Tag: Christianity

Sir Alec Guinness (1914-2000), renowned British actor, converted to Catholicism after playing a priest in the 1954 film “The Detective,” aka Father Brown.

Perhaps best known for his role as the bearded sage Obi-Wan Kenobi in the “Star Wars” films, Guinness was born into a broken family. His mother, Agnes Cuffe, was unmarried. He never knew his father. Abused by a brutal stepfather, as an adolescent Guinness discovered the solace of the theater. Confirmed into the Anglican church at 16, as a youth he dabbled in various religions while secretly considering himself an atheist.

Religion, he believed, was “so much rubbish, a wicked scheme of the Establishment to keep the working man in his place.”

Acclaimed for his role of Hamlet on the London stage, he went on to launch what would prove to be an equally illustrious film career: “Oliver Twist” (1948), “Kind Hearts and Coronets” (1949), “The Man in the White Suit” (1951).

In 1954, he was cast as the lead in “The Detective,” a film based on the character of G.K. Chesterton’s crime-solving priest, Father Brown. On location in France, he was walking down the street one evening, still clad in his stage vestments, when a local child mistook him for a real priest, trustingly took Guinness’ hand, and began accompanying him down the street.

In “Blessings in Disguise,” the first volume of his autobiography, he wrote of the incident:

“Continuing my walk I reflected that a Church which could inspire such confidence in a child, making its priests, even when unknown, so easily approachable could not be as scheming or as creepy as so often made out. I began to shake off my long-taught, long-absorbed prejudices.”

Just before filming began, the actor’s son Matthew, 11, had contracted polio. Guinness began ducking into “a rather tawdry little” local Catholic church to pray. He made a bargain with God: if Matthew were healed, he wouldn’t object should the boy ever express a desire to convert to Catholicism.

Matthew did recover. Guinness, his wife, and his son all converted to Catholicism.

“There had been no emotional upheaval,” he wrote, “no great insight, certainly no proper grasp of theological issues; just a sense of history and the fittingness of things.”

Guinness played a priest in another, lesser-known film, “The Prisoner” (1955).

Adapted from a play by Bridget Boland and directed by Peter Glenville, the film considers such contemporary issues as public shaming, the surveillance state, and anti-Church sentiment.

The story is set in the early years following World War II, in an unnamed country under totalitarian rule. In one scene, a child is shot in the back for painting the words “Free Speech” on a wall. A little heavy-handed, but we get it.

A long-suffering but conscientious cardinal — slightly enamored of his reputation as a popular hero after having survived torture by the Nazis — has been arrested for treason.

His interrogator, played by the formidable Jack Hawkins, is a former Resistance comrade of the cardinal’s who, for reasons unknown, has switched his allegiance. He knows that physical force will be of no avail against the ascetic priest’s unswerving will.

“You represent a religion which provides an organization outside the state,” he announces at the outset. “You’re a national monument and that monument must be destroyed, defaced.”

“I’m difficult to trap and impossible to persuade,” the cardinal responds.

An agonizing, monthslong, cat-and-mouse game ensues, designed to break the prisoner psychologically and spiritually.

Later, weakened, the cardinal will muse, “Surely it’s a confession you want, not the truth.”

After weeks of forced insomnia, he reveals a devastating childhood wound and “confesses” to a sin of which he may or may not be guilty.

Exposed to his flock as an ostensible fraud, the prisoner has served his purpose. Poised for release, he tells a guard, “Try not to judge the priesthood … by a priest.”

The film raises issues that are at least as relevant now as they were 70 years ago. The cardinal’s “confession,” forced by fear, isn’t all that different from today’s groveling public apologies for having stated a truth, or merely an opinion, that goes against the reigning groupthink.

In another way, though, you could say that the cardinal’s faith has healed him. The confession was forced but neither was it entirely off the mark. Under torture and duress he has undergone a dark night of the soul that, in spite of his adversary’s malign motives, has been inadvertently cleansing — and that may also have inadvertently converted his interrogator.

Clad once more in his vestments, he parts the waiting crowd, leaving the viewer to wonder whether he will be accepted or shunned by his people, and leaving us to wonder as well: which of the two adversaries is the real prisoner?

Guinness was knighted by Queen Elizabeth II in 1959 for services to the arts.

He died of liver cancer in 2000. His wife passed away two months later. The two had been married 60 years.

Watching Guinness now, it’s lovely to contemplate the source from which his devotion to family and to his acting vocation sprang.

He once described walking a London street when, with joy in his heart, he began running. “I ran until I reached the little Catholic church there … which I had never entered before; I knelt; caught my breath, and for 10 minutes was lost to the world.”

Hugging the waters of the wide Yug River is the village of Sholga, Vologda governate. Not far from the banks stands a large, majestic church dedicated to the Holy Trinity. The parish consists of over one hundred villages, and in the Sholga deanery itself serve three priests, two deacons, and three cantors.

Troubles have already rolled across Russia. Before the civil war came the spiritual, and who more than a priest could see the moral fall and emptiness. Outwardly, material life shaped up well for some, but the terrible end could already felt in the air. You knock on a seemingly healthy tree, but the sound betrays a hollow.

The First World War was on; to some it seemed that Russia stood unshakeable, while others could already see that all was coming to an end. Already long before the revolution, the rector of the church, Fr. Prokopy Popov, waved some tsarist money at a patron and said, “Look, Vasily Vasilievich, the time will soon come when this money, Nicholas’s [Tsar Nicholas II], will be pasted on people’s walls, and no one will need it.”

