The Veneration of Sts. Joachim and Anna According to Elder Paisios

The Conception of Saint Anna (Feast Day - December 9)

Elder Paisios was asked:

Elder, tell us about St. Joachim and St. Anna, the Ancestors of God. At one point you started to tell us something.

He said:

From a young age I had great reverence towards the Holy Ancestors of God. Indeed, I had told someone that, when they make me a monk, I would want them to give me the name Joachim. How much I have benefited from them! Sts. Joachim and Anna are the most dispassionate couple which ever existed. They did not have any carnal mindset.

This is how God made man and this is how he wanted men to be born - dispassionately. But after the fall passion entered the relationship between man and woman. As soon as a dispassionate couple was found, which is how God created man and as he wished men to be born, the Panagia was born, this pure creation, and then Christ became incarnate. My thoughts tell me that Christ would have descended earlier to earth, if there was a pure couple, such as were Sts. Joachim and Anna.

The Roman Catholics fall into delusion and believe, supposedly from piety, that the Panagia was born without the ancestral sin. While the Panagia was not free from the ancestral sin, she was born as God wished men to be born after their creation. She was all-pure, (1) because Her conception occurred without pleasure. The Holy Ancestors of God, after fervent prayer to God to grant them a child, conceived not by sexual lust, but by obedience to God. This fact I had experienced on Sinai. (2)

(1) The Theotokos was born according to a natural manner and not virginally. “She was all-pure”, because, as St. John of Damascus writes in his homily “On the Birth of our Most-Holy Lady Theotokos and Ever-Virgin Mary”, she was conceived “chastely” but increased with her struggle the holiness given to her from her parents, warding off all unnecessary and soul-endangering thoughts before experiencing them.

(2) The Elder lived in asceticism on Sinai, at Sts. Episteme and Galaction, from 1962 to 1964. This occurance he did not reveal to us."

(Source: Elder Paisios the Athonite, Book IV: Family Life, Holy Hesychasterion of “St. John the Evangelist the Theologian”, Souroti, Thessaloniki, 2007)

Apolytikion in the Fourth Tone
Against all hope, the bonds of barrenness are loosed today. For, God has hearkened unto Joachim and Anna clearly promising that they would bear a godly maiden. He who commanded the angel to cry out to her, "Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with you," will be born of her, the infinite One Himself, becoming man.

Kontakion in the Fourth Tone
Today the world rejoices in the conception of Anna, wrought by God. For she bore the One who beyond comprehension conceived the Logos.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

The Error of the Immaculate Conception of the Virgin

“ZEAL NOT ACCORDING TO KNOWLEDGE” (Rom. 10:2)

The corruption by the Latins, in the newly-invented dogma of the “Immaculate Conception,” of the true veneration of the Most Holy Mother of God and Ever-Virgin Mary.

by Saint John Maximovitch

WHEN THOSE WHO censured the immaculate life of the Most Holy Virgin had been rebuked, as well as those who denied Her Evervirginity, those who denied Her dignity as the Mother of God, and those who disdained Her icons-then, when the glory of the Mother of God had illuminated the whole universe, there appeared a teaching which seemingly exalted highly the Virgin Mary, but in reality denied all Her virtues.

This teaching is called that of the Immaculate Conception of the Virgin Mary, and it was accepted by the followers of the Papal throne of Rome. The teaching is this- that "the All-blessed Virgin Mary in the first instant of Her Conception, by the special grace of Almighty God and by a special privilege, for the sake of the future merits of Jesus Christ, Saviour of the human race, was preserved exempt from all stain of original sin" (Bull of Pope Pius IX concerning the new dogma). In other words, the Mother of God at Her very conception was preserved from original sin and, by the grace of God, was placed in a state where it was impossible for Her to have personal sins.

Christians had not heard of this before the ninth century, when for the first time the Abbot of Corvey, Paschasius Radbertus, expressed the opinion that the Holy Virgin was conceived without original sin. Beginning, from the 12th century, this idea begins to spread among the clergy and flock of the Western church, which had already fallen away from the Universal Church and thereby lost the grace of the Holy Spirit.

However, by no means all of the members of the Roman church agreed with the new teaching. There was a difference of among the most renowned theologians of the West, the pillars, so to speak, of the Latin church. Thomas Aquinas and Bernard of Clairvaux decisively censured it, while Duns Scotus defended it. From the teachers this division carried over to their disciples: the Latin Dominican monks, after their teacher Thomas Aquinas, preached against the teaching of the Immaculate Conception, while the followers of Duns Scotus, the Franciscans, strove to implant it everywhere. The battle between these two currents continued for the course of several centuries. Both on the one and on the other side there were those who were considered among the Catholics as the greatest authorities.

There was no help in deciding the question in the fact that several people declared that they had had a revelation from above concerning it. The nun Bridget [of Sweden], renowned in the 14th century among the Catholics, spoke in her writings about the appearances to her of the Mother of God, Who Herself told her that She had been conceived immaculately, without original sin. But her contemporary, the yet more renowned ascetic Catherine of Sienna, affirmed that in Her Conception the Holy Virgin participated in original sin, concerning which she had received a revelation from Christ Himself (See the book of Archpriest A. Lebedev, Differences in the Teaching on the Most Holy Mother of God in the Churches of East and West).

Thus, neither on the foundation of theological writings, nor on the foundation of miraculous manifestations which contradicted each other, could the Latin flock distinguish for a long time where the truth was. Roman Popes until Sixtus IV (end of the 15th century) remained apart from these disputes, and only this Pope in 1475 approved a service in which the teaching of the Immaculate Conception was clearly expressed; and several years later he forbade a condemnation of those who believed in the Immaculate Conception. However, even Sixtus IV did not yet decide to affirm that such was the unwavering teaching of the church; and therefore, having forbidden the condemnation of those who believed in the Immaculate Conception, he also did not condemn those who believed otherwise.

