Tag: Christianity

U.S.A., October 16, 2023

    

Archpriest Peter Heers sent a letter to His Eminence Archbishop Peter of Chicago and Mid-America (Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia) on September 18, responding to a letter that the hierarch had circulated to his clergy earlier that month in which he wrote about Fr. Peter and the new book from Orthodox Ethos, On the Reception of the Heterodox into the Orthodox Church: Patristic Consensus and Criteria.

Abp. Peter’s letter is an instructional letter intended for his clergy, but was also posted and circulated online and thus became a point of wide discussion. Fr. Peter’s response to Abp. Peter was also sent to all the hierarchs of the ROCOR Synod and was made available to OrthoChristian by our own sources (see below for both complete letters).

In his letter, His Eminence addresses the issue of economy and strictness, which is also the overriding topic of Orthodox Ethos’ On the Reception of the Heterodox into the Orthodox Church. Abp. Peter instructs, as does the ROCOR Synod, that reception by Baptism is the norm for all converts, and that to “deviat[e] from the canons” and receive by Chrismation is possible only with his blessing. And regarding the issue of “corrective Baptism” (the practice of baptizing someone who is already a practicing Orthodox Christian but who was received incorrectly by economia), again, he instructs that this is possible with his blessing after it’s been demonstrated “that someone was clearly brought into the Church incorrectly.”

Following on his instruction about corrective Baptism, Abp. Peter turns immediately to Fr. Peter Heers and the new book. Like Abp. Peter and the ROCOR Synod, the book argues that Baptism should be the norm for reception and that the economia of Chrismation can be applied under the proper circumstances.

The Archbishop makes several assertions regarding Fr. Peter (that Fr. Peter then responds to in his own letter):

1. He states that Fr. Peter “has been sneaking around our diocese, holding assembles for the faithful, and instructing them not to tell their local priest about these gatherings.”

2. He addressed His Eminence Metropolitan Seraphim of Piraeus of the Church of Greece about the above accusation, whom he writes “seems to be [Fr. Peter’s] bishop.”

3. “By not recognizing that the hierarchs have the exclusive ability and responsibility to exercise economy vs. strictness, Fr. Heers teaches that there is in fact no True Church.”

4. He states that Fr Peter “insist[s] that the canons are self-actualizing magical spells.”

5. “By insisting that reception of converts to Orthodox Christianity can be done ONLY by baptism Fr. Heers misunderstands God’s Grace and treats it essentially as a created object.”

6. Abp. Peter does not bless the selling or distribution of On the Reception of the Heterodox into the Orthodox Church within his diocese.

Abp. Peter then instructs that any clergy must discuss plans to be interviewed or act online with him or the diocesan dean. Archpriest John Whiteford, a priest under Abp. Peter, had appeared on Fr. Peter Heers’ podcast VIDEO: On the Reception of the Heterodox with Fr. John WhitefordA discussion about the newly released book from Uncut Mountain Press, On the Reception of the Heterodox into the Orthodox Church: Patristic Consensus and Criteria with Fr. John Whiteford, rector of St. Jonah Orthodox Church (ROCOR) in Spring, TX, outside of Houston.

“>to discuss the new book not long before His Eminence distributed his letter.

Fr. Peter opens his response letter recalling how he addressed a Lenten clergy gathering in 2017 at Abp. Peter’s invitation. He was surprised to learn of the negative references in the recent episcopal letter, and he assures Abp. Peter that he is always welcome to contact him and speak with him directly.

He explains: “Your Eminence, as your letter has been widely and publicly disseminated, many have urged me to reply publicly to the accusations leveled against myself and against this recently published book. I chose first to write to you directly with the hope that your concerns can be resolved.”

Regarding the points made by Abp. Peter:

1. In response to the accusation of speaking around the diocese, Fr. Peter recounts all the contact with and presence in the Archbishop’s diocese he has had over the past year.

2. Fr. Peter explains that he was released by Met. Seraphim of Piraeus to the Moscow Patriarchate already back in 2018. He was later received into ROCOR by His Eminence Metropolitan Hilarion in January 2021 and attached to Holy Trinity Monastery in Jordanville, New York. In December 2021, the ROCOR Synod ruled to undо Fr. Peter’s reception into the jurisdiction, but without issuing a canonical release.

