The end of democracy?

Is democracy coming to an end soon? There has been a spate of articles in newspapers recently about the possible demise of democracy. The authors who are asking the questions are not demagogues but noted scholars and serious pundits.

One of these scholars is Stein Ringen, who is an emeritus professor at Oxford University and the author of “Nation of Devils: Democratic Leadership and the Problem of Obedience.” In an insightful article in The Washington Post he begins with a warning:

It took only 250 years for democracy to disintegrate in ancient Athens. A wholly new form of government was invented there in which the people ruled themselves. That constitution proved marvelously effective. Athens grew in wealth and capacity, fought off the Persian challenge, established itself as the leading power in the known world and produced treasures of architecture, philosophy and art that bedazzle to this day. But when privilege, corruption and mismanagement took hold, the lights went out.

Two paragraphs later, Ringen turns to the United States and Britain, which are the main focus of the article.

The second democratic experiment is approaching 250 years. It has been as successful as the first. But the lesson from Athens is that success does not breed success. Democracy is not the default. It is a form of government that must be created with determination and that will disintegrate unless nurtured. In the United States and Britain, democracy is disintegrating when it should be nurtured by leadership. If the lights go out in the model democracies, they will not stay on elsewhere.

Democracy is under threat today as never before not only in the United States and Britain but also many other Western countries. The reasons for this and how it is being accomplished are as varied as the countries involved. Nevertheless, there are some similarities among the factors that are undermining democratic institutions everywhere.

Democracy involves more than voting at election time. It means having input in the governing process. That is where democracy is failing especially today. Many people no longer bother to vote. In Canada in the last federal election only 61% cast a ballot.

Even then, votes are manipulated by those who have money. They control the candidates. It is not so much candidates who are in search of money but money is in search of candidates. The moneyed class (the 1% of the Occupy Movement) not only control the media at election time but they control the politicians afterwards.

Ordinary voters have little or no influence. Their role is simply to cast their votes, which in increasing numbers they refuse to do. After that many, if they do vote, are not interested any further in politics. Young people are especially turned off by the electoral process. Small wonder that democracy is threatened.

In this post I will not analyze all these reasons, since that would take too long. but I do want to signal the extent of the problem, which is now endemic. Democracy is under attack all over the globe.

Last year, the Transatlantic Academy, a global partnership of think tanks led by the German Marshall Fund of the United States, issued “The Democratic Disconnect,” a report by a group of distinguished academics. The report begins:

Democracy is in trouble. The collective engagement of a concerned citizenry for the public good — the bedrock of a healthy democracy — is eroding. Democratic governments often seem crippled in their capacity to deliver what their people want and need. They are neither as responsive nor as accountable as they need to be in an era of hard choices and rising nondemocratic powers. There is widespread concern about apparent declining rates of voter participation and about the alienation or disaffection of citizens from the political process.

According to the authors, in Europe, there "is fear that the distance between ordinary citizens and the politicians and bureaucrats in Brussels compromises democratic legitimacy." In the United States, they add, "lamentations about gridlock and polarization are the order of the day." And even Canada is not immune, they claim: "Canadians worry about the tendency of their political system to place largely unaccountable power in the hands of the prime minister."

More than a year after this report, The Canadian government introduced a "Fair Elections Act" that seeks to improve the Canada Election Act, but it is not fair at all, as many critics have pointed out. Prime Minister Stephen Harper has amassed unprecedented power to his office, even though he was elected by only about 25% of the total population (40% of the 61% turnout). Yet he has interpreted his mandate to mean that he can make such sweeping changes that future governments will find it very difficult in the future to undo them. 

In 2014 elections have already been held or will be held in countries as widely scattered as Afghanistan, India, Belgium, France, Netherlands, Turkey, Quebec, and Europe. Some of them are merely local, but others are general elections.

Every year some elections are more or less honest, but many others are fraudulent. Because of fraud even that semblance of democracy is removed. Voting has then become a worthless exercise that serves merely as a window dressing.

Electoral reform is sorely needed in many countries that claim they are democracies. The first-past-the-post system is very bad, but even proportional representation is no guarantee of electoral fairness, as is evident in some European countries.

A level-playing field is needed in which money does not buy elections and influence on governments. Both the US and Canada have opened the door to increased spending by the rich and powerful during elections. It is idealistic to assume that spending limits will rectify the problem, but it is a necessary, although not sufficient, step.

A way must be found to reduce voter apathy and encourage greater involvement of ordinary people in the political process. A stronger civil society can help in promoting such involvement.The use of "bread and circuses" is still to common in many countries. People have to realize that apathy will soon spell the end of democracy.

Ancient Athens is only one historical example. There are many others. I pray that the US, Canada, and many other countries will not follow the same path. The 250 years that Stein Ringen writes about will soon be up for the US. Other countries may follow.

Democracy is too precious to lose. Recall Winston Churchill's famous dictum: "Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time." (from a British House of Commons speech on Nov. 11, 1947).

Churchill had just lost the election. When he heard the news, he remarked about the British people, "They have a perfect right to kick me out. That is democracy." 

He had reason to be be bitter, but he retained his sense of humor. When offered the Order of the Garter, he asked "Why should I accept the Order of the Garter, when the British people have just given me the Order of the Boot?" 
.
Such humor should inspire us today to do what we can to protect democracy. Democracy is indeed too precious to lose.
    

A Holy Week and an unholy world

I had hoped to publish this post before the end of Holy Week, but that is no longer possible with the arrival of my daughter, together with her four children, from Massachusetts. They are here for a week to celebrate Easter with us and enjoy Toronto. I thank God for both my descendants and the miracle of Easter.

That we live in an unholy world is apparent to all of us. One only needs to read newspapers or watch TV to be rudely reminded of this reality. The massacres by Boko Haram in Nigeria, the dissection of Ukraine by Russia, the disappearance of a Malaysian airliner, the sinking of a South Korean ferry, and the senseless killing of five students by a fellow student in Calgary, are only a few recent examples that occur to me.