Meanwhile, the teaching of the Immaculate Conception obtained more and more partisans among the members of the Roman church. The reason for this was the fact that it seemed more pious and pleasing to the Mother of God to give Her as much glory as possible. The striving of the people to glorify the Heavenly Intercessor, on the one hand, and on the other hand, the deviation of Western theologians into abstract speculations which led only to a seeming truth (Scholasticism), and finally, the patronage of the Roman Popes after Sixtus IV-all this led to the fact that the opinion concerning the Immaculate Conception which had been expressed by Paschasius Radbertus in the 9th century was already the general belief of the Latin church in the 19th century. There remained only to proclaim this definitely as the church's teaching, which was done by the Roman Pope Pius IX during a solemn service on December 8, 1854, when he declared that the Immaculate Conception of the Most Holy Virgin was a dogma of the Roman church. Thus the Roman church added yet another deviation from the teaching which it had confessed while it was a member of the Catholic, Apostolic Church, which faith has been held up to now unaltered and unchanged by the Orthodox Church. The proclamation of the new dogma satisfied the broad masses of people who belonged to the Roman church, who in simplicity of heart thought that the proclamation of the new teaching in the church would serve for the greater glory of the Mother of God, to Whom by this they were making a gift, as it were. There was also satisfied the vainglory of the Western theologians who defended and worked it out. But most of all the proclamation of the new dogma was profitable for the Roman throne itself, since, having proclaimed the new dogma by his own authority, even though he did listen to the opinions of the bishops of the Catholic church, the Roman Pope by this very fact openly appropriated to himself the right to change the teaching of the Roman church and placed his own voice above the testimony of Sacred Scripture and Tradition. A direct deduction from this was the fact that the Roman Popes were infallible in matters of faith, which indeed this very same Pope Pius IX likewise proclaimed as a dogma of the Catholic church in 1870.

Thus was the teaching of the Western church changed after it had fallen away from communion with the True Church. It has introduced into itself newer and newer teachings, thinking by this to glorify the Truth yet more, but in reality distorting it. While the Orthodox Church humbly confesses what it has received from Christ and the Apostles, the Roman church dares to add to it, sometimes from zeal not according to knowledge (cf. Rom. 10:2), and sometimes by deviating into superstitions and into the contradictions of knowledge falsely so called (I Tim. 6:20). It could not be otherwise. That the gates of hell shall not prevail against the Church (Matt. 16:18) is promised only to the True, Universal Church; but upon those who have fallen away from it are fulfilled the words: As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine; so neither can ye, except ye abide in Me (John 15:4).

It is true that in the very definition of the new dogma it is said that a new teaching is not being established, but that there is only being proclaimed as the church's that which always existed in the church and which has been held by many Holy Fathers, excerpts from whose writings are cited. However, all the cited references speak only of the exalted sanctity of the Virgin Mary and of Her immaculateness, and give Her various names which define Her purity and spiritual might; but nowhere is there any word of the immaculateness of Her conception. Meanwhile, these same Holy Fathers in other places say that only Jesus Christ is completely pure of every sin, while all men, being born of Adam, have borne a flesh subject to the law of sin.

None of the ancient Holy Fathers say that God in miraculous fashion purified the Virgin Mary while yet in the womb; and many directly indicate that the Virgin Mary, just as all men, endured a battle with sinfulness, but was victorious over temptations and was saved by Her Divine Son.

Commentators of the Latin confession likewise say that the Virgin Mary was saved by Christ. But they understand this in the sense that Mary was preserved from the taint of original sin in view of the future merits of Christ (Bull on the Dogma of the Immaculate Conception). The Virgin Mary, according to their teaching, received in advance, as it were, the gift which Christ brought to men by His sufferings and death on the Cross. Moreover, speaking of the torments of the Mother of God which She endured standing at the Cross of Her Beloved Son, and in general of the sorrows with which the life of the Mother of God was filled, they consider them an addition to the sufferings of Christ and consider Mary to be our CoRedemptress.

According to the commentary of the Latin theologians, "Mary is an associate with our Redeemer as Co-Redemptress" (see Lebedev, op. cit. p. 273). "In the act of Redemption, She, in a certain way, helped Christ" (Catechism of Dr. Weimar). "The Mother of God," writes Dr. Lentz, "bore the burden of Her martyrdom not merely courageously, but also joyfully, even though with a broken heart" (Mariology of Dr. Lentz). For this reason, She is "a complement of the Holy Trinity," and "just as Her Son is the only Intermediary chosen by God between His offended majesty and sinful men, so also, precisely, -the chief Mediatress placed by Him between His Son and us is the Blessed Virgin." "In three respects-as Daughter, as Mother, and as Spouse of God-the Holy Virgin is exalted to a certain equality with the Father, to a certain superiority over the Son, to a certain nearness to the Holy Spirit" ("The Immaculate Conception," Malou, Bishop of Brouges).

Thus, according to the teaching of the representatives of Latin theology, the Virgin Mary in the work of Redemption is placed side by side with Christ Himself and is exalted to an equality with God. One cannot go farther than this. If all this has not been definitively formulated as a dogma of the Roman church as yet, still the Roman Pope Pius IX, having made the first step in this direction, has shown the direction for the further development of the generally recognized teaching of his church, and has indirectly confirmed the above-cited teaching about the Virgin Mary.

