “Nope, we are an independent country. We’re not under you.” And so there’s a parallel of that between the patriarchs of Constantinople, Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople, and Patriarch Kirill of Moscow saying, “Well, who is,” and I forget which one it is, the Ukrainian Orthodox church or the Orthodox Church of Ukraine.
Michael Lofton:
Yeah. There’s several actually. So you have the Orthodox Church of Ukraine that is under Metropolitan Epiphanius that Moscow does not recognize. You also have the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, Moscow patriarch that is under Russia, under Moscow. And that’s at the heart of the dispute.
Trent Horn:
Yeah. So the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, so it’s like, well, which patriarch are they under? It’s just like we have a conflict now over which civil leader are you supposed to be under. Part of it is also, well, what religious leader are you supposed to be under? Is the Ukrainian Orthodox Church supposed to be under the patriarch of Moscow, Kirill, or under the Archbishop of Constantinople because Patriarch Kirill has said a lot of things to be very supportive of Putin and what he is doing with the invasion, which also throws a wrench in discussions about who … Because even if the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, and I apologize if I’m referencing the wrong one, people know what I’m talking about. If that church is canonically whatever it’s supposed to be under Moscow, it gets even worse seeing how Kirill is in with Putin politically with everything. So this is all tied together basically, right?
Michael Lofton:
Yeah. And some have rightly noted that, well, if he is their spiritual father, that is the people of Ukraine, there are some problems there, of course, with his association now with Putin. But yeah, at the heart of this controversy is, as you are noting here, really who is over the church in Ukraine, and it, again, goes back to this issue of autocephaly, the ability to be not only self-governed, but to appoint your own head.
Michael Lofton:
Well, long story short, you can see even with a spokesman for the Russian church, Metropolitan Hilarion, saying that from Russia’s perspective, Moscow has been given the ability to be the head effectively of the Ukrainians. So it is really up to them as the mother church to determine whether or not autocephaly would be granted to the Ukrainians, and that this power, this authority, if you will, as the mother church over Ukrainians was granted to them by the patriarch of Constantinople over 300 years ago.
Michael Lofton:
They want to say that a very long time ago, Constantinople used to be the mother church of Ukraine, but that was then given over to Russia. But here now Constantinople is coming back and saying, “Oh, well, actually I’m the spiritual leader. I’m the mother church, if you will, of the Ukrainians, and therefore I have the ability to grant autocephaly.”
Michael Lofton:
Now that’s Russia’s perspective, right? Constantinople is going to say that at best, it only temporarily gave this authority to Russia as the mother church, but it’s still actually the mother church. And in fact, the very document that granted the Ukrainians autocephaly notes that Constantinople, or at least Bartholomew claims there, that they’re his daughter church. So he’s their spiritual parent, if you will. So that’s where the dispute is. So who actually has the authority to grant autocephaly? Who is their mother church. That’s the heart of it.
Trent Horn:
And so would you say that the decentralization of Eastern orthodoxy over the past nearly 1,000 years, that it has continued to result in decisions and stalemates and things like this over time? Because it’s difficult. People will say like, “Oh, I don’t want to the liabilities that come with the Pope and the authority he has that’s different for every other patriarch or anyone else like that.” But at the same time, it seems like without that, Eastern orthodoxy, it’s been stuck for 1,000 years. I think you mentioned your article that they’ve tried to host things like ecumenical councils to resolve who determines autocephaly, and nothing seems to ever get resolved.
Michael Lofton:
Right. And back when they had an emperor, that helped a little bit to replace the Papacy. That helped to bring about some unity. But now that is gone-
Trent Horn:
You mean like the Byzantine Empire?
Michael Lofton:
The Byzantine Empire, yeah, which then also some believe was transferred over to Moscow as the third realm, but what we’ll table that one for now. But back in the day when they had a recognized emperor in the Byzantine Empire, it was a little bit easier to keep them unified, although they still had a lot of problems then. But without an emperor, it’s been very difficult. Now to their credit, they have been able to resolve some disputes. You mentioned ROCOR. There was a period where ROCOR was not in communion with Russia, and then they entered back into communion.
Michael Lofton:
There was a dispute between Constantinople and Moscow not too long ago over the church of Estonia. And they were able to resolve that, but these are temporary patches, if you will. They’re not going to ultimately solve their problems. Because as you just noted there, effectively we’re going to have to have some kind of pan orthodox senate or ecumenical council to resolve these things permanently. But that’s the problem. That’s the difficulty is having a pan orthodox senate, having something like an ecumenical council. Who gets to call it? Who gets to vote? Who participates? How do you know whether or not something is passed? Is it unanimous? Is it majority vote?
Michael Lofton:
Russia’s perspective is, for a pan orthodox senate to be binding, for example, they think that every orthodox church has to participate. So if any of them back out, which they did in 2016 for a pan orthodox senate that had been in preparation for over 100 years, if any Orthodox church backs out, oh, well, there it is, it’s no longer binding. Well, with that kind of standard of authority, I’m not sure anything will ever be resolved. Perfect unanimity, that’s a pretty high standard. So that’s why we have these difficulties to this day in orthodoxy, unfortunately,
Trent Horn:
Because you spoke about this, I think, on Catholic Answers recently about Catholics who’ve been disenchanted with some of the changes that have happened to the church. You have the motu proprio in the Latin mass. You’ve had confusion in magisterial teachings recently. And then some people look, and then you have things, the clerics, bishops, archbishops in the West, some of them saying doing pretty dopey things.