3. In response to the accusation that he does not recognize that hierarchs have the exclusive right to exercise economia, which, Abp. Peter writes, leads to the idea that there is no True Church, Fr. Peter writes:

We, in fact, not only fight for the “right” (or responsibility) of the Shepherd (particularly the Bishop) to manage the household (economize) but see the akriveia-oikonomia dichotomy as the main interpretative key to properly enter into the patristic outlook on the reception of the Heterodox.

He also emphasizes that the new book is not about corrective Baptism.

4. Fr. Peter writes: “Your Eminence’s characterization of my alleged stance vis-a-vis the Holy Canons as ‘self-actualizing magical spells’ is confusing, because it’s a stance I reject heartily with you. To what from our lectures or writings are you referencing precisely? It is certainly not in my book or any of my lectures.”

Fr. Peter asks Abp. Peter to watch two videos he made on this topic and to offer constructive criticism: Are You Being Healed? On Confession, Penances, and the Spiritual Father ( and Our Spiritual and Ecclesiastical Crisis: An Interview with Professor Demetrios Tselengides, Pt. 1/3 ( starting at the 21:16 mark.

5. Regarding the assertion that Fr. Peter insists reception can be ONLY by Baptism and therefore he conceives of grace as a created thing, Fr. Peter responds that the teaching of created grace is a heresy, and he rejects any such accusation. Further: “Your Eminence, as stated above, it is impossible to deny (‘ONLY’) the possibility of oikonomia. The Shepherd can absolutely apply economia and chrismate those who have been formerly baptized with proper form.”

Again, he points to one of his videos: On Canon 95 and Application of Economy at the 7th Oecumenical Council (

In conclusion, Fr. Peter writes: “I truly hope and expect that this response will be met by Your Eminence with both understanding and love, as a true Shepherd of Christ, and even with joy — joy that one sheep that you went in search of has been found, found to be not far, but within, the sheepfold. I hope you agree and will see it necessary then to change what has been written.”

***

Abp. Peter’s letter:

  

    

    

Fr. Peter’s letter:

    

    

    

    

    

    

    

Follow OrthoChristian on Twitter, Vkontakte, Telegram, WhatsApp, MeWe, and Gab!

Iași, Iași County, Romania, October 16, 2023

Photo: doxologia.ro     

Every year, the extended pilgrimage in Iași, Romania, in honor of St. Paraskeva gathers thousands upon thousands of faithful pilgrims from throughout Romania and beyond, and this year was no exception.

As of Monday morning, the Basilica News Agency reported that since the start of the pilgrimage last Saturday, more than 364,000 pilgrims had venerated the relics of St. Paraskeva which were placed in a special canopy in the Metropolis courtyard.

According to Iasi TV Life, approximately 450,000 had “enjoyed all the events held at the Metropolis of Moldavia and Bucovina in the city of Iași.”

Photo: basilica.ro     

The relics of St. Paraskeva have resided in Bulgaria, Serbia, and Constantinople, and she is greatly loved throughout the Balkans and the entire Orthodox world, but they have remained in the cathedral in Iași, working countless miracles, since 1641. St. Paraskeva heals woman of debilitating diseaseThough St. Paraskeva is loved throughout the Balkans, and her relics have had many homes, they have been venerated in Iași since 1641, working countless miracles to this day.

“>OrthoChristian reported last week on one miracle that occurred during this year’s pilgrimage.

The faithful also had the opportunity to venerate a portion of the relics of St. Andrew the Crete, which were brought specifically for the pilgrimage by Metropolitan Andreas of Arkalochori, Kastelli, and Viannos of the Church of Crete (Patriarchate of Constantinople), who also presided over the Divine Liturgy on Saturday, October 14, for the feast of the beloved St. Paraskeva.

Joining Met. Andreas were 25 other hierarchs representing six Local Churches altogether.

Photo: doxologia.ro     

In particular, joining Met. Andreas were Metropolitan Daniel of Askum, Exarch of Ethiopia (Patriarchate of Alexandria), Metropolitan Stefan of Chkondidi, Tsageri, and Lentekhi (Patriarchate of Georgia), His Grace Bishop Qais of Erzurum (Patriarchate of Antioch), Bishop Porphyrios of Neapolis (Church of Cyprus), and nearly two dozen Romanian hierarchs.