Thus the Roman church, in its strivings to exalt the Most Holy Virgin, is going on the path of complete deification of Her. And if even now its authorities call Mary a complement of the Holy Trinity, one may soon expect that the Virgin will be revered like God. who are building a new theological system having as its foundation the philosophical teaching of Sophia, Wisdom, as a special power binding the Divinity and the creation. Likewise developing the teaching of the dignity of the Mother of God, they wish to see in Her an Essence which is some kind of mid-point between God and man. In some questions they are more moderate than the Latin theologians, but in others, if you please, they have already left them behind. While denying the teaching of the Immaculate Conception and the freedom from original sin, they still teach Her full freedom from any personal sins, seeing in Her an Intermediary between men and God, like Christ: in the person of Christ there has appeared on earth the Second Person of the Holy Trinity, the Pre-eternal Word, the Son of God; while the Holy Spirit is manifest through the Virgin Mary.

In the words of one of the representatives of this tendency, when the Holy Spirit came to dwell in the Virgin Mary, she acquired "a dyadic life, human and divine; that is, She was completely deified, because in Her hypostatic being was manifest the living, creative revelation of the Holy Spirit" (Archpriest Sergei Bulgakov, The Unburnt Bush, 1927, p. 154). "She is a perfect manifestation of the Third Hypostasis" (Ibid., p. 175), CC a creature, but also no longer a creature" (P. 19 1). This striving towards the deification of the Mother of God is to be observed primarily in the West, where at the same time, on the other hand, various sects of a Protestant character are having great success, together with the chief branches of Protestantism, Lutheranism and Calvinism, which in general deny the veneration of the Mother of God and the calling upon Her in prayer.

But we can say with the words of St. Epiphanius of Cyprus: "There is an equal harm in both these heresies, both when men demean the Virgin and when, on the contrary, they glorify Her beyond what is proper" (Panarion, "Against the Collyridians"). This Holy Father accuses those who give Her an almost divine worship: "Let Mary be in honor, but let worship be given to the Lord" (same source). "Although Mary is a chosen vessel, still she was a woman by nature, not to be distinguished at all from others. Although the history of Mary and Tradition relate that it was said to Her father Joachim in the desert, 'Thy wife hath conceived,' still this was done not without marital union and not without the seed of man" (same source). "One should not revere the saints above what is proper, but should revere their Master. Mary is not God, and did not receive a body from heaven, but from the joining of man and woman; and according to the promise, like Isaac, She was prepared to take part in the Divine Economy. But, on the other hand, let none dare foolishly to offend the Holy Virgin" (St. Epiphanius, "Against the Antidikomarionites").

The Orthodox Church, highly exalting the Mother of God in its hymns of praise, does not dare to ascribe to Her that which has not been communicated about Her by Sacred Scripture or Tradition. "Truth is foreign to all overstatements as well as to all understatements. It gives to everything a fitting measure and fitting place" (Bishop Ignatius Brianchaninov). Glorifying the immaculateness of the Virgin Mary and the manful bearing of sorrows in Her earthly life, the Fathers of the Church, on the other hand, reject the idea that She was an intermediary between God and men in the sense of the joint Redemption by Them of the human race. Speaking of Her preparedness to die together with Her Son and to suffer together with Him for the sake of the salvation of all, the renowned Father of the Western Church, Saint Ambrose, Bishop of Milan, adds: "But the sufferings of Christ did not need any help, as the Lord Himself prophesied concerning this long before: I looked about, and there was none to help; I sought and there was none to give aid. Therefore My arm delivered them (Is. 63:5)." (St. Ambrose, "Concerning the Upbringing of the Virgin and the Ever-Virginity of Holy Mary," ch. 7).

This same Holy Father teaches concerning the universality of original sin, from which Christ alone is an exception. "Of all those born of women, there is not a single one who is perfectly holy, apart from the Lord Jesus Christ, Who in a special new way of immaculate birthgiving, did not experience earthly taint" (St. Ambrose, Commentary on Luke, ch. 2). "God alone is without sin. All born in the usual manner of woman and man, that is, of fleshly union, become guilty of sin. Consequently, He Who does not have sin was not conceived in this manner" (St. Ambrose, Ap. Aug. "Concerning Marriage and Concupiscence"). "One Man alone, the Intermediary between God and man, is free from the bonds of sinful birth, because He was born of a Virgin, and because in being born He did not experience the touch of sin" (St. Ambrose, ibid., Book 2: "Against Julianus").

Another renowned teacher of the Church, especially revered in the West, Blessed Augustine, writes: "As for other men, excluding Him Who is the cornerstone, I do not see for them any other means to become temples of God and to be dwellings for God apart from spiritual rebirth, which must absolutely be preceded by fleshly birth. Thus, no matter how much we might think about children who are in the womb of the mother, and even though the word of the holy Evangelist who says of John the Baptist that he leaped for joy in the womb of his mother (which occurred not otherwise than by the action of the Holy Spirit), or the word of the Lord Himself spoken to Jeremiah: I have sanctified thee before thou didst leave the womb of thy mother (Jer. 1:5) - no matter how much these might or might not give us basis for thinking that children in this condition are capable of a certain sanctification, still in any case it cannot be doubted that the sanctification by which all of us together and each of us separately become the temple of God is possible only for those who are reborn, and rebirth always presupposes birth. Only those who have already been born can be united with Christ and be in union with this Divine Body which makes His Church the living temple of the majesty of God" (Blessed Augustine, Letter 187).