There are many more. Just think of the Boston Marathon bombings last year or the ongoing turmoil in Syria, where millions of refugees have fled the country because of the long-lasting civil war. I was reminded of these refugees when I witnessed a Syrian family begging in Istanbul. Later I saw other Syrian refugees in that city. There are an estimated million refugees in Turkey. There are as many as well in other neighboring countries, like Lebanon. What is is the rest of the world of the world doing to help end the strife in Syria? Very little, sad to say.

The world is also standing on the sidelines as Ukraine is being dismembered. Sanctions are of little value when countries like Britain, France, and Germany are all reluctant for various reasons to put real teeth into such punitive measures. We can only pray that diplomacy may yet stop the Russian advance, but the early signs already point to a negative  response on the part of those who are occupying building in eastern Ukraine to the agreement signed in Geneva by Russia. The protesters have said that Russian foreign minister "did not sign anything for us."

Thus it is good to learn that appearances can be deceiving, and that reality is not as it seems. That is what Holy Week teaches us. The Christian world has again celebrated Holy Week. One of the lessons of Holy Week is that Christians are forced to focus their attention, at least temporarily, on on another reality -- a reality that faith alone allows them to see.

Technically, every day of every week is holy. Holy Week is, therefore, no more holy than any other. But this week is traditionally called Holy Week. Also, the world is not always unholy, but here I am using the word "world" as a short form for the evil that exists in the world.

An unholy world: civil war in Ukraine

I admit that I am a news-nut. I pay more attention to current events than is perhaps good for me. Such a diet serves only to depress people, as my wife often reminds me. Holy Week, however, has the potential to drag people away from a depressing reality and provide them with a glimpse of a new and better world, one where sin no longer reigns and death has been conquered. I need that glimpse, as do all Christian believers.

Holy Week, which culminates with Easter, drags me away from TV and radio for a while. For a few brief hours every day I could live in a new world, one that will become a full reality for me after my death, when I too will experience the resurrection that Christ has made possible. That is what Holy Week does for me and countless other Christians. Weekly church services can do that too, but Holy Week does it in an especially profound and poignant way.

This year all Christians in the world celebrated Easter on the same date. That happens only rarely. The dating of Easter is a complex subject. Briefly, the early church fathers wished to keep the observance of Easter as soon as possible after the Jewish Passover, because Christ`s death, burial, and resurrection had happened after that event. But the Passover is movable, and thus Easter is also movable.

The Western and Eastern churches tend to use different calendars and have different ways of calculating the date of Easter. Thus the dates rarely coincide. Last year they were five weeks apart and next year they will be separated by a week. But this year they coincide, as they did in 2007, 2010 and 2011, and will again in 2017. Thus Holy Week also coincides for the two traditions.

The church services during Holy Week all focus on Christ`s passion and death, ending with his burial. These are somber days, illustrated vividly by Tenebrae services where lights in the church are slowly dimmed until only one candle signifying Christ is left. I attended several such services during this Holy Week. That has been my custom ever since I lived in Moscow. Every night, in fact, was marked by worship.
.
Christ`s resurrection marks a new beginning for humanity and indeed all of creation. It is thus a joyous event -- the most joyous one in the ecclesiastical calendar. Easter is the highlight of the Christian year, for me; I am sure most adult Christians would agree. Children, for obvious reasons, may vote for Christmas, but the older generation prefers Easter.

From the somberness of Holy Week to the joyfulness of Easter Christians everywhere can participate in a drama that dispels, however, briefly, the cruel reality of the unholy world in which all of us exist. I say this not to proselytize anyone but only to testify to my own experience and that of other Christians all over the globe.

Those who do not participate in this drama, even if they are Christian believers, may never experience that feeling, since it is only through faith and actual participation that a new and better reality becomes apparent. The unholy world disappears for a while, and it is replaced by a vision of a transcendent reality. That this unholy world reappears repeatedly is an indication of the already and not yet nature of that transcendent reality: it is here, but not fully yet. One day all of us will experience that reality.

I am holding a poster for the Good Friday walk

On Good Friday I participated in this drama in an unusual way. I joined the Ecumenical Good Friday Walk for Justice. At the various stations of the cross the walkers were confronted with various injustices. We heard stories about about how an unholy world treats the environment and other humans. A reading of Matthew`s account of the passion of Christ put this misuse of the creation into sharp relief. We felt we were indeed walking with Jesus, as we sang lustily on the streets of Toronto. It concluded with a simple meal of bread and vegetarian soup served in Holy Trinity Anglican Church, which abuts the Eaton Centre.

This event too provided a glimpse of that new transcendent reality when we stood shoulder-to-shoulder with our aboriginal brothers and sisters, as well as those from countries like the Philippines, who bear the brunt of these injustices.

My commemoration of Good Friday concluded with Duruflé`s Requiem, performed by the Toronto Mendelssohn Choir. This year I could compare that work with Fauré s version that I heard on Palm Sunday. Both pieces are beautiful; both usher the listener briefly into another reality, yet I admit that I prefer Fauré. That is the power of music, especially the music of Holy Week and Easter.

This post has become more personal than I had intended when I began. I had hoped to send it off before Easter, but that was impossible, with four small children running around the house. In addition, I received word that my mother is dying, so I had to travel to Ottawa to be with her.

I have five siblings, and we are sharing the burden of providing round-the-clock care for her. We started doing taking turns on Easter Sunday. Together with my youngest brother, I have taken the midnight through 4 am shift. But this is the least we can for our mother.

I say all this to illustrate how an unholy world keeps impinging itself on us. Death is the last enemy, and it is especially cruel. Yet the joy of Easter provides us with a renewed hope. Christ's resurrection is the promise of our own resurrection and that of those whom we love.