The pious patron thought this sounded like a call to revolution. He lost his temper, barely refraining from telling the priest off in no uncertain terms. Time passed, the tsarist government fell, a murky wave carried off the provisional government, and the whole thousand-year history of Russia began to lurch and reshape, all the rainbow colors faded, and the future turned dark.

The Revolutions and DiabolismAccording to St. Seraphim of Sarov, devil was the first revolutionary, who rebelled against God. That is why all revolutions are adverse to Christianity and have a diabolic origin. An accurate and unbiased analysis of Russian revolutions in the 20th century shows they were no exception of this rule being apparently of diabolic nature.

“>revolution happened, and the year 1918 began. The Bolsheviks organized punishment squads that destroyed clergymen and authoritative laymen all across the country. On October 13, before the Protection of the Mother of God“>feast of the Protection of the Mother of God, the punishment squad arrived in Sholga and arrested Fr. Prokopy. A pit was dug in the middle of a field. Emboldened by their power and impunity, they decided to shoot him in broad daylight, without hindering any of the people from being present.

There was a time when pagan Roman soldiers saw the numberless murders of Christian martyrs and then they confessed themselves to be Christians. But now the pastor was being killed before the eyes of his flock—and the flock silently gave him over to the slaughter.

The newly-baked lords showed that there would be no limits to their cruelty, and this merciless resolve brought paralysis upon the population. This was the time of brazen, triumphant evil.

Fr. Prokopy stood before his grave, prayed, bid farewell to his parishioners, bowed to the ground to them and said, “Forgive me, a sinner.”

The parishioners burst into tears. The priest removed his ryassa, gave it to his sons who were all the while standing next to him, and remained in his cassock. Then he turned his face to the east, again prayed, and said, “I am ready.”

A shot rang out. Fr. Prokopy fell. He was killed by the second shot.

At first the priest was buried here, in the field; but his sons asked for permission to take his body to the cemetery. The authorities denied the request, but his family did not give up on their attempts, and finally they were given permission to bury the holy hieromartyr in the cemetery of the village of Koskovo.

Hieromartyr Prokopy was numbered among the ranks of the New Martyrs and Confessors of Russia at the Jubilee Council of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church in August, 2000, for Church-wide veneration.

Is. 25:6–10 / Ps. 23:1–6 / Phil. 4:12–14, 19–20 / Mt. 22:1–14

Our Lord’s parable in this week’s Gospel is again a fairly straightforward outline of salvation history.

God is the king (see Matthew 5:35), Jesus the bridegroom (see Matthew 9:15), the feast is the salvation and eternal life that Isaiah prophesies in Sunday’s First Reading. The Israelites are those first invited to the feast by God’s servants, the prophets (see Isaiah 7:25). For refusing repeated invitations and even killing his prophets, Israel has been punished, its city conquered by foreign armies.

Now, Jesus makes clear, God was sending new servants, his apostles, to call not only Israelites, but all people — good and bad alike — to the feast of his kingdom. This is an image of the Church, which Jesus elsewhere compares to a field sown with both wheat and weeds, and a fishing net that catches good fish and bad (see Matthew 13:24–43, 47–50).

We have all been called to this great feast of love in the Church where, as Isaiah foretold, the veil that once separated the nations from the covenants of Israel has been destroyed, where the dividing wall of enmity has been torn down by the blood of Christ (see Ephesians 2:11–14).

As we sing in the Psalm this week, the Lord has led us to this feast, refreshing our souls in the waters of baptism, spreading the table before us in the Eucharist. As Paul tells us in the Epistle, in the glorious riches of Christ, we will find supplied whatever we need.

And in the rich food of his body, and the choice wine of his blood, we have a foretaste of the eternal banquet in the heavenly Jerusalem, when God will destroy death forever (see Hebrews 12:22–24).

But are we dressed for the feast, clothed in the garment of righteousness (see Revelation 19:8)? Not all who have been called will be chosen for eternal life, Jesus warns. Let us be sure that we’re living in a manner worthy of the invitation we’ve received (see Ephesians 4:1).

Seattle, October 13, 2023

St. Michael’s Orthodox Cathedral, Sitka AK – Facebook His Grace Bishop Alexei of Sitka and Alaska (Orthodox Church in America) recently undertook a trip throughout the Pacific Northwest to raise funds for the stipend fund for the struggling clergy of the Alaska Diocese.

At every stop, including Seattle, Tacoma, Portland, Paulsbo, Kirkland, and Vashon Island, His Grace was accompanied by the wonderworking “The Miraculous Icon of Our Lady of Sitka” LectureOn March 20, 2016, the Very Reverend John Kowalczyk, pastor of St. Michael’s Orthodox Church in Jermyn, PA delivered a lecture at Villanova University’s Connelly Center. The lecture is entitled ”The Miraculous Icon of Our Lady of Sitka,” and is the first presentation in the Alaskan Exhibition Lecture Series:

“>Sitka Icon of the Mother of God.

And according to the press service of the Diocese of Alaska, every visit brought reports of miracles worked through the intercession of the Mother of God in her wonderworking icon. The diocese specifically mentions a few:

• One man’s back was healed

• One woman was saved from a burst appendix when she felt prompted in her spirit to go to the hospital while praying before the icon, even though she didn’t know anything was wrong at the time

• A child was miraculous healed of brain cysts (Bp. Alexei was shown the before and after scans)

Photo: roea.org     

Hundreds of faithful came out to every stop to attend the Divine services, hear His Grace’s presentation about the needs of the Alaskan clergy, and venerate the Sitka Icon.