The above-cited words of the ancient teachers of the Church testify that in the West itself the teaching which is now spread there was earlier rejected there. Even after the falling away of the Western church, Bernard, who is acknowledged there as a great authority, wrote, " I am frightened now, seeing that certain of you have desired to change the condition of important matters, introducing a new festival unknown to the Church, unapproved by reason, unjustified by ancient tradition. Are we really more learned and more pious than our fathers? You will say, 'One must glorify the Mother of God as much as Possible.' This is true; but the glorification given to the Queen of Heaven demands discernment. This Royal Virgin does not have need of false glorifications, possessing as She does true crowns of glory and signs of dignity. Glorify the purity of Her flesh and the sanctity of Her life. Marvel at the abundance of the gifts of this Virgin; venerate Her Divine Son; exalt Her Who conceived without knowing concupiscence and gave birth without knowing pain. But what does one yet need to add to these dignities? People say that one must revere the conception which preceded the glorious birth-giving; for if the conception had not preceded, the birth-giving also would not have been glorious. But what would one say if anyone for the same reason should demand the same kind of veneration of the father and mother of Holy Mary? One might equally demand the same for Her grandparents and great-grandparents, to infinity. Moreover, how can there not be sin in the place where there was concupiscence? All the more, let one not say that the Holy Virgin was conceived of the Holy Spirit and not of man. I say decisively that the Holy Spirit descended upon Her, but not that He came with Her."

"I say that the Virgin Mary could not be sanctified before Her conception, inasmuch as She did not exist. if, all the more, She could not be sanctified in the moment of Her conception by reason of the sin which is inseparable from conception, then it remains to believe that She was sanctified after She was conceived in the womb of Her mother. This sanctification, if it annihilates sin, makes holy Her birth, but not Her conception. No one is given the right to be conceived in sanctity; only the Lord Christ was conceived of the Holy Spirit, and He alone is holy from His very conception. Excluding Him, it is to all the descendants of Adam that must be referred that which one of them says of himself, both out of a feeling of humility and in acknowledgement of the truth: Behold I was conceived in iniquities (Ps. 50:7). How can one demand that this conception be holy, when it was not the work of the Holy Spirit, not to mention that it came from concupiscence? The Holy Virgin, of course, rejects that glory which, evidently, glorifies sin. She cannot in any way justify a novelty invented in spite of the teaching of the Church, a novelty which is the mother of imprudence, the sister of unbelief, and the daughter of lightmindedness" (Bernard, Epistle 174; cited, as were the references from Blessed Augustine, from Lebedev). The above-cited words clearly reveal both the novelty and the absurdity of the new dogma of the Roman church.

The teaching of the complete sinlessness of the Mother of God (1) does not correspond to Sacred Scripture, where there is repeatedly mentioned the sinlessness of the One Mediator between God and man, the man Jesus Christ (I Tim. 2:5); and in Him is no sin (John 3:5); Who did no sin, neither was guile found in His mouth (I Peter 2:22); One that hath been in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin (Heb. 4:15); Him Who knew no sin, He made to be sin on our behalf (II Cor. 5:2 1). But concerning the rest of men it is said, Who is pure of defilement? No one who has lived a single day of his life on earth (Job 14:4). God commendeth His own love toward us in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us If, while we were enemies, we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, being reconciled, shall we be saved by His life (Rom. 5:8-10).

(2) This teaching contradicts also Sacred Tradition, which is contained in numerous Patristic writings, where there is mentioned the exalted sanctity of the Virgin Mary from Her very birth, as well as Her cleansing by the Holy Spirit at Her conception of Christ, but not at Her own conception by Anna. "There is none without stain before Thee, even though his life be but a day, save Thee alone, Jesus Christ our God, Who didst appear on earth without sin, and through Whom we all trust to obtain mercy and the remission of sins" (St. Basil the Great, Third Prayer of Vespers of Pentecost). "But when Christ came through a pure, virginal, unwedded, God-fearing, undefiled Mother without wedlock and without father, and inasmuch as it befitted Him to be born, He purified the female nature, rejected the bitter Eve and overthrew the laws of the flesh" (St. Gregory the Theologian, "In Praise of Virginity"). However, even then, as Sts. Basil the Great and John Chrysostom speak of this, She was not placed in the state of being unable to sin, but continued to take care for Her salvation and overcame all temptations (St. John Chrysostom, Commentary on John, Homily 85; St. Basil the Great, Epistle 160).

(3) The teaching that the Mother of God was purified before Her birth, so that from Her might be born the Pure Christ, is meaningless; because if the Pure Christ could be born only if the Virgin might be born pure, it would be necessary that Her parents also should be pure of original sin, and they again would have to be born of purified parents, and going further in this way, one would have to come to the conclusion that Christ could not have become incarnate unless all His ancestors in the flesh, right up to Adam inclusive, had been purified beforehand of original sin. But then there would not have been any need for the very Incarnation of Christ, since Christ came down to earth in order to annihilate sin.

(4) The teaching that the Mother of God was preserved from original sin, as likewise the teaching that She was preserved by God's grace from personal sins, makes God unmerciful and unjust; because if God could preserve Mary from sin and purify Her before Her birth, then why does He not purify other men before their birth, but rather leaves them in sin? It follows likewise that God saves men apart from their will, predetermining certain ones before their birth to salvation.

(5) This teaching, which seemingly has the aim of exalting the Mother of God, in reality completely denies all Her virtues. After all, if Mary, even in the womb of Her mother, when She could not even desire anything either good or evil, was preserved by God's grace from every impurity, and then by that grace was preserved from sin even after Her birth, then in what does Her merit consist? If She could have been placed in the state of being unable to sin, and did not sin, then for what did God glorify Her? if She, without any effort, and without having any kind of impulses to sin, remained pure, then why is She crowned more than everyone else? There is no victory without an adversary.