Watch the Divine Liturgy here:

​

Following the Gospel, a message from His Beatitude Patriarch Daniel of Romania was read, in which he explained why the people love St. Paraskeva:

The great piety of the righteous people towards Venerable Paraskeva is explained by the conviction and finding that she is “very useful,” as she is called in her Akathist. St. Paraskeva offers help through her prayers, to young and old, to virgins and mothers, to monasteries and families, to the sick and to the poor, gathering the clergy and the people in prayer and common confession, from Romania and other countries. Her power comes from her holiness and goodness, that is, from her love for God and for men.

Photo: doxologia.ro     

And Met. Andreas from Crete emphasized that:

St. Andrew of Crete and St. Paraskeva of Epivat received the grace of the Holy Spirit because they spent their lives in prayer and became bearers of incessant prayer. Pure and unceasing prayer made them partakers of the Holy Mysteries of the glory of God. They became our saints, witnesses of the mysteries of the Orthodox Church and culture.

With enlightened minds and heart purified by passions, today, in Iași, Sts. Paraskeva and Andrew have become and remain recipients and transmitters of the mystery of the grace of the Holy Spirit, bearers of God and bearers of Christ, praying for the peace of the world that is currently being tried in Ukraine and the Middle East, but also for peace in the Orthodox Churches.

When we opened the reliquary of St. Andrew of Crete and took his holy relics to bring them to Iași, St. Andrew emanated, in the presence of the faithful, a Heavenly and indescribable fragrance. We believe that he expresses his joy at his earthly encounter with the incorrupt body of St. Paraskeva of Iași.

Photo: basilica.ro     

This morning, the relics of St. Paraskeva were placed back inside the Metropolitan Church in Iași.

Follow OrthoChristian on Twitter, Vkontakte, Telegram, WhatsApp, MeWe, and Gab!

Athens, October 16, 2023

L to R: Abp. Ieronymos of Athens, Pat. Theodoros of Alexandria, Abp. Georgios of Cyprus. Photo: orthodoxianewsagency.gr     

A host of primates and hierarchs from throughout the Orthodox world gathered in Athens last week and over the weekend for the academic conference organized by the Church of Greece in honor of the centenary of its Theologia journal.

In addition to Archbishop Ieronymos of Athens and the attending hierarchs of the Church of Greece, the opening of the conference was also attended by Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople, Archbishop Georgios of Cyprus, Archbishop Anastasios of Albania, and hierarchs, clergy, and lay representatives of the Churches of Alexandria, Antioch, Jerusalem, Georgia, Serbia, Romania, Bulgaria, and Poland.

Photo: orthodoxianewsagency.gr     

And on Sunday, October 15, several primates and hierarchs gathered for the celebration of the Divine Liturgy in the Metropolitan Church in Athens.

The service was presided over by Patriarch Theodoros of Alexandria, who had arrived after the opening of the conference, with the concelebration of Abp. Georgios of Cyprus, Abp. Ieronymos of Athens, Metropolitan Stephanos of the Constantinople’s Estonian Church, and several Greek hierarchs, reports Romfea.

Photo: orthodoxianewsagency.gr     

Following the service, Abp. Ieronymos spoke about the conference (Orthodox Theology on the Way to the “Immaterial Reality” of Late Modernity), which dealt with the Church’s response to rapidly progressing technology:

When we conceived the idea for the theme of the conference, many people were surprised and asked me: “Well, how did it happen that the Church also deals with technology?” And others hastened to prejudge that from the gathering, the Church will demonize modern technology, dogmatizing with wooden language. Both of these reactions start from the fact that many perceive the Church statically. They consider that it is an outdated institution, which has fossilized in the past, which has no connection with modern reality and its reason is regressive.

What I would like to emphasize is that the word of the Church is eternal, because it has to do with the salvation of man. This is something that is not affected by historical conditions. Of course, no one can ignore the reality of his time. This does not mean that we are forced to assimilate the spirit of the times. But because we have to know how each condition—historical, economic, social, scientific, technological—reshapes the old problems or creates new ones. And it is necessary to know this, in order to direct our theological discourse towards the most specific contemporary problems. With this in mind, we organized the conference—to highlight the problems that the rapid development of technology has caused in our world. Not only the problems that are visible to the naked eye, such as for example the destruction of the environment, climate change, the depletion of natural resources, the increase in poverty, but everything else that is hidden, hidden under the surface. These are perhaps the most important. Because, without us realizing it, they affect the way we think and the way we live.