As the culmination of Holy Week, Easter reminds us that the reality that an unholy world presents us is not lasting, but it is transitory. There is another, better reality, one that is intended for every Christian. People like my mother can experience that immediately; others of us may have to wait a while. But the promise is there. God is faithful. He always keeps his promises.
     

Noah: the movie (2014)

I am back from an extensive trip to Europe, where I visited Amsterdam, Prague, and Istanbul, which is where I saw the Noah film. The viewing prompted this post. I hope to make more regular postings again.

Banned by some Muslims and panned by some Christians, Noah, which was released on March 28, is doing well at the box office. This movie is now showing in theaters all over the world, although as I am writing this, it still had not recouped its cost of $125 million.

I saw it in Istanbul, which is appropriate since Turkey shares with Armenia the honor of hosting Mount Ararat, the mountain where Noah's Ark is reputed to have landed after the flood had receded somewhat.

Some Muslims do not want to see this movie because it depicts Noah, who is a prophet and thus a sacred figure in Islam. Prophets do not share the same weaknesses that most mortals do. Similarly, some Christians are very critical of this film, regarding it as blasphemous and a distortion of the biblical story in Genesis 6-9.

These Christians are partially right. Noah is not blasphemous, but it is a distortion of the Genesis account. It is the writer and director, Darren Aronofsky's, interpretation of the story of of Noah and the Flood. He has made more than a few changes, as anyone who has read the biblical story realizes. But this is his account, which bears only a passing resemblance to the biblical one.

Darren Aronofsky

As some critics have pointed out, Aronofsky has stirred in ideas from earlier film versions of Noah's story, plus bits from other religions and mythologies, including kabbalism and pre-Christian gnosticism.

Aronofsky has thrown in flashbacks to earlier parts of the Old Testament, including Adam and Eve's ejection from the Garden of Eden, and Cain's slaying of his brother Abel. Some flashbacks are helpful, but not all.

The film's most visually inventive sequence is a self-contained, time-lapse retelling of the birth of the universe, as the Big Bang. Unlike the other flashbacks, which help to explain what led God to want to destroy the human race through a flood, this episode adds little to the Noah story, except to explain the opening screed, "In the beginning there was nothing . . .", which is a departure from the biblical, "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth."

God is never mentioned in this film by name. He is simply called "The Creator." God does not speak directly to Noah, but through a series of mysterious dreams. Noah does not seem to fully understand why God is sending a flood to destroy the human race but wants to preserve Noah and a boatload of animals in the Ark.

Noah thinks all along that when his sons die that will be the end for humanity, although the animals will be have been saved. In fact, Noah's understanding of salvation is extremely limited, as the scene where he wants to kill his grandchildren is aborted only when he realizes his love for them. His discovery of love for them is wonderful, but it misses the real purpose of the Ark, which was to preserve humanity because of God's great love for them.

Russell Crowe

In this film Noah is portrayed as an eco-warrior who hides his 600 years very well. Aronofsky's concern for the environment, which is perhaps his chief motive for this production, is admirable, but unfortunately his grasp of the biblical story is minimal. Aronofsky has admitted as much when he has called his pet project, "the least biblical 'biblical' film ever."

In this film there are echoes of some of his earlier works, like Pi and The Fountain, as well as evidence of blatant imitations from other notable films, such as Lord of the Rings, Waterworld, Galaxy Quest, and Transformers, just to mention a few.

Russell Crowe, who plays Noah, does not come across as genuine. His performance stands in striking contrast to the stellar effort displayed by Jennifer Connelly, who portrays Naameh, Noah's wife. Her devotion and anguish for her spouse help to lend Noah some human qualities. Without her, Noah would be a cardboard character. But because of her, there is grace in a film that displays little grace otherwise.

Jennifer Connelly

This film is notable for its violence. Noah is shown hacking people to pieces before he enters the Ark. In this he is joined by "The Watchers," a race of fallen angels who had allied themselves with the descendants of Cain, but in the end helped Noah to build the Ark and defend it from those humans who desperately wanted to get on it to save themselves. The Watchers became encrusted with molten magma when they fell from heaven. Their lumbering makes them scary, but it also contributes much to making this film as preposterous as it is. They could better have been left out. After all, in the Bible Noah and his sons build the Ark without assistance from others.

Paramount Pictures pressured Aronofsky to re-edit this film to make it more presentable to Christians who might be offended by his departure from the biblical story, but the director refused. Thus we have a film that is entertaining in its own way, especially for those who enjoy violence and are not deterred by the superficiality of much of the acting. Yet this film does not deepen our understanding of what happened to Noah and his family. The distortions are so great that there is little of Genesis account that is still recognizable.

One of the most serious distortions relates to Noah's three sons, who in the Bible all have wives by the time of the flood. Aronofsky, instead, creates family conflict by denying that any of them had wives, though he does provide one for Shem by introducing an adopted daughter of Noah. She later marries him. How Noah and his family can then continue the human race is never explained. Perhaps it does not matter. Noah, as mentioned already, thought that the race would end with him and his family. That Shem's newly-born daughters could later have become wives for his brothers is too preposterous even to imagine. 

Aronofsky is one of the finest directors ever, but this film does not contribute to his legacy. The theological richness of the biblical story is lacking. Hence my profound disappointment -- a disappointment that is shared by many, I suspect. I watched this film avidly, but I left the theater feeling empty and disappointed.. 

Anthony Hopkins

This had been a waste of time, at least from my perspective, even though it had entertained me for a few hours, in 3-D, no less. Yet I did not learn anything I did not already know. Other viewers will probably be confused by the many distortions of the biblical story.

I am still waiting for a Noah film that is true to the Bible and at the same time is of great artistic merit. This film, sad to say, does not meet either of these criteria well. I expected much more from Aronofsky, after his earlier works. This film is thus a travesty. It may be a blockbuster, but it is not a truly great movie.

