More on the Relationship Between Elder Paisios and Saint Euphemia

[On September 16th I posted on the fascinating relationship between Elder Paisios and Saint Euphemia. Since then I have acquired more details on this relationship and further evidence of the great love Elder Paisios came to have for this Great Martyr of the Church. - J.S.]

The Elder (Paisios) was in the front yard of his retreat when he was visited by one of his spiritual children. He was repeating, from the heart, "Glory to You, O God", over and over again.

"Can someone be rendered useless - in a good sense?" the Elder suddenly asked him.

"Who would that be, Elder?"

"Well, I was sitting in my cell quietly, then she came here and drove me crazy with excitement. They are having such a good time, 'up there'."

"What's troubling you, Elder?"

"I will tell you, but don't you tell anyone."

He went on to narrate the following:

I had just returned from the world, to deal with an ecclesiastic matter (he had a meeting with the late Mayor of Athens, Mr.Tritsis). It was Tuesday, around ten in the morning, I was in my cell reciting the Hours. I hear a knock on my door, and a woman's voice saying:

"With the blessings of our Holy Fathers" (the traditional monastic manner of requesting permission to enter another's quarters).

I thought to myself: "How did a woman come to be on the Holy Mountain?" And yet, I could feel a divine sweetness flow through me, so I asked: "Who is it?"

"Euphemia" (replied the voice).

I thought to myself: "Who is this Euphemia? Could it be a woman who did something foolish and came to the Mountain wearing men's clothes? What am I supposed to do now?" A second knock was heard. I asked again: "Who is it?"

"Euphemia" (replied the voice again).

I thought it over and decided to not open the door. At the third knock, the door opened on its own, even though it was bolted from the inside. I heard footsteps outside, in the corridor. I dashed out of my cell and saw a woman who was wearing a head veil. She was accompanied by someone who resembled Luke the Evangelist, but he vanished. Despite my certainty that this was not a sinister phenomenon because the woman's presence glowed with a radiant light, I asked her who she was.

"The martyr Euphemia"* (she replied).

"If you are indeed the martyr Euphemia, come with me, and let us prostrate ourselves before the Holy Trinity. Whatever I do, you must do."

I went into the chapel, prostrating myself and saying "In the name of the Father..." She repeated it, also prostrating herself.

"And of the Son..."

"And of the Son..." she repeated in a soft voice.

"Louder, so I can hear you" I said to her, and she repeated it, in a louder voice.

While still in the corridor, her prostrations were not in the direction of the chapel, but towards my cell. At first I was puzzled, but then I remembered I had a tiny paper icon of the Holy Trinity pasted onto a piece of wood, which was hanging above the door of my Cell. After our third prostration, saying, "And of the Holy Spirit," I said to her:

"Now, let me prostrate myself before you." I prostrated myself and kissed her feet and then the tip of her nose. I thought it too impertinent to kiss her face.

The Saint sat down on a stool and I sat myself down on the small chest, and she proceeded to give me the solution to my concern (regarding the ecclesiastic matter).

Then she told me about her life. I knew that a Saint Euphemia existed, but I didn't know anything about her life. When she described her martyrdoms, I didn't only hear them being described; it was as though I could actually see them and feel them. I shuddered...oh my God!!

"How did you survive such tortures?" I asked.

"If I had known what kind of glory the Saints have, I would have done whatever I could to undergo much worse tortures."

Well, after that occurrence, I was unable to do anything for three whole days. I was beside myself with elation and was constantly praising God. I didn't want to eat, I didn't want anything. I was constantly glorifying!

Elder Paisios in his cell with the icon he commissioned of St. Euphemia hanging on the wall beside him.

In one of his letters the Elder had mentioned:

"In all my life, I will never be able to repay my huge obligation to Saint Euphemia, who, although entirely unknown to me, and without being obliged to, bestowed on me such a great honour...."

When describing the incident, he added very humbly that Saint Euphemia appeared before him, "not because I was deserving, but only because I was preoccupied at the time with an issue that had to do with the state of the Church in general, and for two other reasons."

What had especially impressed the Elder was "how that petite, frail person could last through such tortures.... If she were more of a...(implying a woman of a bigger and stronger physique), but she was so tiny...."

While in that paradisiacal state, the Elder composed a Canon in honour of the Saint:

"With what complimentary songs can we praise Euphemia, who condescended from above and visited a wretched resident monk in Kapsala? On knocking the third time, the door opened miraculously and she, the Martyr of Christ, entered with heavenly glory, and we worshipped together the Holy Trinity."

He also composed a closing hymn, which began with the words:

"Glorious Great Martyr of Christ, Euphemia, I love you very very much, after the Most Holy Mother...."

(Of course he did not intend these compositions for liturgical use, nor did he chant them in public.)

Contrary to his custom, the Elder left (Kapsala) for the town of Souroti and made the sisters of the monastery there participants of that celestial joy. With his help and his instructions, they painted an icon of the Saint exactly as she had appeared before him (depicted above).

The Elder himself had fashioned a negative of the Saint's icon onto a metal mold, which he used to print small, stamped icons that he distributed as blessings to visitors, in honour of Saint Euphemia. While sculpting the mold of the icon, he had trouble fashioning the fingers of her left hand. He said: "I struggled to fashion her hand, but then I put forward a positive thought to explain it: 'Perhaps it is because I had also oppressed the poor girl'...."

-------------------------

*During the Fourth, Holy and Ecumenical Synod, which was convened in Chalcedon by the pious emperors Marcian and Pulcheria in the grand basilica of Saint Euphemia, the 630 Fathers undertook the retraction of the heretical views of Archmandrite Eutychius, who was supported by Archbishop Dioscorus of Alexandria. To resolve the dispute through a divine decision, the Patriarch - Saint Anatolius - proposed to both sides to compose a tome containing their respective Confession of Faith, and both documents would then be placed inside the reliquary of Saint Euphemia. The two parchments, on which were inscribed the definitions of the Faith with regard to the Person of Christ, were placed on the Saint's chest and after the reliquary was sealed shut, the Fathers began to pray. After eight days, they all went to the witnessing place, where, upon opening the reliquary, they discovered to their amazement that the Saint was hugging the Orthodox tome in her arms, as though she wanted to place it inside her heart, whereas the tome of the heretics appeared to have been thrown down to her feet. In the face of such a splendid proof of the truth, the Orthodox offered up thanks to God, and the heretics were scorned and jeered by the crowd of faithful.

Other miracles have been mentioned, which the precious relics of saint Euphemia have performed. During a Persian invasion, the barbarians stormed Chalcedon and attempted to destroy her relics with fire. However, they remained intact and furthermore, blood was seen pouring out of the hole that was made to open the reliquary. This miracle repeated itself occasionally at later times and would heal the faithful who came to collect some of the blood of Saint Euphemia. However, her tomb would more frequently exude a fragrant aroma, thus witnessing the favour that God had bestowed on the Saint.

To protect them from another vandalization, the precious relics were translated to Constantinople where they were deposited in the Church of Saint Euphemia, near the Hippodrome. During the years of Iconoclastic persecutions by Constantine V Kopronymos, her temple was turned into an arsenal, while her precious relics were thrown into the sea and were washed ashore on the coast of Limnos Island, where they were salvaged by two fishermen. They were rediscovered during the reign of the Empress Irene and were transferred officially to the Capital (Constantinople) in 796, where they continued to work miracles. After many other adventures, the relics are now venerated in the Church of Saint George of the Ecumenical Patriarchate in the Phanar.

[The New Book of Saints of the Orthodox Church (July Volume), Indictus Publications, p. 112]

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

The Repose of St. John the Theologian According to His Disciple Prochorus

The Translation of St. John the Theologian (Feast Day - September 26).

The Latter Years of the Apostle John

(According to the Synaxarion)

The last years of his life, the holy Apostle John spent in strict asceticism. He ate only bread and water, did not cut his hair, and dressed in simple linen garments. Because of his old age, he did not have the strength to preach the word of God even in the environs of Ephesus. At that time he taught only the bishops of the Church and inspired them to teach the people the Gospel unceasingly, and especially to keep in mind and to preach the first and principal commandment of the Gospel: the commandment of love.

When the holy apostle became very weak, the blessed Jerome relates, his disciples carried him to the church, but he was no longer able to give long sermons. He then reduced his teaching to the unceasing repetition of "Little children, love one another." One day when his disciples asked him why he repeated this to them incessantly, John replied with the following words: "This is the Lord's commandment; and if ye keep it, it is enough."