For example, we are surrounded by so-called “smart” machines: mobile phones, air conditioners, televisions. We live in the age of automation. What consequences does this have on our thinking, on our behavior? In the way we treat our fellow human beings, nature, and God? And how does automation, which makes it easier for us, ultimately affect our freedom? From the middle of the 20th century, the fear began to spread that living in a mechanized world, man would completely lose his identity. What can we answer to this? How will modern man deal with the loss of his personality?

We tried to highlight this reality, in its most possible dimensions. Our goal was not to demonize progress. And of course, our proposal is not to return to a society of simple tools—although there have been philosophers who have expressed such views. We are not Luddites. We grew up without a telephone or with an analog one, at best.

But our young people do not have this experience and cannot understand it. Describing it nostalgically has no effect. Criticizing them for being so dependent on technology is out of place.

What we can and must do, however, is to teach them to be critical of all these concepts that have almost been deified: Is it really progress to have the latest smartphone model? Is the possibility of direct communication really beneficial for human relations? In the same way, we must also position ourselves against the spirit of our time. Critically and not critically. The role of theology, moreover, is not to criticize but to distinguish. And to distinguish, based on the truth, which, as St. Maximus the Confessor said, is “the state of the future.” The truth must be sought in the end, in the eschaton.

Throughout history, there will always be a conflict between the spirit of the world and the spirit of the Church.

In this conflict, the Church must take a position. Not to condemn and criticize the spirit of the world. Certainly not to impose anything. Because human freedom is very important. It is a gift from God. Our mission is to tell the truth. Not on a whim. But because this truth is related to our salvation. Both now and in the end…

We cannot, as a Church, be “unworldly,” to cut off all contact and communication with the world and isolate ourselves. However, we must not become secularized either. In other words, we must be “in the world.” We must engage with the world and invite it to foretaste, here and now, the coming Kingdom.

Follow OrthoChristian on Twitter, Vkontakte, Telegram, WhatsApp, MeWe, and Gab!

Not that “confirmation.” I am talking about confirmation bias — I do too much of it and it seems every pundit on legitimate media and expert amateurs on any social media platform are also addicted.  

Last week a dear friend of mine came to visit from out of town. We rarely get a chance to get together, reminisce about old times, catch up on new times, and share our memories and laughter — all of this despite the fact that my friend and I have little in common. 

For starters, my friend is an atheist. He is not the only friend I have who bends this way. He is on the opposite political spectrum from which I inhabit as well, but for some reason, we became friends in high school and have remained friends ever since. 

This is either a testament to our bond of friendship or proof that we have not matured much since we were 17 years old. In either case, friendship endures. We have yet to solve all the world’s problems, but we haven’t given up hope.   

He married and moved away a long time ago, but even with our now infrequent encounters, we seem to pick up where we left off. He likes to push my buttons and I like to fire back.

When he came over to the house for pizza, wine, and enjoyable conversation, as usual we covered a wide range of topics. He dangled a couple of pieces of red meat my way — mentioning how much he admired pop culture atheist Sam Harris, and how he was really getting into the late pop philosophy of Joseph Campbell. My Catholic spidey senses tingled a bit, but I did not approach the hook. I opted to talk about the many foibles and happy misadventures my friend and I shared in days gone by.

I must come clean though. Just a day after my friend’s visit, I was busily scouring the internet looking for “answers” as to how his belief in nonbelief, and especially in two of its greatest disciples, was wrong and I was right. I wanted to confirm what I already believed. I knew enough about both Sam Harris and Joseph Campbell to understand they are the antithesis of what I believe, but I wanted more.

Then I stopped myself. Is my faith that fragile? Do I need to constantly remind myself that I am right and my friend is wrong? It really does not work that way. 

In my quieter, more God-centered moments, I am graced with the understanding that I am not in a competition with my friend, or anyone for that matter, when it comes to matters of faith. I cannot argue him into belief anyway, even though I have been foolishly trying to for nearly 50 years.

The term for what I was doing is “confirmation bias.” It is when we search high and low and back again for data, opinions, and anything we can get our hands on to affirm something we already believe. It is not healthy. The algorithms that drive social media know this about us and that is why when you search for something you are likely to get like-minded articles and even advertisements that reinforce your bent.