As a theological educator I am especially disappointed in this film. What could have been an opportunity to teach about God's love for humanity by sparing a remnant, instead becomes a mishmash of episodes from other films and a multitude of other stories. What should have taught the world about the biblical idea of salvation, has become a vehicle for making money. This is Aronofsky's film, however, not mine.

This is certainly not Hollywood at its best. I do not expect the major movie studios to become seminaries, but I would like them to be true to the original story as many Christians and Jews understand it. The story of Noah and the Ark has turned what could have been a great film into something that cheapens the story that has traditionally been understood. There are other weaknesses as well.

The acting of the major actors, such as Crowe, is substandard. Except for some of the women, much of the acting is poor. In only a few roles do the actors shine. Just think of Anthony Hopkins, who plays Methuselah, whose remaining passion in life (at the venerable age of 969) is looking for berries. It is a minor role, but well acted. When he does find them, it becomes almost a sacramental act.

Aronofsky, at least, did the Ark right. It was not a boat, but instead was a box that from the perspective of the Bible was controlled by God, since salvation is God's work. Also, Noah is not the hero in the biblical story but he is a rather weak man. Noah only becomes truly righteous late in life. For Aronofsky, Noah too has weaknesses, but he is the hero of this eponymous film.

Aronofsky concludes this film with the covenant that God makes with Noah. The rainbow is the sign that God gives of his promise not to destroy the human race again with a flood. 

So Aranofsky does not get everything wrong, but too much in this film is colored by his peculiar presentation of this amazing story. There are a few things that Christians can learn from some of his other sources, but most of them distort the story in ways that leave me disappointed.

I regret that I could not ask the other film viewers in the theater what they thought of this film. There were very few there that afternoon, and most were Muslims. Turkey is about 97% Muslim, with Christians making up only 0.2% of the population.

In conclusion, for Aronofsky the story of Noah is not that of salvation, at least not in the traditional sense. Instead it is a warning about a looming ecological disaster, which is a highly secularized view of salvation. There are many subtexts in this film that are interesting, but the biblical story has largely gotten lost amid all the other stories that Aronofsky is telling.

Maybe that is the greatest failing of this film: Aronfsky has too many stories to tell. Noah, the movie, is not the story I was looking for when I went to the theater, yet I must admit that it was not as bad as I had heard. That is maybe part of Aronofsky's genius: he is a great storyteller. Too bad he is not telling the biblical story as I, and many others, hoped to hear or, in this case, to view.

         

Cleaning up the Vatican

In many countries it is the custom to do spring cleaning. After a long winter, the windows are opened, and homes are cleaned from top to bottom. This is what Pope Francis started doing for the 1.2 billion-member church that he heads. Now he has finally turned to cleaning up the mess in the Vatican for which the word "Stygian" is not inappropriate.

After a year in the papal office, Francis has established himself as a cross between a rock star and Superman. In 2013 he had already made Time magazine's "Person of the Year." Modelling himself after his namesake, Saint Francis, he lives a simple life-style. He avoids the Apostolic Palace, which he claims could hold 300, and wears a simple white cassock rather than the red robes preferred by his predecessors.

Francis wowed the world by clearly siding with the poor in his first encyclical Evangelii Gaudium ("The Joy of the Gospel"). He threw down the gauntlet to the wealthy of the world when he told them what their task is: "The pope loves everyone, rich and poor alike, but he is obliged in the name of Christ to remind all that the rich must help, respect and promote the poor." This reminder has hardly improved his popularity with the rich in the church, including some prelates who also happen to work in the Vatican.

These thoughts were prompted by a series of articles on the first year of Pope Francis and, in particular, a hard-hitting report aired on PBS . It can be viewed at http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/secrets-of-the-vatican/. It exposes in unflinching detail the sexual abuse scandal that reaches into the upper echelons of the Vatican. It also delves extensively into the allegations of money laundering on the part of the Vatican Bank. The Vatican is where Francis must begin cleaning house.

I saw the PBS program. Someone has commented: “It is unbelievable that this documentary was ever produced and shown on American television, much less by the government’s PBS network.” I agree.

The tentacles of the sexual abuse scandal reach from every parish, through every diocese and archdiocese, right into the corridors of the Vatican. That this scandal has been allowed to continue so long is astounding, until one realizes that the perpetrators were being defended by those in authority at every step, including the papacy. Thus the necessity of cleaning up the Vatican.

Marcial Maciel Degollado and Pope John-Paul II

The PBS program tells the story of Rev. Marcial Maciel Degollado, a Mexican priest who founded the Roman Catholic Church’s Legion of Christ, an order which recruited young men for the priesthood. He was also a drug addict and pedophile who sexually abused dozens of young boys during a reign of terror that spanned decades and fathered multiple children out of wedlock. He even abused his own sons.

But Maciel, whose conduct was repeatedly brought to the attention of church leaders including the future Pope Benedict XVI, was never called to account for his sins. He was protected by former Pope John Paul II.

Maciel was never punished but merely encouraged by Benedict to live "a reserved life of penitence and prayer, relinquishing any form of public ministry." Only this year was he formally denounced by the order he founded for "reprehensible and objectively immoral behavior."

The program also mentions a woman who was raped at the age of eight by a priest who threatened that her parents would "burn in hell" if she told anyone. This incident too like many others was covered up. 

Despite its multiple protestations of remorse over these scandals, the Vatican has done nothing but pay lip service to solving its child sex abuse problem. Sexual abuse, however, goes beyond the abuse of children. The PBS program shows footage of priests in the Vatican engaging in gay orgies at night and yet celebrating the sacraments the next morning.

That there are gay clergy in the Vatican is confirmed by other sources. A former commandant of the Swiss Guard that provides security at the Vatican has said that homosexual clerics formed a virtual "secret society" at the Vatican. A former Guard has charged that he had been propositioned by a Vatican official. Last year Francis himself acknowledged the existence of a gay lobby at the Vatican, but added, "We need to see what we can do about it."