Bp. Alexei spoke about the history and current needs of the diocese, and “the faithful, moved by the presentation, were exceedingly generous.”

The report notes that his trip began at the Romanian Diocesan Congress, where Bp. Alexei concelebrated with His Eminence Archbishop Nathaniel and His Grace Bishop Andrei, followed by a trip to All Merciful Savior Monastery on Vashon Island, under Abbot Tryphon, where the newly composed Akathist to Our Lady of Sitka was sung.

One priest said. “His Grace worked tirelessly over this thirteen-day journey to bless the faithful of the Northwest with these holy treasures of Alaska, and to advocate on behalf of his Diocese, with an emphasis on the need to support his priests who often undergo heroic labors for the Lord for very little material reward. The Clergy of the area were warm and gracious, and had a real love for Christ’s Holy Church in Alaska.”

Visit the site of the Diocese of Sitka and Alaska to contribute to its rectory construction fund, clergy stipend fund, missionary fund, or land management fund.

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

St. Edward was born in 1003, the son of the Duke of Normandy and the nephew of King Edmund Ironside of England. From the age of 10, he lived in exile in Normandy, after the Danes gained control of England. This early experience of loss and his religious piety caused him to renounce worldly ambitions, and devote himself to God. 

When the Danish king Canute died in 1042, Edward was called to the throne of England. He accepted his duty and ruled until 1066. His sanctity made him a popular king — he abolished an unjust tax, and was said to be able to heal people with his touch.

Edward accepted marriage for the sake of his kingdom, but he had previously made a vow of chastity, so he lived in celibacy with his queen.

Edward had also made a vow to make a pilgrimage to St. Peter’s tomb, but he was unable to leave his people vulnerable to attack. The pope commuted his vow to rebuilding St. Peter’s Abbey in Westminster. A week after its dedication, Edward died, on January 5, 1066, and was buried there. 

The Latin Catholic patriarch of Jerusalem has called for a day of prayer and fasting on Tuesday, Oct. 17, for peace and reconciliation in the Holy Land.

Cardinal Pierbattista Pizzaballa has urged Catholics to organize times of prayer with Eucharistic adoration and recitation of the rosary “to deliver to God the Father our thirst for peace, justice, and reconciliation.”

“In this time of sorrow and dismay, we do not want to remain helpless. We cannot let death and its sting (1 Cor 15:55) be the only word we hear,” he said in a statement issued Oct. 11.

“That is why we feel the need to pray, to turn our hearts to God the Father. Only in this way we can draw the strength and serenity needed to endure these hard times, by turning to him, in prayer and intercession, to implore and cry out to God amidst this anguish.”

Pizzaballa, who serves as the head of Latin Catholics living in Israel, the Palestinian territories, Jordan, and Cyprus, acknowledged that the war may inhibit many Catholics in the Holy Land from organizing large gatherings and encouraged “simple and sober common moments of prayer in parishes, religious communities, and families.”

In response, Catholics from around the world have also pledged on social media to join in the fast for peace in the Holy Land in solidarity, which falls on the feast of St. Ignatius of Antioch, the first-century bishop and martyr from Syria.

After Hamas’ unprecedented multi-front attack on Israel killed 1,200 people, the Israeli government vowed retaliation and launched airstrikes on the blockaded Gaza Strip, killing 900 people according to Gaza officials.

Some 130 Israeli hostages were taken by the militant Islamist group, who have threatened to kill one hostage every time that Israel’s military bombs civilian targets in Gaza without warning.

“The pain and dismay at what is happening is great. Once again we find ourselves in the midst of a political and military crisis. We have suddenly been catapulted into a sea of unprecedented violence,” Pizzaballa said.

“The hatred, which we have unfortunately already been experiencing for too long, will increase even more, and the ensuing spiral of violence will create more destruction. Everything seems to speak of death.”

The cardinal, who arrived back in Jerusalem on the night of Oct. 10 after being in Italy for the consistory, said that he returned to find “a country that has changed a great deal and very quickly.”

“I fear it will be a very long war,” Pizzaballa said in an interview with Vatican News on Oct. 11, noting the possibility of an Israeli ground operation in Gaza.

He said that Christians in Gaza have taken shelter in the Catholic parish and school grounds in the hope that these buildings will not be targeted.

“As long as the Palestinian issue, the freedom, dignity, and future of the Palestinians are not taken into account in the ways that are necessary today, prospects for peace between Israel and Palestine will be increasingly difficult,” the cardinal said.

“The international community must start looking again at the Middle East and the Israeli-Palestinian issue with more attention than it has shown so far. And it must work hard to calm the situation, to bring the parties to reasonableness through mediations that are not necessarily public, because public ones will never work,” he added.

“We need support, to condemn all forms of violence, to isolate the violent, and to work relentlessly for a cease-fire. Because as long as weapons speak, it will not be possible to hear other voices.”

Catholics should approach the issue of artificial wombs with both courage and caution, an ethicist stressed after U.S. Food and Drug Administration advisers met about the new technology.

“Courage because this endeavor is highly complex technologically and may positively impact human lives and health at very vulnerable stages,” John F. Brehany, the executive vice president and director of institutional relations at the National Catholic Bioethics Center, told OSV News. “Caution because — when it is deployed — such technology will be powerful and subject to abuse.”