The holy Bible has been part of the “confirmation bias” ever since the Reformation. Scripture can be cherry picked ad infinitum to support one argument or another. There is an entire cottage industry where hit-and-run social media tactics are fueled by biblical “support” taken out of context. Fortunately, we have a Church that tempers this abuse with tradition and a magisterium.

Like everything else, the real answer to this phenomena is also found in scripture. Those seeking to confirm their own biases about what they thought the true Messiah should be and what he should do had their hopes dashed. He was from the House of David, but there was nothing all that regal about an out-of-work carpenter who hailed from one of the lowliest parts of Israel. 

Jesus did not help matters much either by never seeming to cooperate with people’s preconceived notions. Rather, almost every page of every Gospel highlights Jesus telling people exactly what they do not want to hear: love your enemy, lose your life to save it — the list goes on and on.

So, us modern-day confirmation bias adherents need to tread with caution when we get too comfortable and turn to Scripture to make us even more so, as Jesus so often does not give us what we want, but what we need. 

Bosanki Petrovac, Bosnia and Herzegovina, October 16, 2023

Photo: eparhijabihackopetrovacka.org     

The relics of a 19th-century Serbian hieromartyr who suffered under the Turkish yoke were uncovered in Bosnia and Herzegovina last week.

The relics of Fr. Pilip Karanović were uncovered in the hamlet of Selište, near Krnjeuša in the municipality of Bosanski Petrovac on Tuesday, October 10, with the blessing and participation of His Grace Bishop Sergije of Bihać and Petrovac, and with the help of local clergy and parishioners, reports the local diocese.

Bp. Sergije is a descendant of Fr. Pilip.

Photo: eparhijabihackopetrovacka.org     

The diocese writes of the hieromartyr:

For two centuries now, from one generation to the next, an oral tradition has been passed down and later recorded about the martyrdom of the local parish priest, Fr. Pilip. He suffered for the Orthodox faith and the Serbian name at the hands of the criminals known as Kulenović, more precisely Kulin-kapetan, the son of Mustaj-bey.

A former Krnjeuša priest, Petar Radjenović, left a record about the life and death of Fr. Philip that says: “He was born, as they say, in Lika, and studied there. It’s strange how he could have been born in Lika when it’s known that the Karanović family lived in Boboljuska. Perhaps his father temporarily moved to Lika for some reason, and during that time, he was born there. After 1800, Fr. Pilip moved from Boboljuska to Vedro Polje near Petrovac, and from there the spahi (local authority) sent him too Selište, first to Mala Selište and then to Veliko Selište. When he arrived here, there must not have been a single priest here, because nothing is mentioned about it. The records immediately speak of Fr. Pilip as the priest of this entire parish. He served this parish for about 15-20 years. Around 1821, when many Orthodox priests throughout the Turkish Empire were suffering, the Turks suspected Fr. Pilip of preparing a rebellion and banished him to Prkosi, where the authorities were located at that time. They hanged him on a pear tree in Ponorac. He hanged there all day, and at night, his parishioners came secretly, took his body down from the gallows, and buried him in the graveyard right behind his house.”

Fr. Pilip left numerous descendants. His sons Trivun and Damjan were priests, and his grandsons, also priests, Đurađ and Stevan, were Bosnian Serb leaders during the 1875-1878 uprising.

Today, Orthodox Krajina rejoices as, after two centuries, the biological and spiritual descendants of Fr. Pilip have brought his martyric relics from the bowels of the earth into the light of day, to forever remind us of his spiritual strength, to be a source of strength and help all of us in prayer, but also to forever remind us of the words of Christ: I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in Me, though he were dead, yet shall he live (Jn 11:25).

Follow OrthoChristian on Twitter, Vkontakte, Telegram, WhatsApp, MeWe, and Gab!

St. Margaret Mary Alacoque was born in 1647, to virtuous parents. She grew up a serious, deeply religious child. Her father died when she was 8, and she suffered from a paralyzing illness from the ages of 9-13, and Margaret and her mother struggled for many years. 

While she was ill, Margaret vowed to become a nun, but as a teenager, she changed her mind. She lived a normal life until she was in her early twenties, spending time with friends and thinking about marriage. But when she was 22, Margaret had a vision of Christ being scourged. She believed the vision was a message, telling her she had betrayed God by not following her vocation to enter religious life, and immediately joined a convent. 