The fact that some former popes did nothing about sexual abuse and even permitted it within the supposedly sanctified halls of the Vatican is frightening and underlines the urgency and necessity of cleaning it up. 

The financial corruption in the Vatican is also reprehensible. In contrast to the simple lifestyle of Pope Francis, Msgr. Nunzio Scarano, who was arrested last year for attempting to bring €20 million into Italy illegally, now faces new criminal charges for money-laundering. Before he was suspended, Msgr. Scarano held a key office supervising Vatican financial accounts. His supervisors must have been either terribly negligent or he enjoyed protection.

Msgr. Nunzio Scarano

Scarano's arrest appears to confirm suspicions that the bank, which oversees about €7.1 billion in assets, "continues to be used as an offshore haven," according to knowledgeable sources.

The Vatican Bank may prove even more difficult to deal with than sexual abuse is. Francis has replaced several directors of the Bank, which is properly called The Institute for the Works of Religion (Italian: Istituto per le Opere di Religione – IOR).

He has also appointed a new team to oversee finances and clean up the Vatican bank. He brought in outside consultants to advise on accounting, management and communications. And he established an eight-man Council of Cardinals to act as his personal advisers. But will this be enough?

If reform of the Vatican Bank proves impossible, Francis may have to scrap it. He is already on record as saying that St Peter "did not have a bank account." Scarano is not the only prelate who has allegedly dipped his hand into the Vatican purse.

If Francis manages to clean up the Vatican, there are many more issues that will demand his attention. Just to list some of them: marriage, women in the church, homosexuality, ecumenism, and inter-faith relations. Those who expect him to introduce major changes in all these areas will probably be disappointed. For example, Francis is not going to ordain women priests, but he may appoint women to important positions within the Vatican. Not every Vatican position requires ordination. Perhaps very few do. Clericalism should also be added to the list.

But for the time being Francis will first have to deal with the the major issues in the Vatican. Until he does so successfully, the Roman Catholic Church will not regain the large number of people who have left it for many years already, especially because of the sexual abuse scandal. The crisis in the priesthood will not end either.

My prayer is that Francis will be successful in cleaning house, and that God will protect him from the attacks of the many enemies he has made both within and outside of the Vatican. There are still many theories about Pope John-Paul I, whose papacy lasted only 33 days, met his death. These are all theories; none have been proven. But the Roman Catholic Church and indeed the whole world must be concerned for Pope Francis.

       

Divided Ukraine, divided churches

The crisis in Ukraine has laid bare the fault lines in Ukraine for all the world to see. But these fault lines are not only political and ethnic or linguistic but also religious. If war is to be averted, which is the prayer of nearly everyone, then some of the fault lines must be bridged over. This includes the religious ones.

It is remarkable that after the ouster of President Yanukovich and the seizure of Crimea by President Putin, ostensibly to protect Russian citizens living there, that many Ukrainians of diverse political stripes are now united as they have not been before. They protested together for months in Independence Square, but they disagreed on many matters regarding the future of Ukraine. Now, while threatened by Russia, they are one, at least for the moment. Depending on what Russia does, however, that moment may not last very long.

First a brief survey of the major churches in Ukraine, and the history that led up to the current situation. I will refrain from calling them denominations,since both the Catholic and Orthodox churches regard themselves as predating the various schisms that have led to all the denominations that exist today. Similarly, both reject the idea of branches, since they regard themselves as the trunk from which other churches have sprung through schism. In fact, other churches are often seen not fully churches but are viewed as sects.

The beginnings of Christianity in what is today Ukraine is attributed to St. Andrew, but there is no proof for this. There is a tradition, however, that Pope Clement I was exiled to Crimea in 102. A representative from the northern Black Sea region may have been present at both Nicaea I in 325 and Constantinople I in 381.

Christianity had established itself firmly by 900 when a church was built in Kyiv. After the baptism of Vladimir the Great in 988, Kyivan Rus' became a Christian state. This event marked the birth of Russia and its long association with Eastern Orthodoxy. With the breakup of Kyivan Rus' the long and bitter rivalry between Catholics and Orthodox was accelerated and has contributed to the current situation in Ukraine. However, this history is too convoluted to describe fully now, and thus I will highlight only a few features.

The Russian Revolution and formation of the Soviet Union later also contributed to a situation where there are three major Orthodox churches in Ukraine, three Catholic churches, and a large number of Protestant churches, largely Baptist and Pentecostal, but these remain a small minority. Decades of state-endorsed atheism almost terminated some churches;:many churches were closed and numerous clergy executed.

Pechersk Lavra, seat of UOC(MP)

\
The Ukrainian Orthodox Church (Moscow Patriarchate), abbreviated UOC(MP), claims to be the largest group. It is found throughout Ukraine, but is concentrated especially in Russian-speaking areas. It operates as an autonomous church under the Moscow Patriarchate and regards other Ukrainian Orthodox churches as schismatic. It considers itself as the true descendant of the Orthodox Church of Kyiv and Rus' and thus traces itself back to the time that Vladimir was baptized in 988. It is the only Ukrainian church that has full canonical status in Eastern Orthodoxy.

The Ukrainian Orthodox Church (Kyiv Patriarchate), abbreviated UOC(KP), is the result of a schism from the UOC(MP) in 1992, led by Metropolitan Filaret (now Patriarch of Kyiv), who led a group of bishops out of the UOC(MP), and wanted to form a Ukrainian autocephalous church. Filaret, who is very active in both church and state politics, wants to form a single Ukrainian national church. The UOC(KP) is not canonically recognized.

To make an already complex situation even worse, the Ukainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church (UAOC) had been established in 1921 after Ukraine gained temporary independence. The ordination of the bishops for this new church was highly irregular. It has undergone several "resurrections," most recently in 1990 when the church received state recognition and Ukraine regained its independence the next year. It is the smallest Orthodox group and was briefly united with the UOC(KP), but now finds itself closer to the UOC(MP).