The Repose of St. John the Theologian

(According to the testimony of St. Prochorus, his disciple and one of the original seven deacons of the Church)1

In our first visit to Ephesus, we were there for nine years, and then spent fifteen years of exile in Patmos. After twenty-six years had passed from the time we came from Patmos to Ephesus again, John came out of the house of Domnus and assembled seven of his disciples - myself and six others - and said to us: "Take spades in your hands and follow me."

So we did as we were instructed and followed him outside the city to a certain place, where he said: "Sit down." He then went a little apart from us to where it was quiet and began to pray. It was very early in the morning; the sun had not quite risen. After his prayer he said to us: "Dig with your spade a cross-shaped trench as long as I am tall." So we did it while he prayed. After he had finished his prayer, he laid himself in the trench we had dug, and then said to me: "Prochorus my son, you will go to Jerusalem. That is where you must end your life." He then gave us instructions and embraced us, saying: "Take some earth, my mother earth, and cover me." So we embraced again, and taking some earth, covered him only up to his knees. Once more, he embraced us, saying: "Take some more earth and cover me to the neck." So we embraced him again and took some more earth and covered him up to the neck. Then he said to us: "Bring a thin veil and place it on my face, and embrace me again for the last time, for you shall not see me anymore in this life." So we embraced the apostle again, grief-stricken. As he was sending us off in peace, we, lamenting bitterly, embraced his whole body. The sun rose just then, and he surrendered his spirit.2

We then returned to the city and were asked: "Where is our teacher?" So we explained what had just occurred in great detail. They begged us that we show them the site. Therefore, we went back to the grave with the brethren, but John was not there. Only his shoes were left behind. Then we remembered the words of the Lord to the Apostle Peter: "If I will that he tarry until I come, what is that to you?" And we all glorified God, the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit, to Whom is due glory, honor, and worship, unto the ages of ages. Amen.

It should be noted, that according to Holy Tradition, the reason we have no physical remains and an empty tomb of the Apostle John is because when the disciples returned to his tomb, it was found empty. It is assumed that he was raised, just like the Lord and the Theotokos. This is what we call "Metastasis" or "Translation", and it is what we celebrate on September 26th.

------------------

1. Taken from The Lives of the Holy Apostles by Holy Apostle Convent (pp. 149-152).

2. This last sentence is not recorded in the original, but incorporated into the text by Maximus of Margounio. Furthermore, according to St. Jerome, the Apostle John reposed in the third year of the reign of Trajan, that is 101 AD. This is sixty-eight years after the Passion and Resurrection of the Lord. This is confirmed by Clement of Alexandria, Irenaeus, and other Holy Fathers of the Church. It is believed he was about 6-8 years younger than the Lord, which made him 93 or 95 years of age upon his repose.

Apolytikion in the Second Tone
Beloved Apostle of Christ our God, hasten to deliver a people without defense. He who permitted you to recline upon His bosom, accepts you on bended knee before Him. Beseech Him, O Theologian, to dispel the persistent cloud of nations, asking for us peace and great mercy.

Kontakion in the Second Tone
Who can tell thy mighty works, O virgin Saint? For thou pourest forth miracles, and art a source of healings, and thou dost intercede for our souls, as the Theologian and the friend of Christ.

The Ikos
To learn wholly the high secrets of heaven, to investigate the depths of the sea is rash and beyond comprehension; as therefore it is wholly impossible to number all the stars and the sand on the sea shore, so it is to tell the graces of the Theologian, with so many crowns Christ has garlanded the one he loved; the one who leant on his breast and feasted with him at the mystical supper, as Theologian and friend of Christ.

Concerning a pilgrimage I made to the grave of St. John the Theologian (depicted above) in Ephesus, see here.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Unusual Phenomenon at Solovki Monastery

Interfax
September 25, 2009
Arkhangelsk, Russia

On the picture of Spaso-Preobrazhenski Cathedral of the Solovki Monastery, the sixth dome appeared in the rose-coloured shine.

The picture was taken by a pilgrim on her mobile phone.

The Orthodoxy in the Northern Land website reports Friday that it is symbolic that the monastery's history began with the vision to St. Zosima of a church in celestial shine. The first wooden church of Transfiguration was built at the place of this vision.



About Solovki Monastery

Located on the Solovki Archipelago in the White Sea, the Solovki (Solovetski) monastery was founded between 1429 and 1436 by the hermits Savaty and German, followed by the monk and future abbot Zosima. By the early sixteenth century, Savaty and Zosima had become the patron saints of the White Sea region. Solovki, also a garrison, was one of Russia's most important cloisters with extensive territories, earning income from trade, salt, fishing, and rents. Metropolitan Phillip II of Moscow contributed significantly to Solovki's architectural development while serving as abbot (1546 - 1566). Its monastic rule, formulated in the late sixteenth or early seventeenth century, became a template for later communities.

Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich's troops besieged Solovki from 1668 to 1676 in a conflict traditionally linked to Old Belief. Solovki's leaders and a large part of the brotherhood first accepted, then rejected, Patriarch Nikon's liturgical reforms. However, rebellion against central authority combined religious concerns with anti-Moscow sentiment fostered by political exiles imprisoned at Solovki. After their defeat, many monks left, ultimately to swell the number of trans-Volga elders - hermits who served as spiritual fathers to disaffected Orthodox communities.

Solovki remained an active monastery and popular pilgrimage site until the October Revolution, after which the Soviet government transformed it into a military training camp. It became a labor camp in the 1920s and 1930s for political prisoners. Abandoned soon afterward, Solovki was reopened as a museum in the 1970s, then closed again until the end of Soviet rule, when it was reopened to the public.

Bibliography

Michels, Georg. (1992). "The Solovki Uprising: Religion and Revolt in Northern Russia." Russian Review 51:1 - 15.

Spock, Jennifer B. (1999). The Solovki Monastery, 1460 - 1645: Piety and Patronage in the Early Modern Russian North. Ph.D. diss. Yale University.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Unusual Celestial Event Over the Kursk Root Hermitage

Believers Evidence an Unusual Celestial Event Over the Kursk Root Hermitage

Kursk, Russia
September 24, 2009
Interfax

A large cross of clouds over the Kursk Root hermitage attracted attention of multiple pilgrims who gathered together to meet the Wonderworking Kursk Root Icon.

The cross could be seen in the sky over the monastery at Wednesday night when Patriarch Kirill of Moscow and All Russia brought to Kursk the miraculous icon which was kept in Russian foreign parishes for about 90 years.

Two white lines crossing at a straight angle were clearly seen in a dark blue evening sky; they resembled the trace left by aircrafts. Eyewitnesses noted the intensity and geometrical accuracy of the crossing lines. This celestial phenomenon could be seen over the monastery within half an hour.

The cross in the sky over the Kursk Root hermitage was widely discussed by pilgrims the next day when the Wonderworking Kursk Root Icon was brought to the hermitage.

An Interfax-Religion correspondent talked to some participants of the celebration, and they all see this cross of clouds as a sign of grace of the Holy Mother.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

14 Schismatic Monks of Esphigmenou Convicted

Monks Convicted

Kathimerini
September 25, 2009

A misdemeanors court in Thessaloniki yesterday issued suspended jail sentences to 14 ultra-Orthodox monks who have been illegally occupying the Esphigmenou Monastery on Mount Athos since 2002 when they fell out with the Istanbul-based Ecumenical Patriarchate. The monks were issued with 1-year jail sentences, suspended for three years, after being found guilty of disturbing the peace. Two police officers, charged with breach of duty after allegedly allowing a vehicle carrying provisions for the rebel monks to cross into the monastic community, were exonerated due to a lack of incriminating evidence.

-------------------------------

14 Monks From Rebel Monastery Convicted

September 25, 2009

A court has convicted a rebel abbot and 13 of his monks of obstructing the functioning of their 1,000-year-old monastery by refusing orders to leave it.

Court officials in Thessaloniki said on Thursday the 14 were given one-year suspended prison sentences.

The occupants of Esphigmenou Monastery are in a bitter fight with Orthodox Christian authorities. Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I, spiritual leader of the world's Orthodox Christians, has declared them schismatic and ordered them out of the walled monastery on the autonomous Mount Athos peninsula in northern Greece.

He is backed by an older eviction order from Greece's highest administrative court.