In mid-September, the FDA’s Pediatric Advisory Committee met to discuss and provide recommendations on the future of artificial womb technology for extremely premature infants, or babies born before 28 weeks of pregnancy. The independent committee considered plans to establish the safety and effectiveness of the technology, including regulatory and ethical considerations for use with humans.

The advisers examined artificial womb technology as an alternative to current standard-of-care management of extremely premature babies in the neonatal intensive care unit.

While the technology has developed animals, it has yet to be used on humans.

Ahead of the meeting, an FDA briefing document defined artificial womb technology as “a proposed therapeutic strategy that aims to bridge the period between extreme preterm birth and later gestation to allow for organ maturation in a system that mimics the womb environment and provides artificial placental (AP) support for nutrition and gas exchange.”

The FDA document provided a rationale for using the new technology: to attempt to save the lives of more babies born prematurely.

The discussion comes as the U.S. preterm birth rate reaches the highest level reported since at least 2007, according to a National Vital Statistics System report released in January by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Most recently, the CDC reported that the preterm birth rate rose 4%, from 10.1% in 2020 to 10.5% in 2021.

For that year, about one in 10 babies born in the U.S. arrived prematurely, or before 37 weeks of pregnancy, according to the CDC.

This disproportionately impacts African-American babies. The CDC found that the rate of preterm birth was about 50% higher for African-American women than for white or Hispanic women in 2021.

According to the NVSS report, of the 3,664,292 births reported in 2021, less than 1% happened before 28 weeks of pregnancy. That number still amounts to more than 23,000 babies born extremely premature.

A more recent NVSS report released in September found that, by gestational age, babies born before 28 weeks held the highest mortality rate, with a rate 170 times as high as that for babies born at 37-41 weeks. In 2021, the same report found, 65% of infant deaths occurred among babies born preterm before 37 weeks.

The CDC lists preterm birth and low birth weight as the second leading cause of infant death in the U.S. for the year 2021.

While addressing the issue of artificial wombs, Brehany pointed to the Catholic position on cherishing human life.

“We Catholics believe that we have a limited dominion over creation, and should use reason and science to protect human life and health,” he said.

He explained why Catholics should also exercise caution.

“Even an invention as simple as a sonogram can be used for valid and nefarious purposes,” he said. “That is, sonograms can be used for clinical diagnoses, to help refugees from Planned Parenthood visualize the reality of their babies — and, unfortunately, to identify unwanted female babies.”

He added: “The same will be true for artificial wombs.”

He spoke about the importance of moral and ethical guidelines regarding this technology.

“No doubt there will be complex clinical protocols to ensure the optimal utilization of artificial wombs, just as there are with neonatal intensive care units,” he said. “Ethically speaking, artificial wombs also will provide an opportunity to intervene upon, if not to control, human gestation more radically than ever.”

Brehany highlighted an observation from Christian author and apologist C.S. Lewis: Every power that humans develop over nature also increases the power that some people have over others.

While he did not describe the use of artificial wombs in specific situations, Brehany proposed general guidelines for the new technology.

“Prudential guidelines should ensure that artificial wombs are used only when no less radical means are available, and not simply as a replacement for normal gestation,” he said. “We should be able to do this, but it will be hard.”

He expressed concern over the misuse of the technology in the future.

“For years, C-sections have been utilized by some doctors for the sake of convenience and by some women who wish to avoid unwanted side effects of vaginal births,” he said. “There eventually will be analogous temptations to use the more powerful technology of artificial wombs.”

Brehany concluded by describing the potential benefits and risks of this technology.

“The benefits likely will be that many lives will be saved,” he said. “The risks are that people will have even more power over human beings during pregnancy and more discretion in choosing whether to continue pregnancies or not.”

About 20 people are physically abused by an intimate partner every minute in the United States. This comes out to more than 10 million women and men a year, according to the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence.

The group Catholics for Family Peace Education and Research on Domestic Abuse organized a Mass Oct. 7 at the Basilica of the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception in Washington to mark Domestic Violence Awareness Month, observed every October.

During the Mass, it was emphasized that efforts within the Catholic Church can play a crucial role in raising awareness among community members in need about the resources accessible to them through local and national organizations.

Msgr. Charles Antonicelli, pastor at Our Lady of Mercy Parish in the Washington suburb of Potomac, Maryland, and judicial vicar of the Archdiocese of Washington, celebrated the Mass.

In his homily, he addressed abuse, which he said can come in the form of “physical, sexual, mental, emotional, verbal or spiritual abuse between spouses or siblings or parent and child.”

“In the face of this evil that touches individuals and families in all sectors of society, we come together to raise awareness and to pray for and help those who are affected by it to find peace and security, healing and hope. We want to break the silence, break the cycle, begin the healing,” the priest said.

Msgr. Antonicelli was among the priests delivering homilies and hosting information resource tables at their parishes during the awareness month. Catholics for Family Peace offers a “pastor packet” on its website that includes tips on how to address domestic violence in their homilies, along with bulletin notices, prayers and social media posts.

“Jesus encountered the socially marginalized Samaritan woman at the well whose own experience with marriage and family was a most unhappy one. At this solemn Mass dedicated to domestic violence awareness, we are similarly confronted with the tragic reality of what should be ‘very good’ in the words of God being replaced with something very wrong,” Msgr. Antonicelli said.