Where further unity discussion will go is uncertain. There are not theological barriers to union of the Orthodox churches, since they share the same theology, which makes it possible for them to be in communion with each other. The differences between Orthodox churches are ethnic and historical or political, and reveal themselves in terms of jurisdiction.

To muddy the waters further, many Orthodox people are unaware of the jurisdiction to which the church they attend belongs. That often does not seem to matter to them. The theology is the same and the liturgy is largely the same, except in some small details.

One barrier to union of the Orthodox churches is certainly the mutual accusations of collaboration with the Communists during the Soviet era. In addition, there is today fierce competition for limited resources, whether human, financial, or buildings.

St. Nicholas Cathedral, seat of Ukrainian Catholic Church

The Catholic churches date back many centuries when Ukraine was under Lithuanian and Polish political control and cultural influence. Under the Union of Brest in 1596 parts of the Ukrainian church came under the jurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome. Today it is known as the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church, which is sometimes labelled "Uniate," but they strenuously object to this term. It is the third largest church in Ukraine.

There is also a Ukrainian Catholic Church (UCC), which uses Latin-rites, but it is considerably smaller that some of the other churches, although it is slightly larger that the UAOC. A large number of assorted small Protestant and Independent churches complete the list of Ukrainian churches.

Aside from the huge barrier that ethnicity and language have created in Ukraine, the legacy of collaboration with the Communists cannot be easily overcome. In Russia, Baptists and Pentecostals both did extensive house cleaning by removing the most prominent collaborators and KGB-agents. Unfortunately the Russian Orthodox Church never di, nor is it likely to do so as long as a former-KGB agent is President of Russia.

Such house cleaning has not happened in Ukraine to the best of my knowledge. It is urgently needed, but highly unlikely. Lent would be an appropriate time for such confessions, but the wounds run too deep for forgiveness to be accepted much less offered.

Yet the current crisis in Ukraine offers a unique opportunity for some of the churches to unite. Especially if largely Russian-speaking Crimea becomes part of Russia again, as seems likely now. Some other parts of Ukraine may also come closer to Russia or even be absorbed by their eastern neighbor, but that is more difficult, As a result, Ukraine may yet become a stronger, more united country.

Russia has driven the political opposition in Ukraine closer together. That is necessary if Ukraine is ever to have a strong, effective government that is widely accepted: one that has the support not only of Ukrainians but also of the international community which will have to provide much-needed economic support.

One important step toward achieving that unity is if the churches, especially the Orthodox, would signal their own unification. The protesters in Independence Square did not represent any churches publicly, but the clergy who were also present could not hide their commitment since they wore their robes.

If the Ukrainian churches do achieve a grater unity in the near future as a result of this crisis, it will have come at an enormous cost: the loss of parts of Ukraine. Yet with some of the Russian-speaking parts gone, there is a hope for greater unity in the Ukrainian heartland.

Whether the churches can play a leading role in promoting greater Ukrainian unity or whether church unity will follow is anybody's guess. At the end of the day, both church and state may remain as divided as they were before. But that would be a pity. The loss of life in Kyiv and other cities would have been in vain.

Before his death on the cross, Jesus prayed for the unity of all believers. I am sure that his prayer was also intended for the divided churches in Ukraine.

Let us pray for that unity as well. Let us also pray that the crisis in Ukraine may end peacefully.

           

While we watched the Olympics . . . .

I have a confession to make: I watched the Olympic Games nearly every day for two weeks. I did not watch every sport, but I especially enjoyed watching the Canadian and Dutch athletes (I hold dual citizenship). I admit that I was unable to keep abreast of what was happening elsewhere in the world as much as I usually do, and thus there were many things that I missed, if not entirely, at least in detail. If you followed the Olympics closely, you may have had a similar experience.

The list of countries where a lot has happened during the Olympics is a long one: Syria, Turkey, Nigeria, and Central African Republic are only a few; the list could go on and on. In many countries these developments are the continuation of earlier ones, but in some cases matters came to a head during these two weeks, as it did in Ukraine (note absence of "the").

As the Olympics drew to a close, the crisis in Ukraine culminated with the departure and deposition of President Viktor Yanukovich. As I am writing this, his whereabouts are uncertain, as is the future of his country. The good news is that the slaughter, in which more than 100 protesters and police died, has ended, at least for a while. But the unrest continues with pleas from the protesters in Independence Square that the new government be instituted as soon as possible. Unfortunately, there have been numerous delays in naming the cabinet, which illustrates the divisions within the protest camp.

Ukraine, meaning "borderland," is where Russia started historically and spiritually. The baptism of Vladimir the Great in 988 marks the turn to Byzantine Christianity. Russia considers this event as both the beginning of Russia and of its association with Orthodoxy. The millennium of this event was celebrated in 1988.

This intimate connection with Ukraine is why Russia to this day refuses to concede that country to the West. Ukraine is still considered an integral part of a greater Russia. Russians have never accepted the dissolution of the Soviet Union entirely; they regard Ukraine and other former USSR states as the "near abroad." In other words, these states enjoy a special status in the Russian scheme of things.

The protests in Ukraine increased in scope and violence ever since Yanukovych, late last year, under great financial pressure from Russia, refused to sign a trade agreement with the European Union. Polls conducted then showed 43% of Ukrainians approved of closer links with the EU. His bowing to Russian pressure was seen as a betrayal by many Ukrainians. It provided further evidence that he favored the Kremlin over the western provinces of his own country. But the protests eventually went far beyond this issue. The men and women who gathered in Independence Square wanted the ouster of Yanukovich and his government.

At the risk of oversimplifying Ukraine's complex geographical and historical situation, the western part of the country is largely Ukrainian-speaking and has a pro-European stance, whereas the eastern and southern parts are Russian-speaking and are oriented to Moscow.