The monks oppose efforts to improve relations between the Orthodox Church and the Vatican.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Archbishop Ieronymos Cracking Down on Greedy Clergy

Collection Crackdown: Archbishop Wants Clerics to Come Clean about Finances

September 25, 2009
Kathimerini

Archbishop Ieronymos yesterday issued a strict message to priests who failed to submit reports regarding Church collections by a June deadline. According to sources, the archbishop also warned any clerics who have been accepting illicit payments that such practices would not be tolerated any longer. "All that is over. From now on, I will not tolerate any suspicion of mismanagement of funds," Ieronymos said. According to the same sources, the archbishop sought the resignation of about 50 priests currently responsible for church collections because the churchmen in question had failed to submit their financial reports in time.

--------------------

Romfear.gr (9/25/09) quotes the Archbishop saying to over 100 priest gathered:

"It is not proper to ask the faithful for money to perform the Mysteries; to cheat tips out of people is a shame. If the faithful want to give money, let them give."

"Do not politicize in public, but hold your political opinions to yourself."

--------------------

The Church of Greece’s Finances Today

Aug. 30th, 2009

The Church of Greece’s finances are in rude health, according to a report handed to Archbishop Ieronymos this week, which indicated that the church made more than 7 million euros profit in 2008.

According to the internal report, almost 20 million euros of revenue flowed into the church’s coffers last year, mostly from the renting out of church property. It also earned some 4.5 million euros from investments.

During 2008, the church spent almost 12.5 million euros. The biggest outlay, just over 4 million euros, was for sponsoring events. Almost 4 million was spent on salaries.

Last year, the robust state of the church’s finances also allowed it to buy 1.6 million shares in the National Bank, taking its stake in the lender up to 7.7 million shares.

--------------------------

Priest Tricked a Cancer Sufferer

Jun. 10th, 2009

Thessaloniki court decided yesterday that a priest and three members of an ecclesiastical council should stand trial on charges that they tricked a cancer sufferer into making the Orthodox Church a gift of a half a million euros shortly before his death.

The court heard that in the days preceding the 82-year-old’s death, his health had deteriorated and, as a result of the heavy medication he was receiving, often did not recognize people nor was he able to speak coherently.
Nine days before he died, the man allegedly appeared at his local bank with the priest and three church officials to withdraw the money. Bank employees told the court that the 82-year-old appeared confused and had to be reminded he was withdrawing 500,000 euros, not drachmas.

The man’s widow launched the action against the four men, who, along with a fifth person, will stand trial for fraud.

--------------------

13 Million Euros of the Church of Greece are Missing

March 14th, 2009

An investigation into the finances of the Church of Greece’s nongovernmental organization Solidarity has revealed that 13 million euros are missing, sources revealed yesterday. The development came one day after a senior cleric at the Bishopric of Attica sent Archbishop Ieronymos his resignation in protest at a decision by the Holy Synod not to make the jailed former bishop of Attica, Panteleimon, face a Church court.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Putin Bows to the Main Shrine of the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad

Moscow, Russia
September 22, 2009
Interfax

Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin has bowed to the main shrine of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia (ROCOR) the Kursk Root Icon of the Mother of God.

The icon was brought into Russia on September 12 for worship. It will remain in the Cathedral of Christ the Savior until Wednesday, after which Patriarch Kirill of Moscow and All Russia will take the icon to Kursk, where the icon was first appropriated.

When Putin entered the cathedral, representatives of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia sang troparion. Putin kissed the icon and came up to the representatives of the Russian Church Abroad.

After welcoming them, the prime minister recalled that some of the representatives of the ROCOR present in the cathedral had participated in the union of the Russian Orthodox Church in Russia and the Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia.

"It was the right decision, and your visit now is the best evidence of that. I would like to welcome you as guests, but then I realized it would be wrong. You are home," Putin said.

In response, Metropolitan Hilarion, first hierarch of the ROCOR, thanked Putin for "assisting with the organization of the arrival of this icon to Russia."

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

A Question Concerning the Knowledge of God and Orthodox Gnosiology

QUESTION

Father Romanides taught that when someone experiences theosis, when they experience the uncreated glory of God and His uncreated energies, then "perfection has come" and faith and hope are no longer necessary and only love remains (I Cor. 13.10). Romanides also taught that prayer of the heart is an experience in which the saint is aware of the Holy Spirit praying within them, which is an existential phenomenon and empirical for the person experiencing it.

How does his teaching relate to the following particular idea of Father Alexander Elchaninov in his book Diary of a Russian Priest?

"Those who demand proofs in order to believe are on the wrong track. Faith is a free choice; wherever there is a desire for proof, even a desire hidden from ourselves, there is no faith. The evidences of divine manifestation must not be taken as 'proofs' - this would be to degrade and nullify the great virtue of faith."


ANSWER

They are speaking of two different methods of attaining to a knowledge of God.

Father Elchaninov is critiquing here the scholastic "proofs" for the existence of God as well as those who seek to get to know God by such proofs. Proofs are obtained from deductive reasoning or logic, rather than from inductive or empirical arguments. It was believed by the scholastics that if we believe in God we can come to know Him through reason and deduction. Anselm of Canterbury used to say: “I believe in order to comprehend”. Therefore, according to the scholastics, faith comes first (a priori) then through rational arguments and logical categories we can know God - this is Natural Theology according to Thomas Aquinas. Revelation was believed to come through Scripture alone and its contemplation. With the association between philosophy and theology the model of metaphysics proposed by the scholastics collapsed in the West and ever since people think that they can actually come to faith through logic and reason, which is still considered the highest faculty within man.

Father Romanides presents the Orthodox a posteriori approach to theology, which is the biblical and patristic scientific method. By "a posteriori" and "scientific" we mean that it is empirical. The word empirical denotes information gained by means of observation, experience, or experiment. A central concept in science and the scientific method is that all evidence must be empirical, or empirically based, that is, dependent on evidence or consequences that are observable by the senses. St. Paul in Romans 1 speaks of a natural faith which arises empirically from the moment we are able to comprehend our observations in the created world. Commenting on this, St. John Chrysostom says: "Every Scythian, every barbarian, may come to the knowledge of God by the wonderful harmony of all things, which proclaims the existence of God louder than any trumpet." According to Scripture and the Church Fathers, this initial natural faith is meant to lead the individual to revelation through the prescribed therapeutic method which purifies the nous (the highest facult in man according to the Orthodox) darkened through our passions and sins and allows us to see with our eyes through the illumination of the Holy Spirit the uncreated glory of God. This is why Jesus said in Matthew 5: "Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God." The pure in heart thus have an actual empirical observable knowledge of God, and revelation of divine things becomes written in the heart through the acquisition of the Holy Spirit. This is the faith which the Prophets foretold, the Apostles taught, the Fathers received, and the Church proclaims.

Some will ask where does Holy Scripture fall into the picture. St. John Chrysostom beautiful explains this in his commentary on Matthew 1:

It were indeed meet for us not at all to require the aid of the written word, but to exhibit a life so pure, that the grace of the Spirit should be instead of books to our souls, and that as these are inscribed with ink, even so should our hearts be with the Spirit. But, since we have utterly put away from us this grace, come, let us at any rate embrace the second best course.

For that the former was better, God has made manifest, both by His words, and by His doings. Since unto Noah, and unto Abraham, and unto his offspring, and unto Job, and unto Moses too, He discoursed not by writings, but Himself by Himself, finding their mind pure. But after the whole people of the Hebrews had fallen into the very pit of wickedness, then and thereafter was a written word, and tables of stone, and the admonition which is given by these.

And this one may perceive was the case, not of the saints in the Old Testament only, but also of those in the New. For neither to the apostles did God give anything in writing, but instead of written words He promised that He would give them the grace of the Spirit: for "He", says our Lord, "shall bring all things to your remembrance" (John 14:26). And that you may learn that this was far better, hear what He says by the Prophet [Jeremiah]: "I will make a new covenant with you, putting my laws into their mind, and in their heart I will write them" (31:33), and, "they shall be all taught by God" (31:34). And Paul too, pointing out the same superiority, said, that they had received a law "not on tables of stone, but in fleshy tables of the heart" (2 Cor. 3:3).

But since in the process of time they made shipwreck, some with regard to doctrines, others as to life and manners, there was again need that they should be put in remembrance by the written word.