In 1673, Margaret experienced the presence of Christ during prayer. She heard him tell her that he wants to show humanity his love for them by encouraging a devotion to “the heart that so loved mankind.” She went on to receive a series of private revelations from Jesus, but her convent’s superior dismissed her as crazy. 

This dismissal nearly killed Margaret, but the following year, Father Claude de la Colombiere (later made a saint) became her spiritual director. He believed her, and wrote down her accounts of her visions. Through his direction, even after he left the convent, Margaret reached a place of inner peace, and was no longer worried about anyone else’s opinions. 

Eventually, the visions that St. Claude had written down about the Sacred Heart of Jesus were examined by the Church, but by then, Margaret was facing her final illness. She died on Oct. 17, 1690, and was canonized in 1920. 

Whenever I ask a girl for her number, or in one of those folkloric moments where she takes the initiative, the first obstacle we face in our budding romance is my smartphone wallpaper.

As I swipe my phone on, a picture of a portly fellow in a homburg hat appears. He most closely resembles a penguin, but with a neatly clipped mustache. This is Hercule Poirot, and he is my best friend.

Poirot is Agatha Christie’s most famous creation, the little Belgian detective of “ze little grey cells.” Considering that Christie has sold more books than the Bible, Poirot himself might have better claim to John Lennon’s famous boast about the Beatles. Twenty-seven actors have played Poirot over the years, most recently Kenneth Branagh in his trilogy of Christie adaptations. “A Haunting in Venice,” a retelling and retitling of Christie’s “Hallowe’en Party,” recently hit theaters just in time for the spooky season.

Poirot himself is not a complicated character. On the page, he is not much more than a collection of affectations. The challenge — or perhaps the privilege — of the actor portraying him is to find the human among the huffy mannerisms. It’s in these distinctions we see what the actor values, and what the actor values is often a reflection of what his era values as well. Poirot is like the role of Hamlet in this regard (or like America’s Hamlet, the Joker). 

Your favorite Poirot is likely your first, and mine remains David Suchet in “Agatha Christie’s Poirot,” (1989) the man currently peeking out from behind my apps. I was introduced to him and the show in college by a friend, and we made a habit of watching one episode every Sunday evening to ease ourselves back into the week. Our other roommates and friends were confused at first, but by the end of the year the room was crammed with smelly college boys, channeling the remaining fervor of Sunday Night Football into hollered accusations at the scullery maid.  

Suchet’s genius was to deepen, not create. The Poirot from the stories was still there: the fussiness, the egotism, the love of a past that likely never existed. But other actors put on those traits like a jacket, Suchet wore them as a skin. I’m not kidding when I say I consider him a friend; I am a man who has casually watched a college class worth of coeds perish in the “Friday the 13th” movies but only made it two minutes into Suchet’s final episode. I couldn’t face saying goodbye to an actor I never met, playing a detective who doesn’t exist.

Suchet found common cause with Poirot in their shared Christianity. Christie made sporadic mention of Poirot’s Catholicism, mostly as an extension of his gently reactionary worldview. (It was one shared by the author herself, who despite not being Catholic protested the introduction of vernacular in Mass.) Suchet, an Anglican, imbued his more sincere spirituality to the character, especially in later seasons.

His faith could be a feature of his ego, like in “Murder On the Orient Express” when he prays thanking God for making him Catholic. But more often, it is a refuge from a world he no longer understands, and one that no longer bothers understanding him. In one moving instance, he gives a victim his rosary, urging her to turn to God, “for without Him is but madness.” Poirot’s ordered world can’t survive the chaos of the 20th century, so he clings to his faith as a lifeline to sanity.

In the more recent “A Haunting in Venice,” director and star Kenneth Branagh tackles the same problem but comes to a different conclusion. His Poirot is a broken man, first by his service in World War I and then its echo in World War II. He retreats to Venice, ignoring calls from clients and friends alike.

A woman who is both, mystery author Ariadne Oliver (Tina Fey), entices him out of hiding to debunk a medium (Michelle Yeoh) who is holding a séance in a nearby palazzo. The owner is desperate to speak to her daughter again, who leapt from the balcony into the water a year prior. This Poirot insists he no longer believes in God, but then no man feels this much anger at something he doesn’t think is real. When was the last time you saw a blood feud against a unicorn? He attends at any rate. 