Some people surmise that Yanukovich has fled to the Autonomous Republic of Crimea, from where he might be able to stage a return to power or to promote secession and its reabsorption by Russia, from where it had come during Khrushchev's time (who was supposedly drunk at the time of the transfer). Yanukovich was reportedly seen in Crimea over the weekend. The Russian Black Sea fleet has for many years leased a base in Sevastopol in the Crimea. This is where the Ukrainian fleet is also based.

During the Olympics the government and the protesters continued fighting in Independence Square in Kyiv (this is the newer transliteration), which all sides recognize as the capital of Ukraine. This square, also known as Maidan, is very large, as I know when I visited it about twenty years ago. It became the main battle zone between protesters and the government, but has become quieter since the departure of Yanukovich.

I won't write much about these protests, since they were well covered even during the Olympics. After all, Ukraine is just down the coast of the Black Sea from Sochi. Yanukovich attended the Olympics, and Putin must have kept more than a single eye on developments in Ukraine. What Putin will do now is still uncertain.

Putin can cut the gas supplies to Ukraine, but that would hurt Russia economically, since two-thirds of its gas exports to Europe go through Ukraine. Military options are very limited. Sending Russian troops to Ukraine would be tantamount to war. But Russia is staging military exercises on the border with Ukraine.

Over the weekend, Ukraine’s parliament voted overwhelmingly to send Yanukovych and others before the International Criminal Court for “serious crimes.” MPs passed a resolution linking the ousted president to violence against protesters which caused the deaths of more than 100 people. The resolution said the former interior minister and prosecutor-general should also be sent to The Hague.

Ukraine's acting president, Oleksandr Turchynov, who is also a Baptist pastor, has warned of “dangerous signs of separatism” in parts of the country, amid anger at the removal of Yanukovych. His comments echo those of MPs who have voiced fears that Ukraine could split because of anger in the east and south at recent events in Kyiv. 

Putin cannot afford to lose Ukraine, however. If Yanukovich can be ousted, then Putin can too, is the logic that drives him. Yet Putin has to tread carefully, lest he upset Western countries. But Putin can count on the support of China, which is the largest foreign landowner in Ukraine and hardly in favor of people's power.

One action he might take is to give Russian passports to Russian speakers in Crimea, and then move into Crimea in order to protect them. There have already been marches in Sevastopol and elsewhere in Crimea where people chanted, "Russia, Russia."

This is what he did in Abkhazia in 2008. Such an action might provide a slight cover for Russia, but it would nevertheless be condemned by Western countries that have already called for sanctions against Russia as a warning to stay out of the Ukrainian crisis..

As for the eastern part of Ukraine, Putin's options are even more limited. Yet his own future is threatened by the developments in Ukraine. There have already been protests in Moscow. As the Pussy Riot protesters have demonstrated, it is easy to gain the attention of the world, whether in Moscow in the Cathedral of Christ the Savior or in Sochi at the Olympics.

The rest of the world will not sit idly by as the situation in Ukraine resolves itself. Putin should be warned that Ukrainians of every ethnicity must be allowed to choose their own future. There must not be any interference from Russia nor should there be any from the West.

As John Kerry, the US Secretary of State, correctly observed, "This is not a zero-sum game, it is not the West versus East. This is about the people of Ukraine making their choice about their own future."

Canada is sending Foreign Minister John Baird to Ukraine with a large delegations of MPs and Ukrainian-Canadians to meet with the new leaders there. There are many people of Ukrainian descent in Canada and a federal election is expected in Canada sometime in 2015.

On the one hand one must admire Canada standing with the Ukrainian people in this time of crisis, yet on the other hand there is more than a whiff of politics involved. Canada must be careful not to feed the suspicion of Russian-speaking Ukrainians that West is meddling in their affairs. And Putin can use Canada's action as an excuse for Russia to interfere in Ukraine. Interference must be avoided by all sides.

Yet Western countries must show their support for the fledgling democracy in Ukraine. Yanukovich is gone, but it is still far from clear who will form the new government. There are many factions in the country. The crisis cannot be reduced to a conflict between the western and eastern parts of the country or between the two main language groups. 

Therefore the world must wait and pray until great clarity is achieved. In the meantime, Putin especially must be warned to keep his hands off Ukraine while it is in crisis. The West, however, must also be careful as the situation unfolds not to aggravate it and precipitate the division of Ukraine or even war. At the same time, the West must stand up to the Russian bully.

The West too must carefully find a way to encourage those who risked their lives for months in Independence Square to regain freedom for their country. But Ukrainians alone can decide whether to align themselves with Europe or with Russia, or both, or neither. Everyone must demonstrate a lot of wisdom.

While we watched the Olympics much happened in the rest of the world. Ukraine is only one example; there are many more, as I will show in a future post.
      

Success, scandal and sex at Sochi

The Sochi Olympic Games have been successful for the athletes and their home countries, even if they were marked by scandal, but sex has also played a very important role -- more than most people realize. (Note: I wrote this post while these Games were not yet finished, and I revised it slightly after they concluded.)

Success at the Olympic Games can be measured in many different ways. Nations measure it by the number of medals that their athletes win. Athletes train for years for the right to compete and win a coveted place on the podium, especially gold. Yet some athletes compete with the knowledge that they may not win, but they nevertheless have put their best effort into it. That too is a measure of success.

However, sometimes nations fail to achieve the success that they hoped for. Russia, as the host country, hoped to top the medals count, as many other host countries had before it. It has achieved that goal (33 medals), but it missed out in the most important sport of all. Russia was defeated at the hands of Finland in the quarter-finals in men's hockey. They were prepared to lose every gold medal, one Russian has been quoted as saying, if they could win that gold medal. Some of the Russian medals were tarnished by charges of fixing the results. The South Koreans made such a charge, but after the deadline for protests had passed.