Trent Horn:
Well, one, this is interesting. This idea, oh, they just kowtowed to the government during the pandemic. And some bishops did do that, and others fought as hard as they could to provide the sacraments. And it’s hard if you see your Bishop in cahoots with the government and you think, I don’t want to have anything to do with this. And you see orthodoxy and think, ah, look at this untouched, beautiful liturgy, doesn’t care what the government thinks, blah, blah, blah, blah.
Trent Horn:
And that might be true for many orthodox churches here in the United States. They don’t care. But then you go, well, it’s interesting, number one, that there were Eastern Orthodox patriarchs and clerics who were very strong for lockdowns and for COVID vaccines and things like that, who did things that even those same traditionalist Catholics wouldn’t like. And then number two, if you don’t like it, oh, they’re just kowtowing to the government, well, look, what’s happening with the Russian Orthodox church and Putin with this invasion and everything that’s happening. They’re completely lockstep with it.
Trent Horn:
So I think it’s important to point that out, to say, look, the grass as is not greener on the other side, but also my big temptation to tell Catholics, don’t you for a second try to gloat about where you see some orthodox cleric or patriarch saying dopey things. We’ve got more than our fair share of that. So it’s like kind of like a wire we’ve got to walk.
Michael Lofton:
More than our fair share. And how is it that them, or some of their clerics I should say, going astray from orthodoxy, how does that help us really when it comes to reconciliation? It doesn’t. It just makes it that much harder. So you’re right. We definitely shouldn’t gloat. And we definitely have a lot of problems on our end, as you note there.
Michael Lofton:
And I would also say I know a handful of Orthodox here in the United States that actually had to change their jurisdictions because they felt very betrayed by their bishops, orthodox bishops in the United States who cooperated with the government over the lockdowns. Whether they’re right or wrong is another issue. The point is they felt that they were wrong. They felt betrayed. They felt they didn’t have access to the sacraments. Therefore, they switched jurisdictions. So that same problem exists in Eastern orthodoxy even here in the United States.
Trent Horn:
Yeah. So I think that’s an important point to bring up, and definitely, people who are listening, go check out catholic.com. Michael had a great appearance. I forget if it was Focus or Catholic Answers live, but I think you talked about orthodoxy a little bit.
Michael Lofton:
Yeah. That one was on the Focus one. And then I also did a Catholic Answers live last night, talking about Eastern Christianity. So it’s another supplement one. Yeah.
Trent Horn:
So I think that’s important just to point out, because it’s easy to think oh … Because that’s always happens to people who leave the church, whether it’s Eastern orthodoxy or the evangelical Bible study that’s super friendly and everyone’s really charismatic. It’s interesting.
Trent Horn:
It’s not obviously the same in every respect, but it’s like when people are tempted to infidelity. It’s like you imagine how great it would be to have this relationship with this other person instead of your spouse. And you can’t see any of the downsides that just show up in marriage. And much the same way. A thing could happen is that you can look at other religions, other Christian denomination, other churches like the Orthodox or other ecclesial denominations, Protestants, or even other religions, and you only see grass is greener and you don’t see look, the perennial problems of sin, of corruption, you’ll find that everywhere. But which is the church crisis established that has the remedy for these kinds of things? So I don’t know if that makes sense.
Michael Lofton:
You hit the head on the nail. That’s the question. Not what do I like, what are my preferences, what are my experiences. One could have a great experience in the Catholic church, and that doesn’t necessarily mean that Catholicism is true. One could have a great experience in orthodoxy. That doesn’t necessarily mean that orthodoxy is the fullness of the faith. In order to really determine these things, we have to go to objective truth claims.
Michael Lofton:
So we really have to ask the question, okay, well, which is the community that Christ established? And let’s trace this thing out historically and doctrinally. That’s really where, in my opinion, the discussion should be. But oftentimes we’re hurt or emotional, and therefore we make decisions based on subjective feelings more than objective truth claims. And it’s understandable. I think we’ve all experienced that before, but at the end of the day, we have to ask, no matter whether I feel good about it or not, what is the church Christ established? Where does God actually want me? And that’s where I need to be, regardless of how I feel.
Trent Horn:
Michael, thank you so much for coming on the show today. I will link to your article, The War in Ukraine Is Spiritual Too, published at Catholic Answers and some of your recent appearances there. People, go and check it out. Also, check out Michael’s podcast, Reason and Theology. I know if you have any fun episodes coming up soon you want to share with us or anything else going on on that front.
Michael Lofton:
Yeah. All kinds of things. And in fact, I’ve been having discussions about the old earth and young earth issue, and I’m going to have Gideon Lazar on in a few days to talk about his perspective. I differ from his perspective. I’m more along the lines of Jimmy, but I’m more than happy to have him on and continue the discussion.
Trent Horn:
Oh, that’s great. Well, keep it up. And definitely, people who are listening, go check out Reason and Theology. Awesome podcast and YouTube channel. Thank you so much, Michael. And thank you guys so much for listening. Hey, I hope that you all have a very blessed day.
If you liked today’s episode, become a premium subscriber at our Patreon page and get access to member-only content. For more information, visit trenthornpodcast.com.