The righteousness and sanctity of the Virgin Mary were manifested in the fact that She, being "human with passions like us," so loved God and gave Herself over to Him, that by Her purity She was exalted high above the rest of the human race. For this, having been foreknown and forechosen, She was vouchsafed to be purified by the Holy Spirit Who came upon Her, and to conceive of Him the very Saviour of the world. The teaching of the grace-given sinlessness of the Virgin Mary denies Her victory over temptations; from a victor who is worthy to be crowned with crowns of glory, this makes Her a blind instrument of God's Providence.

It is not an exaltation and greater glory, but a belittlement of Her, this "gift" which was given Her by Pope Pius IX and all the rest who think they can glorify the Mother of God by seeking out new truths. The Most Holy Mary has been so much glorified by God Himself, so exalted is Her life on earth and Her glory in heaven, that human inventions cannot add anything to Her honor and glory. That which people themselves invent only obscures Her Face from their eyes. Brethren, take heed lest there shall be any one that maketh spoil of you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ, wrote the Apostle Paul by the Holy Spirit (Col. 2:8).

Such a "vain deceit" is the teaching of the Immaculate Conception by Anna of the Virgin Mary, which at first sight exalts, but in actual fact belittles Her. Like every lie, it is a seed of the "father of lies" (John 8:44), the devil, who has succeeded by it in blaspheming the Virgin Mary. Together with it there should also be rejected all the other teachings which have come from it or are akin to it. The striving to exalt the Most Holy Virgin to an equality with Christ ascribing to Her maternal tortures at the Cross an equal significance with the sufferings of Christ, so that the Redeemer and "Co-Redemptress" suffered equally, according to the teaching of the Papists, or that "the human nature of the Mother of God in heaven together with the God-Man Jesus jointly reveal the full image of man" (Archpriest S. Bulgakov, The Unburnt Bush, p. 141)-is likewise a vain deceit and a seduction of philosophy. In Christ Jesus there is neither male nor female (Gal. 3:28), and Christ has redeemed the whole human race; therefore at His Resurrection equally did "Adam dance for joy and Eve rejoice" (Sunday Kontakia of the First and Third Tones), and by His Ascension did the Lord raise up the whole of human nature.

Likewise, that the Mother of God is a "complement of the Holy Trinity" or a "fourth Hypostasis"; that "the Son and the Mother are a revelation of the Father through the Second and Third Hypostases"; that the Virgin Mary is "a creature, but also no longer a creature"-all this is the fruit of vain, false wisdom which is not satisfied with what the Church has held from the time of the Apostles, but strives to glorify the Holy Virgin more than God has glorified Her.

Thus are the words of St. Epiphanius of Cyprus fulfilled: "Certain senseless ones in their opinion about the Holy EverVirgin have striven and are striving to put Her in place of God" (St. Epiphanius, "Against the Antidikomarionites"). But that which is offered to the Virgin in senselessness, instead of praise of Her, turns out to be blasphemy; and the All-Immaculate One rejects the lie, being the Mother of Truth (John 14:6).

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Evil and Inquiring Into God's Justice

by Elder Paisios the Athonite

In his desire to demonstrate how God provides and cares for His creation, whenever we tend to become indignant and not understand His actions, the Elder would tell us stories such as the following one:

"An ascetic who had observed the injustice that exists in the world prayed to God and asked Him to reveal the reason that righteous and pious people suffer misfortunes and are tortured without any obvious explanation, whereas the unrighteous and sinners become wealthy and enjoy comforts. In the middle of the ascetic’s prayer, he heard a voice instructing him as follows:

"Do not ask for those things that your mind and the power of your knowledge cannot reach, nor seek to learn what is hidden, because the judgments of God are an abyss. However, because you have requested to learn, go down into the world and sit in a certain spot discreetly and note whatever you shall see from there, so that with this minor test, you will get an idea of what God’s judgments are. That way, you will come to understand just why God’s providential administration in all things is unsearchable and unfathomable."

On hearing this, the old ascetic carefully walked down towards the inhabited areas until he reached a meadow that was crossed by a busy main road. There was a spring and an old tree nearby, so the elder hid himself carefully in the hollow trunk of the tree and decided to observe from there. Soon after, a wealthy man on horseback rode past. He stopped at the spring for a drink of water and lay down on the grass to rest. After quenching his thirst, he took out a pouch with 100 gold coins from his garment and began to count them. When he finished counting, he placed the pouch back in his garment; however, without realizing it, the pouch fell to the ground, into the grass.

He ate, he rested, he slept a little, and then he got back on his horse and rode off, without realizing he had lost the pouch with the gold coins.

After a while, another passer-by came to the spring. He found the pouch with the gold coins, grabbed it, and ran off with it, into the fields.

A little while later, another passer-by appeared. Tired as he was, he too stopped at the spring, took a drink of water, took out a piece of bread that he carried with him and sat down to eat.

Just as that poor man was eating, the wealthy horseman reappeared in a fury, his face red with anger. He pounced upon the unsuspecting man, yelling at him to give him back his gold coins. The poor man, not having any idea about those coins, reassured him with solemn oaths that he had seen no such thing. But angry as the horseman was, he began to beat the poor man until he eventually killed him. He then proceeded to search through the poor man’s clothes, found nothing, and left him, greatly shocked and saddened.

The elder saw all these things happen before his eyes, and stood in wonder, overwhelmed with sorrow at the unjust murder that he had witnessed and turned in prayer to the Lord, saying:

"Lord, what is the meaning of this will of Yours? I beg You to explain how Your Benevolence can tolerate such an injustice? Another lost the coins, another found them, and another was unfairly murdered!"