This is a Christie story, so it’s no spoiler to say the séance is interrupted by a murder. Wherever Poirot goes, homicide tends to follow, he’s like an Angel of Death from the land of chocolate. (When given the option, it’s safer to share a train compartment with enriched plutonium.) The guests are split on whether the slaying is supernatural. Some, like the former nun turned devout housekeeper, entertain no other option. Others like Poirot trust the evidence, except when the evidence points to something they’d rather not believe.

The film doesn’t offer answers to the mystery of the afterlife, or even if Poirot returns to his faith. But the film features a recurring motif of filled teacups balanced on a table’s edge, an unsubtle metaphor for all the séance guests, all of whom are teetering on the edge in some form or other. After all, no one who questions the dead is getting the answers they want out of life. When a cup falls, its splash visually parallels the suicide splash of a certain young girl.

In the final shot of the film Poirot nudges his teacup back onto the table. If still without all the answers, he has at the very least chosen life. And if death happens to follow this Poirot about, he should hardly be surprised to embrace life and find God around the corner.

St. Teresa of Avila was born Teresa Sanchez Cepeda Davila y Ahumada, in Avila, Spain, in 1515. Her parents were Jewish merchants who had converted to Christianity under King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella. 

When she was young, Teresa often thought of God and sainthood; she and her brother, Rodrigo, ran away once in an attempt to become martyrs in a Muslim country, but they were sent home by relatives. 

Teresa’s mother died when she was 14. The loss was hard on Teresa, but it drove her to a more spiritual relationship with the Virgin Mary. While she embraced her spiritual mother, Teresa began to care about her appearance, and became more interested in reading the popular literature of the day than religious texts, so her father sent her to live in a convent of Augustinian nuns. 

In her second year there, Teresa was forced to leave because of her health, but she had already determined that her best course to salvation was to forsake marriage and earthly pleasures, and join the Carmelites. 

Despite her father’s objections, Teresa became a Carmelite at the age of 20, but as her health worsened, she had to return home, where she suffered serious pain for another two years, before being able to return to her monastery. 

While she was ill, Teresa developed a dedicated spiritual prayer life, but as she regained her health, her deep connection to God lapsed. For 20 years, she served as an obedient nun, but without the deep spirituality she had once had. 

Around the age of 40, Teresa received visions from God, and experienced changes in her soul, which brought her back to contemplative mental prayer. Her autobiography, written in 1565, details some of her experiences. 

With this renewed prayer life, Teresa was instrumental in reforms for the Carmelite Order following the Council of Trent. In an effort to return the order to their simple, austere monasticism, based in silence and solitude, she founded the Order of Discalced Carmelites (discalced means barefoot, symbolizing the simplicity of their order). During her life, she faced a great deal of backlash for her reforms, but also saw the founding of 30 new monasteries. 

In 1582, Teresa’s health failed one last time. She welcomed her fate as God’s final call to bring her home. She died on Oct. 15, 1582, and was canonized on March 22, 1622. 

In 1970, Pope St. Paul VI proclaimed St. Teresa a Doctor of the Church. 

ROME – Though the citation may be apocryphal, former British Prime Minister Harold Macmillan is credited with history’s most famous answer to the question of what’s the greatest challenge facing any political leader, diplomat or statesman.

“Events, my dear boy, events,” is the classic reply.

Pope Francis and his team may be feeling something of the same thing these days, watching their Synod of Bishops on Synodality, an assembly that’s been three years in the making, be essentially swamped by the outbreak of war between Israel and Hamas.

While the Vatican is notoriously adept at ignoring the outside world when doing so suits its purposes, in this case it’s virtually impossible to hold the broader global situation at bay, especially since the Holy Land is the birthplace of the tradition whose future this assembly has been convened to ponder.

It should be said that this is not the first time the agenda of a synod has been hijacked, to some extent, by an unforeseen external drama.

The Synod of Bishops on the New Evangelization met Oct. 7-28, 2012, just as a cease-fire in the Syrian civil war had broken down and the government of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad launched an all-out assault intended to wipe out the resistance. The day the synod opened, fighting was raging for control of Aleppo, including mass bombings of civilian neighborhoods by the Syrian Air Force, in a campaign that would eventually leave an estimated 35,000 to 40,000 people dead.

Syrian Christians were especially vulnerable as the carnage wore on, including seemingly deliberate bombings of Christian neighborhoods in Damascus while the synod was meeting.