Abusive partners may minimize or blame their victims by “making light of the abuse and not taking (his/her) concerns about it seriously,” the priest said, emphasizing that victims are not at fault for what they endure.

“Those who are subjected to abuse may even blame themselves while perpetrators may seem to justify it. But let us be clear on this: Neither case is true. Domestic violence can never be justified, and its victims never deserve it,” Msgr. Antonicelli said.

Sharon O’Brien, the director and co-founder of Catholics for Family Peace, has been researching and focusing her work on issues surrounding domestic violence. She served as co-founder and then president of the Interfaith Community Against Domestic Violence of Montgomery County, Maryland, from 2004 until 2013.

“I’m a cradle Catholic, and had never heard anyone address domestic violence, but I knew that all these other major religions did,” O’Brien said after the Mass.

O’Brien stated how isolating domestic violence can be for victims, and it is important to understand that communities and support are available.

“For the victim survivor, I think it’s absolutely imperative to realize you are not alone,” she told the Catholic Standard, Washington’s archdiocesan newspaper. “Everyone thinks, ‘I’m the only Catholic that’s experiencing this. The fact of the matter is that’s not true. The stats are that one out of three women and one out of 10 men experience severe physical violence from someone who says they love them.

“That number holds regardless of religion, which is unfortunate. We would love to think that faith was a protective factor, but faith is a resource.”

Domestic violence is often a result of a cycle of emotional, psychological and physical abuse. However, O’Brien said there is hope for those affected to break from the pattern.

“Women, in particular, are good at not continuing the cycle. It’s more of a challenge for men who grew up in a violent home to take learning opportunities to realize, oh no, there’s another way to treat people, particularly a wife, a partner and the mother of my children. Yes, it absolutely can be broken. We have lots of good stories about people breaking the cycle. Which is what we’re all about: hope, help, and healing,” O’Brien said.

Like O’Brien, Father Chuck Dahm, the director of the Domestic Violence Outreach program for the Archdiocese of Chicago, works on getting domestic violence training to members of the clergy to identify abuse in their communities.

“Clergy are generally not trained, unfortunately. Seminaries do not talk about this. We got it into the seminary in Chicago,” the priest said in a phone interview. “It was never talked about until I brought it into the seminary and insisted that they talk about it.”

Father Dahm added that it is important to incorporate the discussion of abuse when preaching “because when you stand up in the pulpit, you get the women who are abused and the men who are abused, you get the perpetrators, and you get the children, and you get the relatives, you get everybody, and you talk about it. You cast a huge net.”

When they are trained, Father Dahm said, some advice includes how to handle sensitive conversations and how to intervene and ask questions.

“If somebody says in the confessional, ‘My husband and I were fighting, or we had a huge argument,’ and so forth. If you do not ask questions about what that consisted of and why it existed, you won’t discover domestic violence,” Father Dahm said. The priest also recommended asking couples that want to baptize their child, “How are you doing as a couple? How are things going in your marriage?”

Father Dahm said it is important to ask those questions to the individuals separately and that “if you ask those questions, you will discover that it (domestic violence) is very prevalent in your parish.”

He added physical attributes that may be signs of potential abuse within the home to look out for.

“One of the ways in which priests can identify possible victims is by noting certain things. One is they might wear sunglasses when they shouldn’t, or they have long sleeve shirts on when they shouldn’t, they’re covering up bruises or that they’ve withdrawn from things, or they don’t want to talk about their relationship with their family,” Father Dahm said.

Other attributes include signs of depression, which include oversleeping or sleeping too little, and a drop-off in personal hygiene and appearance.

“If you see that in somebody, you have to say, ‘I would like to talk to you separately and say, I’ve noticed this about you, and I’m concerned. What’s happening?” Father Dahm said.

In the Catholic Church’s Code of Canon Law, Canon 1153 states that “if either of the spouses causes grave mental or physical danger to the other spouse or to the offspring or otherwise renders common life too difficult, that spouse gives the other a legitimate cause for leaving, either by decree of the local ordinary or even on his or her own authority if there is danger in delay.”

Father Dahm clarified that divorce itself is not considered a sin.

“The Catholic Church has a very clear position that nobody should really stay in an abusive marriage,” Father Dahm said in a phone interview. “The church really wants to emphasize (that) people’s safety is more important than staying in the marriage.”

Father Dahm referenced the pastoral letter “When I Call for Help: A Pastoral Response to Domestic Violence Against Women,” issued by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops in 1992 and reaffirmed in 2002 and 2018 that states, “We emphasize that no person is expected to stay in an abusive marriage.”

“Some people are confused about divorce, thinking that if they can get a divorce, they can’t go to Communion. That is not true. Divorce is not a sin if you have a good reason to do it, obviously. Your conscience dictates that you should protect yourself and your children,” Father Dahm said.

For anyone experiencing domestic violence or if they know someone experiencing that, the National Domestic Violence Hotline provides crisis intervention and referrals to local service providers. People can call 800-799-SAFE (7233) or 800-787-3224 (TTY). For more information, go to www.thehotline.org. For parishes who want more information on domestic violence and want to help, visit catholicsforfamilypeace.org.

Post-mortem portrait of Eudoxia Lukianovna Streshneva from the Petrine era. Illustration: ru.wikipedia.org The old merchant town of Meshchovsk, Kaluga Province, gave Russia two tsarinas, Eudoxia Lukyanovna Streshneva, wife of Mikhail Fyodorovich, the first monarch of the Romanov dynasty (1596–1645), and Eudoxia Fyodorovna Lopukhina (1669–1731), the first wife of Tsar Peter the Great.