As the elder continued to pray with tears, an Angel of the Lord descended and said to him:

"Do not be sorrowed, elder, nor be disillusioned and imagine that all these things happened supposedly without the will of God. Because of all the things that you just witnessed, some were by God’s concession, others were for education, and others had providential reasons. So listen now:

"He who lost the coins was the neighbour of the one who found them. The latter had an orchard worth 100 gold coins. Being greedy, the rich man forced him to give up the orchard for only 50 coins. Unable to do anything else, the poor man prayed to God to take care of the injustice. Therefore, it was God’s providence which had responded to the poor man’s prayer and had given him back the money, twofold.

"The other man – the poor and weary one – who had found nothing and yet was unfairly murdered? Well, he had committed murder, but only once in his life. However, he had repented sincerely, and for the rest of his life had made sure that his works were Christian and pleasing to God. He constantly beseeched God to forgive him for the murder he had committed, and would usually say, 'My Lord, please give me a death just like the one that I had inflicted!' Naturally, the Lord forgave him from the very first moment that he showed signs of repentance. But He was especially moved by the sensitivity of His child, who not only made sure he upheld all His Commandments, but also desired to pay for his old crime. Thus, the Lord granted his wish, allowing him to die in the manner that he had prayed for. God did not deprive him of his wish, and allowed him to die a violent death, just as he had asked, and then took him into His bosom, in fact even crowing him with a glorious wreath for the sensitivity he had shown!

"Finally, the other man, the greedy one who lost all the gold coins and then committed murder, he would have had a disastrous end on account of his greed and his love of money, so God allowed him to fall into the sin of murder, so that his soul would be severely pained and thus seek to repent. Given the turn of events, that person has now abandoned all worldly pleasures and is going away, to become a monk!

"Now then, in which of these cases did you find God to be unjust or cruel or insensitive?

"For this reason, you must no longer concern yourself with in-depth examinations of God’s judgments, because He meets them out fairly, in the manner that He deems appropriate, when you on the other hand misconstrue them as injustices.

"You should also know that there are many other things that happen in the world by the will of God, for reasons that people cannot understand. Thus, the proper thing for one to say is: 'You are Just, O Lord, and straight are Your judgments'" (Psalm 137).

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Greek ID Cards and 666

Athos Monks Discover Devil’s Number in New ID Numbers

Athens, 9 December 2009, Interfax – Monks of the Holy Mount Athos detected a spiritual threat in the identification numbers of social protection (AMKA) given to Greek citizens.

“This number is given personally to each citizen for his or her entire life. In fact, a personality is diminished, degraded, turned into a number, becomes a numeric, a thing!” monks of some Athos monasteries said in their statement conveyed to Interfax-Religion on Wednesday.

The monks arrived at a conclusion that these plastic cards with identification numbers “will be connected with number 666.”

According to them, AMKA represents unified identification number of an employee for insurance and medical treatment, which is “unique for each citizen and will accompany him all his life.”

This number “will be compulsory, without it a citizen will be deprived of his rights for permanent work, social insurance, medical treatment, pensions, privileges, benefits,” the statement reads.

The Athos monks required to preserve instruments of social protection existed before, including traditional health passports.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Orthodox and Catholics To Oppose World Atheism

Patriarch Kirill Believes Orthodox and Catholics Should Jointly Oppose World Atheism

Moscow, 4 December 2009, Interfax - Patriarch Kirill of Moscow and All Russia stresses the importance of Orthodox-Catholic dialogue in opposing the challenges of atheistic society.

"Today we're facing the challenges of secularism. We need to respond to the challenges together based on historical experience," Patriarch Kirill said at his Thursday meeting with a delegation of the Roman Catholic Church in France at Moscow patriarchal residence in Chisty Pereulok.

Welcoming the guests, the Patriarch emphasized the importance of the dialogue with the Catholic Church, but noted that relations among Christians were complicated with numerous problems arisen recently, including the crisis in the modern ecumenical movement.

"Therefore Churches working in apostolic tradition are called to close interaction," Patriarch Kirill said.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Missionaries Face Fines for Sharing Their Faith

The Moscow Times
3 December 2009
By Alexander Bratersky

Ordinary believers face fines for sharing their faith with strangers in the metro or on the street under amendments drafted by the Justice Ministry that are stirring worries among Protestant groups about a clampdown on religious freedom.

Under the proposed changes to the Law on Religious Activity, only leaders of registered religious groups and their officially authorized missionaries would be allowed to pass out religious literature, preach and talk about their faith in public, according to a draft of the amendments published in Kommersant on Wednesday.

Anyone else who shares their faith would face a fine of 2,000 rubles to 5,000 rubles ($65 to $170) for individuals and 5,000 rubles to 7,000 rubles ($170 to $230) for legal entities.

Currently, no permits are required for missionary activities.

The amendments are expected to benefit the dominant Russian Orthodox Church, which rarely engages in missionary work, to the detriment of other Christian groups, which it regularly accuses of poaching believers.

Some Protestant groups said Wednesday that the amendments were a violation of Jesus' call in Matthew 28:19 to "go and make disciples of all nations."

"Missionary activity is part of the Christian religion, and these proposals target not only our church but the Christian religion itself," said Elder Mikhail Fadin of the Moscow Central Church of Evangelical Christians-Baptists.

He said it would be "unrealistic to issue permits to preach" and the amendments contradicted the Constitution, which guarantees religious freedom.

Andrei Sobentsov, secretary of the governmental commission in charge of religious organizations, confirmed that the amendments violated the Constitution and called them "unacceptable," Kommersant reported Wednesday.

Justice Ministry officials were not available for comment after office hours late Wednesday.

No date has been set for the bill to be submitted to the State Duma, but it has a high chance of being passed because it faced no opposition from within the political establishment, said Alexander Soldatov, head of the Credo.ru religious news wire.