Reflect then how great an evil it is for us, who ought to live so purely as not even to need written words, but to yield up our hearts, as books, to the Spirit; now that we have lost that honor, and have come to have need of these, to fail again in duly employing even this second remedy. For if it be a blame to stand in need of written words, and not to have brought down on ourselves the grace of the Spirit; consider how heavy the charge of not choosing to profit even after this assistance, but rather treating what is written with neglect, as if it were cast forth without purpose, and at random, and so bringing down upon ourselves our punishment with increase.

But that no such effect may ensue, let us give strict heed unto the things that are written; and let us learn how the Old Law was given on the one hand, and how on the other the New Covenant.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

The Wonderworking Kursk Icon Returns Home

KURSK, September 23 (RIA Novosti) - The head of the Russian Orthodox Church on Wednesday led a procession through the city of Kursk, 300 miles south of Moscow, to celebrate the arrival of a miracle-working icon from the United States.

Patriarch Kirill of Moscow and All Russia carried the icon, called the Kursk Root Icon of Our Lady of the Sign, through the streets, where it was welcomed by over 30,000 people - almost 10% of the city's population.

The icon was brought to Russia on September 12 and was kept in central Moscow's Christ the Savior Cathedral before its departure for Kursk. In early October it will be returned to the United States.

Church spokesman Vladimir Legoida said over 150,000 believers came to pray before the icon while it was in Moscow.

"It is one of the most venerated miracle-working icons in the Russian Orthodox Church. It was discovered in the 13th century, and our ancestors always turned to it in hard times," he said.

"The stay of such a shrine in Russia is a very important event in the church life. And the bringing of the icon to Kursk, where it was found, is certainly a symbolic event with historical significance," the spokesman said.

The Kursk Root icon of the Mother of God dates back to the 13th century. A hunter from the city of Rylsk near Kursk came across a small icon lying face down on a root of a tree in the year 1295. He picked it up, and a spring of pure water gushed from the place it lay upon.

Numerous miracles were later attributed to the icon. Legend has it that once late in the 14th century, when Tartars came to raid the Kursk Region and cut the icon in two, the two halves grew together, leaving a small trace of the break.

In 1920 the Kursk Root icon left Russia as many faithful fled the country following the 1917 Bolshevik Revolution that saw the start of a large-scale persecution of Christians. The icon traveled from place to place, including Serbia and Germany, and was finally taken to the United States.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Protestant Views on Justification, Eternal Security and Salvation Outside the Church: An Orthodox Biblical Response

Unlike Martin Luther who was offended by the New Testament Book of James because it "contradicted" his Sola Fidei (faith alone) doctrine - an apostolic book which dared not to separate the faith of a believer from the manifestation of one's faith, which is "works" - the Orthodox Church has been faithful to the apostolic tradition for 2000 years. It never took part in the vain debate of the Reformers of the 16th century who over-reacted against the abuses of Papal Rome by separating faith and works because it never had to. Biblical and Patristic faith comprehends all of life and always is dynamically manifested through the way we live, talk, walk and think. Only by our thoughts and our deeds can we be separated from Satan, whose faith in Jesus surpasses our own. The mind of the Church has always been that those who seek to separate faith from works only reveal their own wickedness, who do not want to manifest their faith with their deeds. And it is for this reason that Jesus says repeatedly that it is by our deeds, which manifest our faith, that we will be judged (Lk. 3:7-14; Mt. 7:21-23; Matt. 25:31-46; etc). And though our faith justifies us (Rom. 3:28), what Paul describes is a living faith that is manifestated by a righteous life, defeat of Satan's power over our lives, growth in the virtues, and a progress through the purification of the heart unto an illumination of the Holy Spirit which is perfection in Christ (Matt. 5:20; Rev. 14:12; Heb. 11:4,8; Is. 58:5-7).

Furthermore, justification is not a legal acquital before God, but part of a covenant relationship with Him Who having fulfilled the requirements of the Law and defeated death by His death has raised us to new life through "water (baptism) and the Spirit" (Rom. 6:4; Jn. 3:5). Christ came to establish a visible Church (Matt. 16:18) to gather all those destined for condemnation, like Noah did in the Ark. He did not come to give us the Scriptures, but to write the law of God within our hearts through the acquisition of the Holy Spirit (Jer. 31:33; Jn 8:7). It is the Holy Spirit which unites the visible Church into a living and organic Body of Christ of diverse spiritual gifts. We are initiated into the Body of Christ through baptism and the eucharist, since without the reception of the Body and Blood of Christ we can have no part in Christ (Jn. 6:53-58). Through the purification of one's heart and mind and the reception of the Mysteries (Sacraments) of the Church the Lord through His Holy Spirit heals us wounded by our passions and sins (all this is revealed in Lk. 10:34), and we become a temple of the Holy Spirit by God's grace and mercy, unworthy though we be.

Orthodox Christians simply leave all judgement to God and dare not judge someone's salvation lest they also be judged (Matt. 7:1), and they by no means judge themselves either (to hell or heaven). All judgement is left to the Lord, and it is up to us to always be ready and be watchful, lest we be "cut off" (Rom 11:22; Matt. 25:13) - we are to be always faithful in a dynamic way and be concerned with this alone. Our love for God is proved in how we keep His commandments (John 14:21). If the Apostle Paul considered himself the greatest of sinners in his great humility (1 Tim. 1:15; Phil. 3:12-14; Rom 7:15-19), even though he had attained great spiritual heights by the grace of God and was a visionary of the uncreated glory of God in the third heaven, then we also ought to imitate him (1 Cor. 11:1) and dare not condemn anyone but ourselves. God alone knows the heart and He has made clear that "My ways are not your ways" (Is. 55:8). A true Christian tries to imitate the selfless love of Christ who condemned Himself to death to save us wretches, as did the Prophet Moses who preferred to lose his own salvation so that the people of Israel would be saved (Ex. 32:30-33), and its for Moses' humility (Ex. 4:10; Num 12:3) that God chose him and exalted him. This was also repeated by the Apostle Paul (Rom 9:1-5). Like the Prophet Isaiah, the nearer we come to the glory of God the more we feel the need to condemn ourselves rather than others (Is. 6:5). Therefore, we repeat with the Apostle Paul: "It is a very small thing that I should be judged by you or by a human court. For I know of nothing against myself, yet I am not justified by this; but He who judges me is the Lord. Therefore judge nothing before the time, until the Lord comes, who will both bring to light the hidden things of darkness and reveal the counsels of the hearts. Then each one's praise will come from God." (1 Cor. 4:3-5). And again: "For if we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged. But when we are judged, we are chastened of the Lord, that we should not be condemned with the world." (1 Cor. 11:31-32).

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

'Last Ottoman' Dies in Istanbul

By Roger Hardy
BBC News
September 24, 2009

Ertugrul Osman - the would-be sultan known in Turkey as the "last Ottoman" - has died in Istanbul at the age of 97.

Osman would have been sultan of the Ottoman Empire had Turkey's modern republic not been created in the 1920s.

As the last surviving grandson of Sultan Abdul-Hamid II, he would have been known as his Imperial Highness Prince Shehzade Ertugrul Osman Effendi.

Born in Istanbul in 1912, Osman spent most of his years living modestly in New York.

No political ambition

He was a 12-year-old at school in Vienna when he heard the news that his family was being expelled by Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, the soldier who founded the modern Turkish republic out of the ashes of the old empire.

Osman eventually settled in New York, where for more than 60 years he lived in a flat above a restaurant.

Always insisting he had no political ambition, he only returned to Turkey in the early 1990s at the invitation of the government.

During the visit, he went to Dolmabahce - the palace by the Bosphorus where he had played as a child.

Characteristically, he joined a tour group in order to avoid any red-carpet treatment.

Ertugrul Osman is survived by his wife, Zeynep, a relative of the last king of Afghanistan.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Pope Benedict XVI on Saint Symeon the New Theologian

[One of the last great Saints prior to the "official" schism between the Orthodox and the Franks in 1054 was St. Symeon the New Theologian. This past September 16th Pope Benedict, who has been offering reflections on many Saints of the Eastern Church in the past few years, focused exclusively on St. Symeon to better acquiant his flock with one of Orthodoxy's greatest Fathers. I thought it was a good reflection and serves as a thoughtful introduction, which was delivered in Paul VI Hall. - J.S.]

On Symeon the New Theologian

"The Source of Love in Him Was the Presence of Christ"

Dear brothers and sisters,

Today we pause to reflect on the figure of the Eastern monk Symeon the New Theologian, whose writings exercised a noteworthy influence on the theology and spirituality of the East, in particular, regarding the experience of mystical union with God.