Russia's gold in hockey was not to be. Canada's men and women's teams both won gold medals, after Russia and the United States had been humbled. Canada was successful, even if it did not win as many gold or total medals as it did in Vancouver. Some of the Canadian athletes came in 4th place in various events, while others were unable to place in their own special events, sometimes through freakish accidents.

These were "Putin's Games" and they were his to lose. He lost on the biggest stage that the international sports world provides, in spite of spending more money on the preparations for these Olympics ($51 billion) than was spent for all the previous ones put together. The venues and facilities were stylish, but blatant and extensive corruption has resulted in enriching some close friends of Putin but leaving several facilities, especially hotels, unfinished when the Games opened.

Former Deputy Prime Minister Boris Nemtsov alleges that $30 billion of that very large amount was stolen. That figure seems excessive, but Nemtsov may be right. This is a scandal that even a Russian gold in hockey might not have been able to atone for.

There have been other scandals as well at the Sochi Games. The charge by a Russian coach, first published in a French sports magazine, of collusion between the Russians and the Americans to guarantee a gold medal to each country in ice dancing, while leaving Canada out in the cold with two silver medals, cannot be proved, but a close study of the scores indicates that may indeed have happened. An official protest was not filed.

Tessa Virtue and Scott Moir, Canadian ice dancers, received a silver medal

The passage of anti-gay legislation by the Russian Duma in 2013 was widely perceived by many countries to be scandalous. This was the reason why many world leaders, including President Barack Obama, boycotted the Sochi Games.

Scandals, of course, are nothing new to the Olympics. The Salt Lake City Games in 2002 were notorious for charges of bribery to win the games. The accused were later acquitted, although the charges did result in a few IOC members being forced to resign, and new rules regarding gifts to members being implemented.

There was also the scandalous admission in Salt Lake City by a French judge that she had awarded higher marks to a Russian pair in figure skating, even though they were error-prone, with the result that a Canadian pair who had skated almost perfectly received the silver. The Canadians did receive gold medals as well after this confession and the marking system was changed, yet to this day figure skating is still suspect, as the Sochi Games demonstrate.

The new system may be fairer, but its lack of transparency means that this sport is still open to scandal. Only when that possibility is removed can it become recognized as a true sport, in spite of the obvious athleticism of the skaters. The subjectivity of this marking system too has to eliminated, or at least reduced further.

What is less known about the Olympic Games is the most popular sport: of all: sex. Many people, especially some people of faith, may be scandalized, but sex seems to have been foremost on the mind of the athletes, as well as some of the volunteers, journalists and friends who came to the Games.

Olympic sex tape (faked)

More than 100,000 condoms were distributed in the Olympic Village before the start of the Games. With almost 3,000 athletes (40% of whom were women) that is potentially a lot of sexual activity, even if spread out over a little more than two weeks.

Time Magazine reports in an article entitled "A Brief History of Sex at the Olympics" that at the London Olympics in 2012 150,000 condoms were distributed. There were reports that people there were having sex right out in the open on the grass. In Vancouver in 2010 there had been reports of orgies involving athletes.

During the Beijing Games in 2008 authorities distributed only 100,000 condoms to athletes, but 400,000 to hotels. In Sydney in 2000 70,000 condoms were handed out, but that was not enough and another 20.000 were ordered after the first week.

Why should that be so surprising? These athletes are young men and women who are in peak physical shape. Why should their athleticism be limited to their own sports, when their favorite extracurricular activity is so readily available?

These athletes obviously do not believe that abstinence is necessary before an an event in order to improve athletic performance. Science, apparently, has found that testosterone increases after sex. While that may be true for male athletes, one wonders whether that applies to females as well. Probably not, although the sex may not hurt them either.

And as if the proximity of so many athletes of both sexes in the dorms in Olympic Village in Sochi were not sufficient, there is now a new app called Tinder that facilitates their getting together. Tinder matches people based on where they are located. Using profiles from their Facebook photos, it pairs up Tinder users based on how near by they are to each other. By swiping their cell phone to the right or left they indicate whether or not they "approve" of each other. Only then are they are able to communicate and get together.

However, since the athletes are already so close to each other, they may not need any social media. After all they managed very well without such a hooking-up app in the past. In previous Olympics they obviously were able to plan trysts (even if they were not always entirely private) without Tinder.

Success, scandal and sex were present in Sochi, if not always always at the same time and to an equal degree. Now that they are over, the world can sit back and calmly assess whether these Olympic Games were worth the expense.

The Russians may not conclude that the Games have been entirely successful for them, but Putin had tried to help his country regain its former greatness. In that he was not as successful as he and his countrymen hoped. The Russian athletes did not perform as well as expected, certainly not in men's hockey.

Many athletes, however, will feel they were very successful, even if they did win any medals. They came in order to compete, and hopefully to win. Success cannot be measured by the number or color of the medals.

Protests in Ukraine

At the end of the Games the tragic deaths of so many protesters and police in Ukraine cast a pall over them. Putin will have to deal with the events in that country that is just down the coast of the Black Sea from Sochi.

No doubt more sordid details of the corruption surrounding the Sochi Games will continue to come out for many months and years. That too will reflect poorly on both Putin and Russia. These after all were "Putin's Games." Unfortunately, the whole country has been dragged into further disrepute, rather than being being built up.

And as for sex, that extracurricular activity will never cease to lose its popularity, especially among young people who are in the prime of life when they participate in the Olympics. Don't look so askance: sex is a normal activity that will remain part of the Olympic Games, even if it may not be featured on TV.

Let's not pretend that sex does not happen at the Olympics. When I first arrived in Russia in 1995, people told me stories about how Russians were told on TV that they do not have sex. They know better, of course. So do we, also about the Olympic Games.

The Sochi Olympics were a great event that was marred by some scandals, but they were also the site of numerous successes, especially for the athletes. And sex, well that has become established as an integral, if still largely unspoken, part of the Olympic Games. We will have to wait until 2018 to find out what the next Winter Olympics, to be held in Pyeongchang, South Korea, will bring.