In that context, participants couldn’t simply pretend nothing was happening. On Oct. 16, the synod announced that it would dispatch a special delegation to Damascus, composed of five senior prelates representing the five continents of the world, to express the synod’s concern and solidarity. The lineup was to include Cardinal Timothy Dolan of New York, who, at the time, was also the president of the U.S. bishops’ conference.

“We cannot be mere spectators of a tragedy like the one that is unfolding in Syria,” Italian Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, then the Vatican’s Secretary of State under Pope Benedict XVI, told the synod in making the announcement.

In the end, that delegation never got off the ground, in part because of security and logistics issues, and in part over fears that Assad wouldn’t allow members to meet with the Syrian opposition and that their presence could amount to a government propaganda coup.

No doubt, there will be similar pressure on this synod to do something equally dramatic – and, ideally, more effective than the aborted peace mission a decade ago. Already, important Jewish leaders in the United States have called on the synod to condemn “atrocities” carried out by Hamas militants, while pro-Palestinian activists in Italy have appealed to the synod to warn Israel against “disproportionate” retaliation.

What might the synod do?

On Oct. 12, the assembly devoted its morning prayer to peace in the Holy Land, and there likely will be calls to set aside time for similar reflection Oct. 17, the date the Latin Patriarch of Jerusalem, Cardinal Pierbattista Pizzaballa, has designated as a special day of fasting and prayer for peace and reconciliation.

Beyond that, it’s possible there will be calls to issue an appeal for peace in the name of the synod. We’re talking about a gathering of 464 Catholic leaders from all over the world, including a broad swath of the church’s hierarchy, and the optics of such a body remaining mute on the defining global trauma of the day likely will strike many participants as undesirable.

On the other hand, cobbling together a joint statement could be tricky – especially if such an effort were to bog down in disputes between some participants who would want a clear condemnation of Hamas terrorism, and others who would insist on criticizing Israeli policies in Gaza and the West Bank as well.

As all this unfolds, there are two possible consequences worth pondering.

First, the reality of war unfolding as the synod meets make it likely that the focus in discussions will become more ad extra, meaning directed to the outside world, rather than ad intra, referring to the church’s own internal life.  Frankly, many participants likely will feel that discussing matters such as the blessing of same-sex unions or women deacons while the world is in flames uncomfortably close to fiddling while everywhere other than Rome burns.

As an extension of that point, participants from other parts of the world may also insist that conflicts in their neighborhoods deserve the same attention as the war between Israel and Hamas. Africans, for instance, may want to use the opportunity to make the point that wars on their continent rarely draw the same level of international concern, such as the violence currently raging in Sudan.

Second, it’s possible that the horrors of what’s happening in the Holy Land may succeed where papal admonitions and pious appeals so far have failed, putting the standard ideological tensions in Catholicism aside in order to face more urgent challenges.

Whether that’s actually what happens will depend upon decisions made by synod participants and leaders over the next few days. This may not be what they came to Rome to do – but events, as ever, wait for no one.

Pope St. Callistus I is celebrated as a saint and martyr on October 14. Because there are no trustworthy biographical accounts of the pope’s life, historians rely on an account written by his contemporary, Hippolytus of Rome. Hippolytus was eventually canonized as a martyr himself, but for many years he vocally opposed the pontificate of Callistus and three of his successors, to the point of making himself the first “antipope.” Despite this, his account of Callistus’ life and papacy holds important information. 

Callistus began his career as a domestic servant, eventually taking over his master’s banking business. When the bank failed, the master blamed Callistus, who attempted to flee. He was demoted to a manual labor position in Rome. 

Eventually Callistus was sent to work in the mines, possibly due to persecution of Christians. He was eventually freed under Pope St. Victor I. Under the next pope, Zephyrinus, Callistus was made a deacon and took over caring for a major cemetery, which is still known as the Cemetery of St. Callistus. He also advised the pope on major controversies of the day, and when Zephyrinus died in 219, Callistus was the natural successor. 

Hippolytus accused Callistus of sympathizing with heretics, and resented his clarification that even the most serious of sins could be absolved after sincere confession. Callistus’ assertion of divine mercy also offended Tertullian. 

Although Callistus could not persuade Hippolytus and his followers of his rightful authority, the Church has always acknowledged the orthodoxy and holiness of Callistus as pope and saint. His death in 222 was attributed to an anti-Christian mob.