Symeon the New Theologian was born in 949 in Galatia, in Paphlagonia (Asia Minor), of a noble provincial family. While still young, he went to Constantinople to undertake studies and enter the emperor's service. However, he felt little attracted to the civil career before him and, under the influence of the interior illuminations he was experiencing, he looked for a person who would direct him through his moment of doubts and perplexities, and who would help him progress on the way to union with God.

He found this spiritual guide in Symeon the Pious (Eulabes), a simple monk of the Studion monastery in Constantinople, who gave him to read the treatise "The Spiritual Law of Mark the Monk." In this text, Symeon the New Theologian found a teaching that impressed him very much: "If you seek spiritual healing," he read there, "be attentive to your conscience. Do all that it tells you and you will find what is useful to you." From that moment -- he himself says -- he never again lay down without asking if his conscience had something for which to reproach him.

Symeon entered the Studion monastery, where, however, his mystical experiences and his extraordinary devotion toward the spiritual father caused him difficulty. He transferred to the small convent of St. Mammas, also in Constantinople, where, after three years, he became director -- the higumeno. There he pursued an intense search of spiritual union with Christ, which conferred on him great authority.

It is interesting to note that he was given there the name of "New Theologian," notwithstanding the fact that tradition reserved the title of "Theologian" to two personalities: John the Evangelist and Gregory of Nazianzen. He suffered misunderstandings and exile, but was restored by the Patriarch of Constantinople, Sergius II.

Symeon the New Theologian spent the last phase of his life in the monastery of St. Macrina, where he wrote the greater part of his works, becoming ever more famous for his teachings and miracles. He died on March 12, 1022.

His best known disciple, Nicetas Stathos, who compiled and re-copied Symeon's writings, prepared a posthumous edition, followed by a biography. Symeon's work includes nine volumes, which are divided in theological, gnostic and practical chapters, three volumes of catechesis addressed to monks, two volumes of theological and ethical treatises, and a volume of hymns. Nor should we forget his numerous letters. All these works have found an important place in the Eastern monastic tradition down to our day.

Symeon focuses his reflection on the presence of the Holy Spirit in those who are baptized and on the awareness they must have of this spiritual reality. Christian life -- he stresses -- is intimate and personal communion with God; divine grace illumines the believer's heart and leads him to the mystical vision of the Lord. In this line, Symeon the New Theologian insists on the fact that true knowledge of God stems from a journey of interior purification, which begins with conversion of heart, thanks to the strength of faith and love; passes through profound repentance and sincere sorrow for one's sins; and arrives at union with Christ, source of joy and peace, invaded by the light of his presence in us. For Symeon, such an experience of divine grace is not an exceptional gift for some mystics, but the fruit of baptism in the life of every seriously committed faithful -- a point on which to reflect, dear brothers and sisters!

This holy Eastern monk calls us all to attention to the spiritual life, to the hidden presence of God in us, to honesty of conscience and purification, to conversion of heart, so that the Holy Spirit will be present in us and guide us. If in fact we are justly preoccupied about taking care of our physical growth, it is even more important not to neglect our interior growth, which consists in knowledge of God, in true knowledge, not only taken from books, but interior, and in communion with God, to experience his help at all times and in every circumstance.

Basically, this is what Symeon describes when he recounts his own mystical experience. Already as a youth, before entering the monastery, while prolonging his prayer at home one night, invoking God's help to struggle against temptations, he saw the room filled with light. When he later entered the monastery, he was given spiritual books to instruct himself, but the readings did not give him the peace he was looking for. He felt -- he recounts -- like a poor little bird without wings. He accepted this situation with humility, did not rebel, and then the visions of light began to multiply again. Wishing to be certain of their authenticity, Symeon asked Christ directly: "Lord, are you yourself really here?" He felt resonate in his heart an affirmative answer and was greatly consoled. "That was, Lord," he wrote later, "the first time you judged me, prodigal son, worthy to hear your voice." However, this revelation did not leave him totally at peace either. He even wondered if that experience should not be considered an illusion.

Finally, one day an essential event occurred for his mystical experience. He began to feel like "a poor man who loves his brothers" (ptochos philadelphos). He saw around him many enemies that wanted to set snares for him and harm him but despite this he felt in himself an intense movement of love for them. How to explain this? Obviously, such love could not come from himself, but must spring from another source. Symeon understood that it came from Christ present in him and all was clarified for him: He had the sure proof that the source of love in him was the presence of Christ and that to have in oneself a love that goes beyond one's personal intentions indicates that the source of love is within. Thus, on one hand, we can say that, without a certain openness to love, Christ does not enter in us, but, on the other, Christ becomes the source of love and transforms us.

Dear friends, this experience is very important for us, today, to find the criteria that will indicate to us if we are really close to God, if God exists and lives in us. God's love grows in us if we are really united to him in prayer and in listening to his word, with openness of heart. Only divine love makes us open our hearts to others and makes us sensitive to their needs, making us regard everyone as brothers and sisters and inviting us to respond with love to hatred, and with forgiveness to offense.

Reflecting on the figure of Symeon the New Theologian, we can still find a further element of his spirituality. In the path of ascetic life proposed and followed by him, the intense attention and concentration of the monk on the interior experience confers on the spiritual father of the monastery an essential importance. The young Symeon himself, as has been said, had found a spiritual director who greatly helped him and for whom he had very great esteem, so much so that, after his death, he also accorded him public veneration.

And I would like to say that this invitation continues to be valid for all -- priests, consecrated persons and laypeople -- and especially for young people -- to take recourse to the counsels of a good spiritual father, capable of accompanying each one in profound knowledge of oneself, and leading one to union with the Lord, so that one's life is increasingly conformed to the Gospel. We always need a guide, dialogue, to go to the Lord. We cannot do it with our reflections alone. And this is also the meaning of the ecclesiality of our faith, of finding this guide.

Thus, to conclude, we can summarize the teaching and mystical experience of Symeon the New Theologian: In his incessant search for God, even in the difficulties he met and the criticism made of him, he, in a word, allowed himself to be guided by love. He was able to live personally and to teach his monks that what is essential for every disciple of Jesus is to grow in love and so we grow in knowledge of Christ himself, to be able to say with St. Paul: "It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me" (Galatians 2:20).

[The Pope then addressed the people in various languages. In English, he said:]

Dear brothers and sisters,

Today’s catechesis focuses on the life of Symeon, an Eastern monk known as the "New Theologian". He was born in nine hundred and forty nine in Asia Minor. As a young man, he moved to Constantinople to embark on a career in the civil service but, during his studies, he was shown a work called The Spiritual Law by Mark the Monk which completely changed his life. It contained the phrase: "If you seek spiritual healing, be aware of your conscience. Do everything it tells you and you will find what is useful to you". From that day on, he made it his way of life always to listen to his conscience. He became a monk and his life and writings, collected afterwards by a disciple, reflect Symeon’s deep understanding of the presence and action of the Holy Spirit in the life of all the baptized. Symeon teaches us that Christian life is an intimate and personal communion with God. True knowledge of God comes, not from books, but from an interior purification through conversion of the heart. For Symeon, union with Christ is not something extraordinary, but the fruit of the baptism common to all Christians. Inspired by Symeon’s life, let us pay greater attention to our spiritual life, seeking the guidance we need to grow in the love of God.

I am pleased to welcome all the English-speaking pilgrims here this morning, including the priests and brothers of the Society of Mary gathered in Rome for their chapter, and the various schools and university groups present. Upon you all, I willingly invoke God’s abundant graces.

© Copyright 2009 - Libreria Editrice Vaticana

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Journalist Who Asked "Is God Dead?" Has Died

John T. Elson, Editor Who Asked ‘Is God Dead?’ at Time, Dies at 78

WILLIAM GRIMES
Published: September 17, 2009
New York Times

All journalists want to write a story that makes a big splash. John T. Elson, the religion editor at Time magazine, was no exception. But in 1966 he got more than he bargained for.

For more than a year, Mr. Elson had labored over an article examining radical new approaches to thinking about God that were gaining currency in seminaries and universities and spilling over to the public at large.

When finally completed, it became the cover story for the issue of April 8, as Easter and Passover approached. The cover itself was eye-catching, the first one in Time’s 43-year history to appear without a photograph or an illustration. Giant blood-red letters against a black background spelled out the question “Is God Dead?”