Eudoxia Lukyanovna was born in 1608 into the family of an impoverished nobleman Lukyan Stepanovich Streshnev. Her mother, Anna Konstantinovna (1584–1650), bore her husband five children, and Eudoxia was the middle child. Since her parents were poor, they sent her to live under the care of the family of okolnichy¹ Gregory Volkonsky, a rich relative on her maternal side. In her new family, the gentle and virtuous Eudoxia received insults from the bad-mannered boyar’s daughter who was of the same age as her. She never complained to anyone, but instead silently endured all the offenses. Eudoxia’s childhood years were during the Patriarchs in Times of TroubleNo matter what historic period the glorification takes place in, it always happens at a time when that spiritual paragon of life in Christ can give assistance from the triumphant Church of Heaven to our earthly, militant Church.

“>Time of Troubles, one of the most terrible and calamitous times in Russian history. It ended with the accession of seventeen-year-old Mikhail Romanov, who was elected to the throne by the Zemsky Sobor [People’s Council] on February 21 (March 3), 1613.

When Mikhail was twenty years old, his mother, Nun Martha, decided to marry him off. When the candidate brides were shown to the tsar, he chose Maria Khlopova, the daughter of a Kolomna nobleman. But the girl suddenly fell seriously ill, and Nun Martha declared that the bride wasn’t suitable for the role of tsarina. Maria and her family were sent into exile in Tobolsk. Then, Princess Maria Dolgorukova was declared the sovereign’s bride and Tsar Mikhail married her on September 18, 1624. But on the very next day following the wedding, the tsarina fell ill with symptoms of poisoning. She died after severe illness that lasted for three and a half months.

In order to strengthen the Romanov dynasty, the tsar had to leave an heir and thus save the country from a new Time of Troubles. Therefore, in 1626, Mikhail Romanov decided to get married again. The choice of brides was held in full accordance with the old Byzantine tradition: Sixty girls from the most distinguished families, “of inherent stature, beauty and intelligence,” arrived to Moscow to be shown to the Tsar. But Tsar Mikhail did not like any of them. He decided on the eighteen-year-old Eudoxia Streshneva, who wasn’t among the girls chosen for the viewing, but rather had come to the palace as handmaid to the daughter of Grigory Volkonsky. His family was displeased that their son chose the “lowborn” Eudoxia, but Mikhail remained adamant. Neither his mother’s displeasure, nor the boyars’ resentment that their own daughters were rejected, could deter him. The monarch declared that she was a girl according to his heart, and what’s more, he saw it as his Christian duty to help her to leave the house of her oppressive relatives. His parents had to submit to his will.

On January 29, Mikhail Fedorovich officially announced his marriage to Eudoxia Streshneva. In order to prevent enemies from “dispatching” the bride, Eudoxia was brought into the Kremlin chambers and named tsarevna only three days before the wedding. The tsar’s messengers travelled to Meshchovsk to Lukyan Stepanovich, the father of the sovereign’s chosen one, so that he could bless his daughter for the marriage.

Wedding cortege of the tsar in Kremlin. Illustration: ru.wikipedia.org   

Lukyan Stepanovich Streshnev (who died in 1650) was very poor. He tilled his small plot of land with his own hands. A shabby hut with a thatched roof burst into view to the arriving messengers of the tsar. The owner was dressed in a caftan of homespun brown cloth. When he was told his daughter had been named the royal bride, he knelt before the icon and tearfully exclaimed: “Almighty God! Support me with Thy right hand, that I don’t fall victim to corruption in the midst of honors and riches!” Later on, when he was the sovereign’s father-in-law, Lukyan Stepanovich was known for his modesty, hard work and generosity. His daughter inherited his qualities.

The solemn marriage ceremony of Mikhail and Eudoxia Romanov was held on February 5, 1626. Patriarch Philaret, Mikhail Fedorovich’s father, officiated at the service and blessed the Tsar and his bride with the Icon of the Mother of God of KorsunThe Korsun Icon of the Mother of God is believed to be one of those painted by the holy Evangelist Luke, and it had been preserved in Ephesus.

“>Korsun Icon of the Mother of God. Thus the Russian Cinderella found herself on the throne. Those close to the court gossiped with concealed envy about the new tsarina, saying that “she’s not a high-priced tsarina”, since it hasn’t been long since she wore “yellowish boots”, meaning the cheapest boots. The highly-placed boyars kept gossiping about Eudoxia’s “humble” origins for many years.

Tsar Mikhail Fedorovich. Illustration: ru.wikipedia.org Historical evidence is unanimous in calling the Tsar’s second marriage a happy one: Mikhail Fedorovich and Eudoxia Lukyanovna lived in love and harmony for nineteen years. The spouses were united, above all, by their fervent faith in God—the guarantee of their family happiness.

The main job of the young tsarina was childbearing. To everyone’s disappointment, Tsarina Eudoxia’s first and second pregnancies resulted in the birth of daughters, and not the desired son, heir to the throne. The queen prayed earnestly that the Lord send her a son, and often went on pilgrimage to holy places and monasteries, generously donating rich gifts. Her prayers were heard, and on March 17, 1629, to the great joy of his parents, relatives and all the Russian people, son Alexei, heir and the future Tsar of Russia (1629–1676) was born to the Romanovs. In the acts of that time, this event was called none other than “the universal joy of the sovereign.” Out of all ten royal children born to Eudoxia only four lived to adulthood: Irina (1627–1679), Alexei (1629–1676), Anna (1630–1692) and Tatiana (1636–1706). Difficult times fell to the lot of the royal family in 1639, when one after another they lost the five-year-old Tsarevich Ivan and the newborn Tsarevich Vasily. Tsarina Eudoxia, although she took the death of her children very hard, still bore her sorrows with patience and humility. Following the death of each child, she would generously offer monetary donations to churches and to the poor for the repose of his soul.