In fact, the Russian Orthodox Church, which enjoys a cozy relationship with Prime Minister Vladimir Putin and President Dmitry Medvedev, is one of the forces behind the bill, Soldatov told The Moscow Times.

"The Russian Orthodox Church is among the initiators of this bill because it sees a danger for itself from other faiths," Soldatov said.

The church, which counts about 70 percent of the Russian population as members, makes no effort to win new members through missionary activities, he said. Instead, the church considers most Russians as Orthodox believers "by default," seeing those not active in performing religious duties as people who "haven't realized their faith," he said.

Russian Orthodox officials offered no comment about any church role in the bill, but they welcomed it as a way to prevent people from masquerading as Orthodox priests.

"A person might be dressed as an Orthodox priest but be a con artist," said Vsevolod Chaplin, head of the department for church and society affairs in the Moscow Patriarchate.

"Every missionary activity should be within the framework of law," he said in a telephone interview. "People should have the right to know who a priest represents."

The bill defines missionary work for the first time as an "activity among nonbelievers and nonmembers of a religious organization aimed at bringing them into the religious organization."

It also expressly bans preaching near religious centers belonging to other faiths without the written approval of the religious group that controls the center.

The number of religious groups working in Russian exploded after the 1991 Soviet collapse, and the government granted a privileged status to four faiths under a 1997 law — Russian Orthodoxy, Judaism, Islam and Buddhism. Religious experts estimate that about 20,000 Protestant groups are currently active in Russia.

Members of some religious groups fear that the new bill could be used to stifle activities other than traditional missionary work.

"If the authorities don't like something about us at a certain moment in time, they might call it a missionary activity. And if people come to us in order to help others, will it be called a missionary activity if we pray together with them?" said Vadim Khurin, deputy head of the St. Petersburg branch of the Salvation Army, an evangelical movement known for its charitable work.

Khurin noted that his organization has a good relationship with the Russian Orthodox Church. "They often call us and ask us to pick up things for the needy," he said.

While the bill favors the Orthodox Church, it could hurt it as well, said Remir Lopatkin, an expert on state-church relations at the Russian Academy of State Service.

"There are missionaries among the Orthodox churches, even radical ones," he said, citing as an example Priest Daniil Sysoyev, who was shot dead last week in his church in southern Moscow.

Sysoyev often publicly clashed with Muslims and neo-pagans, calling on them to turn to the Orthodox Church.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Patriarch Kirill On a Woman's Role In the Church

Patriarch Kirill wants women-believers to be active, but warns against "unwise mannishness"

Moscow, 3 December 2009, Interfax - Patriarch Kirill of Moscow and All Russia believes a woman should have an active position in society, but remember about her top-priority duties of wife and mother.

"Active participation in all spheres of social life is needed, it will make the society hear voice of believers. At the same time, a woman's role as wife and mother, keeper of the house, in no event can be reformed," Patriarch Kirill said on Thursday at the opening of the first All-Russian Forum of Orthodox Women in Moscow.

The Patriarch believes nowadays many Orthodox families practice "hyperpatriarchate" when woman willfully refuses her professional realization, work and social calling.

However, the Patriarch says this "hyperpatriarchate" is often "a reaction on atmosphere of today's world," when false understanding of "equality" with man is imposed on women and she is forced to imitate the worst masculine qualities: aggression, will to competition, strive to make a career, neglecting the family."

"A woman's happiness is first of all in being wife and mother. If our society doesn't learn to back up this role of a woman, it doesn't have a future. On the Creator's intention, woman should be far from unwise mannishness," Patriarch Kirill said.

However, the Primate of the Russian Church is sure that "today an Orthodox Christian woman should stick to an active social position and be a keeper of Christian moral values in family and society."

According to him, a Christian woman, besides realizing herself as wife and mother "should realize herself as an active member of civil society responsible for the country's future."

"Church, Motherland and the whole world awaits vigorous steps from women-believers," Patriarch Kirill said.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

First Interactive Map of Russian Religious Communities

Interfax-Religion Presents the First Interactive Map of Russian Religious Communities

Moscow, 8 December 2009, Interfax – The Interfax-Religion website and Moscow State Linguistic University jointly launch the first interactive map of all Russian religious communities.

“This map is unique not only for Russia, but for the whole world, it contains information about 25 thousand religious organizations working in our country, their exact names and addresses,” its author and the University’s associate professor Roman Silantyev said on Tuesday presenting the project in the Interfax central office in Moscow.

According to him, the open access map contains information only about Russian traditional religions namely about Orthodox communities, Muslims, Jews and Buddhist. It is planned to insert over five thousand pictures to the map database.

Access to the map is possible exclusively from the Interfax-Religion main page. Last versions of Internet browses, Internet Explorer 7 or Internet Explorer 8, are required to use the map.

As Evgeny Filatov, expert-cartographer and the HitRoad Project commercial director, said at the press conference, the map interface allows “any kind of sorting” of religious organizations, for example, it can display only Orthodox monasteries or Muslim educational establishments. Thus, the interactive map enables to find an optimal route to any of the churches. “Any visitor can guess where he is at the moment and form a pilgrimage route,” Filatov said.

In future, it will be possible to integrate the map in personal navigation devices.

According to Silantyev, the map is devoted to the memory of Academician Pavel Puchkov, an outstanding Russian scientist and founder of confessional cartography.

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

Followers of traditional religions make 95 percent of believers in Russia, authors of interactive religious communities map say

Moscow, December 9, Interfax - At least 95 percent of all believers in Russia are members of traditional religious organizations.

Developers of the first interactive map of Russian religious communities arrived at such a conclusion after studying all public information sources, especially data on religious organizations registered in the Russian Federation.