The issue caused an uproar, equaled only by John Lennon’s offhand remark, published in a magazine for teenagers a few months later, that the Beatles were more popular than Jesus. The “Is God Dead?” issue gave Time its biggest newsstand sales in more than 20 years and elicited 3,500 letters to the editor, the most in its history to that point. It remains a signpost of the 1960s, testimony to the wrenching social changes transforming the United States.

The quiet, studious Mr. Elson, who died on Sept. 7 at the age of 78, was an unlikely bomb-thrower, and his article, for those who ventured past the cover, reflected his scholarly bent. Meekly titled on the inside as “Toward a Hidden God,” it began: “Is God dead? It is a question that tantalizes both believers, who perhaps secretly fear that he is, and atheists, who possibly suspect that the answer is no.”

For the next six pages, readers were guided through thickets of theological controversy and a shifting religious landscape. Profound changes taking place in the relationship of believers to their faith were often expressed through the words of people, both eminent and ordinary, grappling with the same fundamental problems. Simone de Beauvoir, Claude Lévi-Strauss, Billy Graham and William Sloane Coffin were quoted. So were a Tel Aviv streetwalker, a Dutch charwoman and a Hollywood screenwriter.

More than 30 Time foreign correspondents were also involved in the project, conducting some 300 interviews to measure contemporary thinking about God around the world.

“Secularization, science, urbanization — all have made it comparatively easy for the modern man to ask where God is and hard for the man of faith to give a convincing answer, even to himself,” Mr. Elson wrote.

John Truscott Elson was born on April 29, 1931, in Vancouver, British Columbia. His father, Robert T. Elson, was a newspaper reporter in Canada who later became a high-ranking editor at Time and Life and helped write two volumes of the three-volume “Time, Inc.,” the company’s official history. He died in 1987.

John Elson was educated at St. Anselm’s Priory School in Washington. He received a bachelor’s degree from Notre Dame in 1953 and a master’s degree in English from Columbia in 1954.

That year, he married Rosemary Knorr. She said her husband died at home in Manhattan after being in poor health for the last two years. Mr. Elson is also survived by two children, Hilary Elson Alter of Lake Zurich, Ill., and Amanda Elson of Wyomissing, Pa.; two sisters, Elizabeth Elson of Manhattan and Brigid Elson of Toronto; a brother, R. Anthony Elson of Chevy Chase, Md.; and a grandchild.

After serving with the Air Force in Japan, Mr. Elson worked for the Canadian Press news agency before being recruited by Time and assigned to its Detroit bureau. As an editor, he started out on the lowest rung, in the milestones and miscellany departments, and rose to assistant managing editor. Along the way, he edited every section in the magazine except business. He retired in 1987 but continued to write for the magazine until 1993.

It was as religion editor that Mr. Elson made his most lasting mark. He wrote numerous cover stories on religious issues — “Is God Dead?” was the 10th — and committed the magazine to serious coverage of ideas and arguments normally encountered in more specialized journals.

“He was catholic with a capital C and a small c in his interests, deeply and widely read,” Jim Kelly, former managing editor of Time, said in an interview last week. “His ability to absorb an enormous amount of information and turn it into a readable story was remarkable.”

Unquestionably, Mr. Elson touched a nerve. Clergymen took up the challenge thrown down by the “Is God Dead?” cover line in Sunday sermons. Church publications and newspaper editorials chimed in.

“Your ugly cover is a blasphemous outrage and, appearing as it does, during Passover and Easter week, an affront to every believing Jew and Christian,” one reader wrote. Others wrote to explain their faith in fervent terms. Atheists gloated or scoffed.

Some expressed their feelings in a single word. Norine McGuire of Chicago, responding to Time’s bombshell of a question, wrote: “Sir: No.” Immediately below her letter, Time ran one from Richard L. Storatz of Notre Dame, Ind.: “Sir: Yes.”

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

The Last Days of Elder Tychon the Athonite: A Blessed Repose

Elder Tychon (+ September 10/23, 1968)

By Elder Paisios the Athonite

In 1968, he [Elder Tychon] had a presentiment of his death, because he continually referred to death. Even the little bodily strength remaining had now deserted him. After the Feast of the Dormition (August 15), he took to his bed and drank only water, because he was burning inside. Despite the fact that he was in this condition, he did not want anyone to stay with him, so as not to have any interruption to his unceasing prayer.

When he had reached the last week of his life on earth, he then told me to stay by his side, because we were about to be parted, since he was leaving for true life. Even during those ten days he did not allow me to stay with him all the time, but directed me to go to the small cell next door, so that I, too, could pray after offering him just a little help. Of course, I did not have the wherewithal to relieve him properly, but since he had never given his weary body any relief, even a little help seemed a great deal to him.

One day, I had saved two lemons and made him a lemon drink. As soon as he drank it, he was refreshed and looked at me strangely saying:

"Well, well, that is good water. Where did you find it? May Christ grant you forty golden crowns."

It seemed that he had never drank lemonade, or if he had, it would have been when he was very young and had forgotten the taste of it.

He was completely bedridden by now, having lost whatever little bodily strength he had left. Since he could no longer get up to go to the Chapel of the Precious Cross, where he had celebrated with piety for so many years, he asked me to fetch the Cross from the Altar Table as a consolation. When he saw the Cross, his eyes glistened, and after kissing it with due reverence, he held it tightly in his hand with all the strength that was left in him. I had also tied a sprig of basil to the Cross and asked him:

"Does it smell nice, Elder?"

He answered:

"Paradise, my son, smells a lot better."

On one of his last days, I had gone out to get him a little water. When I opened the door of his cell afterwards, he looked at me strangely and said:

"Is that you, Saint Sergius?"

"No, Elder, it is me, Paisios."

"Just now, my son, the Mother of God, Saint Sergius and Saint Seraphim were here. Where did they go?"

I realized something was going on, so I asked him:

"What did the Mother of God say to you?"

"That we will have the Feast and then she will take me."

It was afternoon on the eve of the Feast of the Nativity of the Theotokos, September 7, 1968 and three days later, on September 10, he rested in the Lord.

On the second to last day, the Elder said to me:

"Tomorrow I will die and I want you not to sleep, so that I can bless you."

I felt really sorry for him that evening, because he tired himself out with his hand on my head all the time, for three hours, blessing me and embracing me for the last time. To express his gratitude for the little water I had given him in his last days, he said to me:

"My sweet Paisios, we will have love between us unto the ages of ages, my child. It is precious, our love. You will make your prayer here and I will make mine from heaven. I believe that God will have mercy on me, because being a monk for sixty years, my son, I was constantly saying: Lord Jesus Christ, have mercy upon me."

He also said:

"Now I will be celebrating in Paradise. You pray here and I will come and see you every year. If you come and live in this cell, it will be a joy to me, but whatever God wants, my son. I also have provisions for you, tinned food for three years," and he pointed to six small tins of sardines next to him and another four tins of squid, which somebody had brought him a long time ago and had remained since then where the visitor had put them. (With me those tins would not have lasted even a week.)

The Elder again repeated:

"You and me, we will have precious love unto the ages of ages, and I will come every year and see you." And all the while tears were streaming from his eyes.

Since I had the chance actually to live with him for a while and get to know him better, it is true that those last ten days I stayed with him were God's greatest blessing for me, because I was helped more than at any other time. What made the biggest impression on me was the warmth of his interest in the salvation of the soul! Next to his bed were letters ready for me to post to bishops he knew, so that they would commemorate him as soon as he died. He also gave me instructions to bring a bishop to read prayers over his grave, and then leave him there - not to have his relics exhumed - until the Second Coming of Christ.

In the meantime, I had let the monastery know that Father Tychon was approaching his end and Father Basil came so that we could prepare him. You could see, by now, that Father Tychon was passing away like an icon lamp when the oil in the glass has run out and there is only a little left in the wick flickering its last.

Thus, his sanctified soul departed, leaving behind his body and a great emptiness. The two of us prepared him. In the morning we let the other fathers know. They came and the priests whom he knew devoutly read the burial service. Of course, his departure left us with pain in our souls, because his very presence took away pain and imparted comfort. The elder will now visit us from heaven and will help us all the more. In any case, he himself promised he would: "I will come and see you every year."

Three whole years passed without him appearing to me, and this set me thinking: "Perhaps I am at fault over something." After three years he made his first visit to me. If by "every year" the elder meant that he would start after three years, then that is a comfort to me, because then I am not to blame in the matter.