The family life of the first Romanovs was based on strict piety

The family life of the first Romanovs was based on strict piety, daily observance of the prayer rule, the reading the Holy Scriptures, and attending church. Annually, on the day of the memory of Sergei of Radonezh, Saint of All RussiaAt that moment, the fate of the Russian Church was being decided; even the whole fate of Russian culture was being sealed. Just try to imagine Russia without the Holy Trinity-St. Sergius Lavra, without Andrei Rublev, without the churches dedicated to the Holy Trinity. And yet, St. Sergius left that decision up to another, even though he already knew the answer to his own question.

“>St. Sergius of Radonezh, the tsar and tsarina would make pilgrimages to the Holy Trinity-St. Sergius Monastery. Sometimes Tsarina Eudoxia would go on pilgrimages to the miracle-working “Revealed” icon of St. Nicholas the God-Pleaser on Arbat Street. In 1634, she sent a letter to Novgorod to her former father confessor, Archpriest Maxim, asking him to inform her about all the miracle-workers of Novgorod. The Tsarina followed the established customs and rites. For example, if on the feast of St. John the Baptist the Tsar immersed himself in the “Jordan” on the Moscow River, the Tsarina would in turn take a dip at the pond in the village of Rubtsovo, a favorite summer vacation spot of the royal family. The couple greatly revered Venerable Alexander Svirsky, whose relics were uncovered in 1641. In 1643, the Tsar arranged a rich silver reliquary for him, while the tsarina hand-embroidered the gold and silver cover for his relics.

The upbringing of the children in the royal family was imbued with the Gospel spirit. Following the birth of a tsarevitch or a tsarevna, Eudoxia Lukyanovna would order an icon of the patron saint to be painted for each of her children. She taught her children to pray diligently and often took them to church services for Communion—not only in the court churches, but also the parish churches. On the children’s Name Days, she generously gave alms to the poor. When her children were sick, she prayed diligently, ordering prayer services for their health in monasteries and churches of Moscow and other towns, asking to bring to her household the miracle-working icons from Moscow churches to serve molebens before them. She always gave alms for their health.

As was customary in those times, Tsarina Eudoxia led a secluded life in the intimate circle of her family, close boyar women and handmaids. The people never saw the tsarina and royal children—trips were made only in closed carriages, and the Tsarina and princesses would have their faces covered with expensive cloths of dense texture. After saying the morning prayer rule in her room, the sovereign would usually attend Liturgy in one of the house churches. Before dinner, Tsarina Eudoxia would do needlework; she embroidered vestments for her house churches, for other cathedrals and monasteries, as well as clothing for her husband and children. Inside her living quarters, skillful craftswomen, closely supervised by the Tsarina, embroidered, and made linen and even children’s toys.

Eudoxia avoided state life, remaining far from the intrigues and struggles of warring parties at court. She served her country entrusted to her by God through the Tsar, to whom Eudokia was a faithful assistant and friend in everything. It is not without reason that even at his betrothal, the tsar told his bride that the Lord has chosen in her the mother of the Russian people.

Eudoxia Lukyanovna was heavily involved in performing deeds of mercy. Numerous widows and orphans submitted petitions to the Tsarina through a scribe, asking for help in distress. Having read their petitions, the kind Tsarina Eudoxia tried to fulfill their requests, for having suffered herself, she understood the plight of others. She dictated to the scribe and he made notes who the recipient would be and how great an assistance they should receive. She interceded before her husband the Tsar for the wrongfully convicted, often saving them from imminent death. On church feasts, alms were distributed on behalf of the Tsarina at churches and she would also send alms to prisons on great Church feasts. In her palaces, the Tsarina had arranged living quarters for orphaned girls, and she took the most active part in their fate. When they were sufficiently grown, she would give them in marriage to good house serfs, whom the Tsarina had previously reviewed and approved. She made a sizable donation to the restoration of the Meshchovsky St. George’s monastery, where her ancestors were buried in the necropolis. Up until the end of her life, Eudoxia never ceased doing good deeds for her subjects.

On festive days, time was dedicated to various fun activities. Balalaika players, jesters, wandering actors, and dwarfs performed before the members of the royal family in the Toy Chamber. Blind singers sang folk tales, folk poems and spiritual songs to the sound of the domra.²

Every year on March 1, Tsarina Eudoxia’s birthday was solemnly celebrated in the Golden Chamber. The Tsar, showing great care for his wife, would present to her diamond and gold jewelry both on her birthday and after the birth of each child. In the days of the annual major feasts, Tsarina Eudoxia organized festive receptions in the Golden Chamber, when the boyar women and royal relatives would come to the palace. According to the ancient custom, a festive dinner was arranged for the guests. Elderly nuns from the three Moscow the Ascension, Novodevichy and St. Alexis Monasteries, were also invited to join them at the table.