The first time was on September 10, 1971, in the evening after midnight. While I was saying the Jesus Prayer, I suddenly saw the elder come into the cell! I leapt up and embraced his feet, which I kissed with devotion. I don't know how, but somehow he freed himself from my arms and, as he was leaving, I saw that he went into the chapel and disappeared. Naturally, when events like that happen you are at a loss. Nor can you explain them logically, which is why they are called miracles. I immediately lit the candle, because I had only the candle-lamp going when this happened, so I could note in my diary the day when the elder had appeared to me and remember it. When I saw that it was the day when the elder had fallen asleep in the Lord (September 10), I was very sad and chastised myself for not even having noticed which day it was. I am sure the good father will forgive me, because that day, from dawn to dusk, I had visitors at the hut and was so tired and befuddled that I completely forgot. Otherwise, I would have done something for my own benefit and to bring a little joy to the elder with an all-night vigil.

I don't know if he had appeared to anyone else before his first visit to me. In any case, he appeared to a monk neither of us knew, Father Andrew, who used to be at the Monastery of Karakallou. It happened at my cell in the following way:

Father Andrew had come to my cell so I could help him in something he wanted. Naturally, he didn't know me and I didn't know him. So he waited outside my cell, under the olive tree, because he thought I was away. I was inside in the workshop and couldn't be heard, because I was varnishing small icons. When I had finished, I chanted the "Holy God" and went out. As soon as he saw me, Father Andrew was astonished and related the following incident with great wonder:

"While I was waiting under the olive tree, I had closed my eyes, but still aware of my surroundings. Suddenly, I see an elder coming out of the rosemary bush and he says to me:

'Who are you waiting for?'

'Father Paisios,' I answered.

'He is over there,' he said and pointed towards the cell.

Just at the moment he was pointing, I heard you chanting the 'Holy God' and you came out. He was some Saint or other, Father Paisios, because I can recognise them. I have seen things like that before!"

Then I told him a few things about the elder and said that his grave was over by the rosemary. I had planted rosemary all around and it had grown so that the grave was no longer visible; I didn't want his relics to be trodden on, since he had given me instructions not to have him exhumed....

May the prayers of Father Tychon and all the known and unknown saints help us through the difficult times in which we live. Amen.

The grave of Elder Tychon

From the book Athonite Fathers and Athonite Matters)

See also: The Cell of the Precious Cross of Papa Tychon and Elder Paisios

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Three Dead End Approaches in Verifying God's Existence...and One Sure Way

[The article below which is posted on evolutionnews.org I thought was interesting because in the three view points presented concerning the proofs for the existence of God, two present the over-reliance on the reasoning faculties and the other does away with reason and science altogether. They are all dead end streets and all three are a denial of science. The arguments presented by Karen Armstrong are more sentimental and emotional in a pietistic/New Age sort of way that does not represent in any way the empirical viewpoint which is based on observation. Richard Dawkins claims to present a scientific argument against God's existence, but in reality he is presenting metaphysical ideas to reason away God's existence. Michael Egnor also relies too heavily on metaphysical argumentation to argue based solely on reason that "God’s existence is logically demonstrable".

From an Orthodox Christian perspective, all three try to make something that appears logically certain to be reality. Though metaphysics can lead to a certain logical certainty about something, only empiricism can verify and confirm a philosophical or emotional argument. Without empirical proof for God and an actual observation, there is ultimately no proof for God's existence to confirm what is inferred through logic.

The weakness of all religious traditions outside of Orthodox Christianity is that they do not provide the means to empirically prove the existence of God. They can only confuse logic or emotion with reality, and this leads to thousands of possible conclusions that lead nowhere. Orthodoxy provides the scientific method of verfiability through the process by which man can acquire the Holy Spirit and through glorification (union with God) actually perceive God (Matt. 5:8), and this through inner faith which illumines reason. In Orthodox theology, one definition of a Saint could be that it is someone who has verified the existence of God through empirical observation. - J.S.]

Dawkins vs. Armstrong

Michael Egnor
September 17, 2009

Recently the Wall Street Journal published dueling articles by Karen Armstrong and Richard Dawkins entitled Man vs. God. The editors’ choice of Dawkins to represent the atheist viewpoint is understandable enough; in the interest of balance, it seems that the WSJ editors searched hard to find a theist who mangles theism as effectively as Dawkins mangles atheism. Author Karen Armstrong, a former Catholic nun given to syncretism who believes that "we need God to grasp the wonder of our existence,” answered the WSJ’s "Mangler of Theology" Ad, and Dawkins had his disputant.

Armstrong:

"…Darwin may have done religion—and God—a favor by revealing a flaw in modern Western faith. Despite our scientific and technological brilliance, our understanding of God is often remarkably undeveloped—even primitive. In the past, many of the most influential Jewish, Christian and Muslim thinkers understood that what we call "God" is merely a symbol that points beyond itself to an indescribable transcendence, whose existence cannot be proved but is only intuited by means of spiritual exercises and a compassionate lifestyle that enable us to cultivate new capacities of mind and heart."

Indeed, there are deep flaws in modern theology, but Darwin didn't reveal them; he concealed and exploited them. He exploited a deep error that had arisen out of Descartes’ rejection of Thomist metaphysics and his embrace of Mechanical Philosophy. Descartes and his successors dispensed with the hylomorphic understanding of nature—with Aristotle’s and Aquinas' understanding of substances as a composite of matter and form and the invocation of four causes (material, efficient, formal, and final) in nature—and replaced it with an anemic metaphysics of truncated material and efficient causes.

Mechanical Philosophy explains the world as a system of disparate mechanisms, mechanical particles and parts randomly bumping about and constrained only by laws of force, without intrinsic essence or teleology. It is a woefully impoverished attempt at metaphysics; it serves well Francis Bacon's dream of a model of nature that can be manipulated, but it utterly lacks the rich explanatory power of the traditional hylomorphic understanding of nature that is the foundation of Western philosophy and natural science. Mechanical Philosophy ignores teleology and organizational principles in nature; it is an impoverished description of nature as particles in motion. It has survived in spite of its inadequacy because of the remarkable success of scientific endeavors that have focused on the these limited mechanical aspects of nature. The focus on mechanical aspects of nature (material and efficient causes) obviously doesn't mean that such a focus is a complete description of nature, but it worked to advance the manipulation of nature, and over centuries we came to believe (falsely) that this truncated philosophy could be a comprehensive explanation of the natural world. There were of course ideologues who understood something else about Mechanical Philosophy: as it denies teleology in nature, it provides a wedge with which to deny the existence of God. For atheists, Mechanical Philosophy was a gift from... well, a gift.

Mechanical Philosophy is a methodology for manipulating nature; it explains nothing. Now don't get me wrong: I'm all for manipulating nature. I'm a neurosurgeon, and I manipulate nature professionally. I take out brain tumors, using very mechanical means, and during surgery inference to material and efficient causes suits me just fine. Applied science is a methodology, and for some purposes, that methodology is good enough. But the person on whom I'm operating can't be explained by the scientific method or by truncated notions of material and efficient causes. In fact, nothing in nature can really be explained without inference to all aspects of causation—material, efficient, formal, and final. And of course, hylomorphism (the metaphysical view that incorporates the four causes) necessarily leads to other conclusions, such as the existence of a Prime Mover/First Cause/Necessary Being. I'm fine with that, because I'm a Christian, and the necessary existence of a Creator seems obvious to me. I'm not an atheist, and therefore I don't begin with a bias that precludes a rigorous understanding of organizational principles and teleology in nature.

Perhaps the most obvious stumbling block of Mechanical Philosophy is its inability to explain life and the mind. Most people don't know or care about hylomorphism or Descartes or philosophical disputes that date back centuries, but they have the good sense to see that "particles in motion" is an impoverished framework for explaining biology and for explaining the immaterial aspects of the mind. They understand that it's not merely that "particles in motion" doesn't explain life and the mind; they understand that it can't explain life and the mind. Darwin's "accomplishment" was to offer a faux-explanation—chance (ateleology) and necessity (tautology)—to account for life. (Materialists are still scrambling, quite unsuccessfully, to provide a mechanical explanation for the mind). But Mechanical Philosophy has no explanatory power; it merely provides, under some circumstances, a methodology for applied science.

Essences (forms) and teleology pervade nature, and Mechanical Philosophy by its own precepts is blind to such aspects of reality. Darwin provided a faux-mechanism by which the living world acquired essences (species) and teleological attributes (specified complexity), without the invocation of real essence (form) or teleology. Darwin's error was to perpetuate an antecedent and much deeper philosophical error; he provided a faux-mechanism to explain life without reference to organizational principles and teleology in nature. Darwin concealed and exploited flaws in Mechanical Philosophy and in the anemic theology that it spawned; he didn’t reveal them.

Armstrong continues:

"But by the end of the 17th century, instead of looking through the symbol to 'the God beyond God,' Christians were transforming it into hard fact. Sir Isaac Newton had claimed that his cosmic system proved beyond doubt the existence of an intelligent, omniscient and omnipotent creator, who was obviously 'very well skilled in Mechanicks and Geometry.' Enthralled by the prospect of such cast-iron certainty, churchmen started to develop a scientifically-based theology that eventually made Newton's Mechanick and, later, William Paley's Intelligent Designer essential to Western Christianity."

She gets it part-right. God isn’t a "Mechanick," because His creation isn’t mechanical (brought about merely by material and efficient causes). Nature has essence and teleology that transcend "Mechanicks." The theological embrace of the Divine Mechanick was a theological catastrophe.

Armstrong observes:

"But the Great Mechanick was little more than an idol, the kind of human projection that theology, at its best, was supposed to avoid. God had been essential to Newtonian physics but it was not long before other scientists were able to dispense with the God-hypothesis…"

She’s right. But then she falls off her rhetorical cliff:

"…finally, Darwin showed that there could be no proof for God's existence. Religion was not supposed to provide explanations that lay within the competence of reason but to help us live creatively with realities for which there are no easy solutions and find an interior haven of peace…"

Armstrong couldn't be more wrong. Darwin didn’t show that “there could be no proof for God’s existence”; nothing he wrote touched any of the classical demonstrations for the existence of God, which are logical demonstrations, not empirical hypotheses. Contra Armstrong, demonstrations of God’s existence are well within the competence of reason, because the philosophical and theological system constructed by Aristotle and Aquinas is the basis for reason. God undoubtedly provides “an inner haven of peace,” but His existence is, and as we shall see must be, demonstrable by reason.

With theists like Armstrong, theism needs no enemies. Richard Dawkins sees this. He observes:

"Now, there is a certain class of sophisticated modern theologian who will say something like this: 'Good heavens, of course we are not so naive or simplistic as to care whether God exists. Existence is such a 19th-century preoccupation! It doesn't matter whether God exists in a scientific sense. What matters is whether he exists for you or for me. If God is real for you, who cares whether science has made him redundant? Such arrogance! Such elitism.'"

Dawkins is remarkably lucid:

"The mainstream belief of the world's peoples is very clear. They believe in God, and that means they believe he exists in objective reality, just as surely as the Rock of Gibraltar exists. If sophisticated theologians or postmodern relativists think they are rescuing God from the redundancy scrap-heap by downplaying the importance of existence, they should think again. Tell the congregation of a church or mosque that existence is too vulgar an attribute to fasten onto their God, and they will brand you an atheist. They'll be right."

Dawkins is right (my fingers cramp as I type this). Armstrong’s theology is a muddled mess; it’s little more than an apology for atheism. Her assertion that God is That which "help[s] us live creatively with realities for which there are no easy solutions and find an interior haven of peace" is just functional atheism cloaked in New Age psycho-babble. The Incarnation of Armstrong's God isn't Christ; it's Oprah.

Remarkably, and to Dawkins’ (Arrrgh..) credit, Dawkins refuses to accept Armstrong’s easily assailed straw man. Dawkins seems to grasp, with perplexing clarity, the incalculable damage "theists" like Armstrong do to the case for belief in God. God is not a sentiment or a celebrity therapist. He is the Foundation of Existence. He is the Source of reason, and His existence is demonstrable by reason. If He is none of these, He doesn’t exist. Real theologians and philosophers, and countless faithful and faithless alike, understand that God’s existence is a radical claim about fact.

Rigorous philosophical arguments that demonstrate the existence of God bear no resemblance to Armstrong’s woolly syncretistic meditations. The arguments with which New Atheists must struggle are the meticulous theistic arguments of Aristotle and Augustine and Maimonides and Averroes and Aquinas and Konig and Maritain and Gilson and Moreland and Plantinga and Craig. Not Armstrong. The debate with New Atheism is a debate about the rationality of belief in God, and the basis for that rational belief is built on several millennia of profound philosophical insight. The effective theist answer to New Atheist casuistry is not to point out that we feel awe and a sense of mystery and that the object of that awe must be God; the theist answer to New Atheists is that God’s existence is logically demonstrable, and that His existence is the indispensable basis for reason, science, and morality.

Richard Dawkins points out that people who believe in God believe that He “exists in objective reality.” Armstrong’s Wall Street Journal essay is the epitome of rhetorical incompetence: she provided Dawkins with an opportunity to get something right.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

The American Ministry of Elder Joachim of St. Anne's Skete and the Miracle of His Beard

Elder Joachim, known as John Nicholaides in the world, was born in Kalamata, Greece in 1895 and raised by a pious Orthodox family. He had the blessing of having as his spiritual father the great ascetic of Kalamata, Elder Elias Panagoulakis.

Following high school, John travelled to America for studies. In America John encountered a materialistic spirit like he had never known, but thoughout his studies he became more and more firm in the faith of his fathers.

Being taught by his spiritual father in Kalamata to not seek the priesthood, since one must be called by either God or man for such an elevated office, he dared not consider such a ministry for his life. Bishop Panteleimon of the Metochion of the Holy Sepulchre pursuaded him and elevated him to the diaconate and priesthood amidst an enthousiastic Greek parish who proclaimed him "Axios!"

The Greek community of America found great inspiration by the imposing and saintly presence of Fr. Joachim (his monastic name), and found within his sermons a living faith. For his missionary zeal in America he was awarded the Medallion of the All-Holy Sepulchre by the Patriarch of Jerusalem.

Fr. Joachim greatly respected and loved the traditions of Orthodoxy and upheld them faithfully in America amidst all the temptations. This proved to be an aid in his mission in America rather than a hindrance. On at least one occasion he so impressed the non-Orthodox with his traditional Orthodox priestly dress and appearance, dressed in his rason (cassock) and with a full beard, that a crowd surrounded him in the city street and a discussion began. In English he proclaimed to the Americans that God and Orthodoxy are alive and that man can live in God. The crowd became so big that both pedestrians and traffic ceased moving, and this lasted for a considerable time.

Unfortunately Fr. Joachim's ministry in the United States, which was beginning to bear much fruit, was cut short due to his impaired health. He started to became weak before every celebration of the Divine Liturgy and had to take injections. His doctors advised that he return to Greece for some rest, to his disappointment and the grief of his flock. In 1930 he left for the Holy Mountain of Athos. Elder Joachim reposed on September 22, 1950.

HIS BEARD

(Taken from Archimandrite Cherubim's Contemporary Ascetics of Mount Athos)

We must not omit saying a few words about Fr. Joachim’s rare and exceptional beard.

When he lived in America, he observed with sorrow the modernist spirit which had begun to affect even ecclesiastical matters. He saw [Orthodox] priests who thought they could function better in society if they departed from Orthodox tradition. In that worldly atmosphere, Fr. Joachim behaved courageously. He couldn’t stand to see Orthodox priests taking off their precious rason or cutting their hair and beard. It is worth noting that before being tonsured, he made the following prayer to the Mother of God:

“Most Holy Theotokos, when I become a priest, please give me long hair and beard, so that I will look like the priests in my country.“

The Mother of God did not deny him his supplication, but fulfilled his desire abundantly. As we stated earlier, the Americans wondered at his imposing appearance and his long, full beard. When he finally journeyed to Mount Athos, an astonishing thing happened. His beard grew and lengthened all the way down to his legs – a phenomenon very rare even in his fatherland. We attributed this to the prayer he made (to look like a priest) to the Mother of God. In order to move freely and restrain the remarks of others, he was forced to carry his beard in a sack tied around his neck.

In his latter years, the fathers asked him to be photographed with his priestly vestments and beard. At first he wouldn’t do it, but after being asked a second time by the fathers, he gave in. The photograph was saved, and can be seen at the end of the text.



(Thanks to OrthodoxHistory.org, we have a clearer picture of who Archbishop Panteleimon was as well his ministry in America here and here. The latter link even gives us the clue that the Metochion of the Jerusalem Patriarchate was likely located in New York City.)

Tweet

Share on Tumblr