The first royal Romanov couple’s final years were far from serene. Tsarina Eudoxia fell seriously ill. A case was brought against the court craftswomen who admitted (perhaps under torture) that they attempted to “put a hex on the Tsarina” through witchcraft or even to poison her. Apparently, the fact of poisoning did take place, as modern studies of her remains showed the presence of lead, arsenic and mercury in her bones in quantities many times exceeding the maximum allowable concentration.

Historical chronicles testify about the piety of Tsarina Eudoxia, as well as her modesty, intelligence, and physical beauty. Not only her husband and children loved her, but also the people honored her, and subsequent generations have preserved a good memory of her.

Royal authority was a “crown of thorns” for Mikhail Fedorovich. During his reign, the worst consequences of the Time of Troubles were overcome: He restored the economy and trade in the country and ended wars with Sweden and Poland. He reformed the army. Russia grew to add lands along the Yaik River, Zabaikalye, and Yakutia and gained access to the Pacific Ocean. A reasonable system of taxation was developed and the political power of the country was improved, among other things. But, most importantly, the Tsar defended the independence of his country.

All these tasks were within the tsar’s power with the support of God, family members and, of course, his wife Eudoxia Lukyanovna—a faithful, affectionate and loving assistant to her husband.

Pining for her deceased husband, the inconsolable tsarina-widow died at the age of thirty-seven, five weeks after the death of her beloved husband

Mikhail Fedorovich died on July 23, 1645, passing the throne to his son Alexei Mikhailovich. Pining for her dead husband, the inconsolable widowed Tsarina spent her days and nights in tears, grief and prayer, and passed away at the age of thirty-seven, five weeks after the death of her beloved husband. She was buried in the family vault for royal women in the Resurrection Monastery in the Kremlin. In the present time her tomb-chest is kept in the basement chamber of the Archangels Cathedral in the Kremlin.

In spring of 2011, a grandiose monument to Eudoxia Lukyanovna, the matriarch of the crown-bearing Romanov dynasty, was opened on the territory of Meshchovsky St. George Monastery.

I am not a “travel” writer, but I am a writer who travels. Travel is good for the soul. 

I was struck with wanderlust the instant that, as a little boy, I saw my big sister off at LAX on her way to the New York World’s Fair. To this day, that kerosene smell of jet aviation fuel makes me want to pack a bag.

I have traveled throughout Europe, lived in Australia, seen parts of Asia, and still have a bucket list that includes two-thirds of the world map. When I was a child, watching that Pan Am Boeing 707 lift off with my sister, my world was confined to the San Fernando Valley, and revolved around our parish church and school. 

In the decades that have gone behind me since, my world expanded. It became more complicated and nuanced, but I have done my best to pass on to my own children the same rock-like foundation of faith and family that I was spoon fed in the Valley.

Obviously, this is the perfect segue to the story of me, riding on a tourist bus, on an isolated island off the coast of Alaska, looking for brown bears.

The island was Icy Pointe Strait. It is owned in its entirety by the Tlingit Indian tribe. Our guide, Greg, was a member of the Raven clan of this tribe. Greg wore a Kansas City Chiefs’ Patrick Mahomes jersey without a hint of irony as he regaled us in the history of his people who have inhabited this space for centuries.

It may have been only “gift shop” anthropology, but still informative learning. The Tlingit people have always been hunter-gatherers, even if today they mostly hunt and gather tourists.

Though Greg assured us they had never had a serious bear encounter, I was a little worried. The river we saw was teeming with salmon, struggling against merciless currents. And I’m sure the bears could see them too. 

I could not help but worry that a bear about the size of a 1949 Plymouth might get the notion he would like to try a taste of Southern California Terra Tornacense. I silently evaluated the basic ambulatory capabilities of my fellow travelers and after assuring myself I could outrun at least half of them, even if I had to wait for my wife to catch up, I relaxed.

No bears or tourists were hurt in the expedition. We did see two young bears — they were only the size of a Volkswagen — do what bears do to salmon in spawning season.

But on the bus back, Greg told us an origin myth about how the Tlingits and the bears made a pact in ancient times, explaining why the Tlingit never hunt bears. Before he told us his tale, he informed us he had been given permission by a tribal elder to tell us the story. Like many tribes in North America, their myths and ceremonies are not for outsiders. I cannot blame them much, as the indigenous people’s introduction of outsiders from the iron age caused them such unhappiness.

When I was a television writer, I wrote a detective show about a Navajo shapeshifter. The Navajo technical adviser shut down the production for a couple of hours because he refused to perform the ceremony in front of a bunch of non-Navajo people. So the Tlingit reluctance was not my first experience with this sense of “ownership” over Native culture.

Some people might think a Tlingit or Navajo origin myth is “proof” that all belief systems are merely variations of the same theme. And I use “myth” in the metaphysical sense. But my armchair expertise makes it hard to believe that even ancient Tlingits truly thought there was an actual conversation between bears and elders, any more than I think ancient Greeks believed Zeus lived up on a mountaintop using lightning bolts to light his cigars.

One might argue that all these pre-Christian cultures were trying to make sense out of things, trying to figure out how to fill that God-shaped vacuum in their hearts. Without a written language, the oral tradition became so ensconced in these Native cultures that a guy in a Kansas City Chiefs football jersey still seeks permission from tribal elders to tell their story to an outsider.

I was honored to be given this look inside the culture, but I was humbled and deeply grateful that one, I did not become a bear’s hors d’oeuvres of course, and two, I was in the midst of some of God’s greatest work in nature, and lastly, knowing that in Jesus, no one is an outsider.