"Russia's traditional religions enhance their presence in society and comparative analysis of data on registered religious communities from 2004 to 2009 proves it. I suppose the process will develop," Roman Silantyev, the map author and Moscow State Linguistic University associate professor said on the project's presentation in the Interfax central office in Moscow.

According to him, 23 thousand religious organizations work in Russia today enjoying the status of a legal entity. The Russian Orthodox Church has the best dynamics of growth as the share of its parishes and organizations in total amount of religious communities has increased from 53,2 percent to 55,1 percent.

The second place belongs to Muslims as their share has grown from 16,3 percent to 17,1 percent. Share of Buddhist, Jewish, Charismatic and Pagan communities has not changed and is 0,8 percent, 1,3 percent, 7,2 percent and 0,1 percent correspondingly. Total share of all four religions traditional for Russia, which are Orthodox Christianity, Islam, Judaism and Buddhism, equals to 75 percent while the share of their believers totals to 95 percent, thus making them dominate in the religion field.

"New religious movements such as Jehovah's Witnesses, Moonists, Mormons have demonstrated a dramatic drop as their share has reduced from 5,8 to 3,1 percent, Silantyev said. Share of Catholics and Old Rite believers has slightly decreased and made 1 percent and 1,2 percent correspondingly.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Orthodox Businessmen Found Heavenly Protector

Moscow, 8 December 2009, Interfax - St. Joseph of Volotsk is proclaimed a heavenly protector of Orthodox enterprises and management.

Patriarchal Council for Economics and Ethics requested to give a heavenly protector to business activities. Patriarch Kirill of Moscow and All Russia blessed the initiative, his press service said.

St. Joseph of Volotsk (secular name Ioann Sanin, 1440-1515) went down to history as an ardent advocate of Orthodoxy and defender of church and state unity in struggle against heresies and church schisms, an inspirer of the teaching about the Holy Russia as the keeper of ancient ecumenical piety.

He is also famous for his business activities aimed at strengthening church authority and influence on society, enhancing the Church financial capabilities for carrying out the charity.

It'll be 500 years since the Holy Father deceased in 2015.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Remains of Nicholas II Children Must Be Buried

St. Petersburg, 7 December 2009, Interfax - The House of Romanov is concerned about the delayed burial of the remains of Tsarevich Alexey and Grand Duchess Maria which are being stored in Yekaterinburg.

"My brother, Nikolay Romanovich, is very much concerned. The delayed burial is not Christian. Every religion, Buddhism or Islam, have their own burial canons that must be observed," Prince Dmitry Romanov, a descendant of Emperor Nicholas I, told Interfax.

Hopefully, the Russian Orthodox Church and the Russian President will accelerate the process, he said.

In the opinion of the Romanov royal family, the remains should be buried in the Peter and Paul Cathedral in St. Petersburg. But Prince Dmitry Romanov would support the remains being buried in Yekaterinburg.

"If a decision is made to bury them in Yekaterinburg, we will support that," he said.

Fragments of bones and teeth were found in archaeological excavations near Yekaterinburg on July 29, 2007. Russian and international experts confirmed that the remains belonged to Tsarevich Alexey and Grand Duchess Maria.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Lycanthropy in Byzantine Times

[What I find interesting about the article below was the advanced methods of psychiatry in Roman (Byzantine) times which treated symptoms of lycanthropy with a mental disorder, while the West, following the Fall of Constantinople in the 15th century, saw it as a symptom of demonic possession. - J.S.]

"Lycanthropy in Byzantine Times (AD 330—1453)", History of Psychiatry , Vol. 20, No. 4, 468-479 (2009).

by E. Poulakou-Rebelakou, C. Tsiamis, G. Panteleakos, D. Ploumpidis (all from the University of Athens)

Abstract:

In this paper, the original Greek language texts of the Byzantine medical literature about lycanthropy are reviewed. The transformation of a human being into a wolf and the adoption of animal-like behaviour, which were already known from mythology and had been presented in the scientific works of ancient Greek and Roman physicians, were examined by six Byzantine physicians and explained as a type of melancholic depression or mania. In spite of the influence of Byzantine medicine, its rationality in the interpretation of lycanthropy was forgotten in medieval and Renaissance times when it was replaced by explanations based on demonic possession and witchcraft. More recently psychiatry has treated the phenomenon as a subject of medical inquiry and has again explained the condition in terms of mental disorder.

See also: More on Byzantine Lycanthropy

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Saint Patapios of Thebes and His Monastery in Loutraki

Saint Patapios of Thebes (Feast Day - December 8 for his falling asleep and Bright Tuesday for the finding of his relics)

By John Sanidopoulos

Saint Patapios was born in 380 in the Egyptian city of Thebes. His father was a governor of the region and a descendant of a well known Egyptian family. He and his wife were devout Christians and instructed Patapios in Scripture. As Patapios reached a mature age, well-known tutors were brought from Alexandria to instruct him in science, mathematics, philosophy and rhetoric. Through this education, he became acutely aware of how transient this world is and was attracted to the ascetical way of life. He was particularly inspired by Clement, Origen and Athanasius. His father also took him to the renowned catechetical school in Alexandria where Patapios came under the influence of a blind teacher named Didymus. Didymus inspired him even further to desire the ascetical path he had chosen. When he finished his studies, he returned to Thebes to find out that his father had passed away. Desiring to live a life like the ascetics, he decided to leave for the Egyptian desert where he became well known for his ascetic deeds.

No longer able to find peace in the desert he set off for Constantinople in 428. During his voyage, he met his disciple Sechnuti, who was an Egyptian rower. During this voyage, their ship passed near Corinth where they stayed for seven years in cave.

By 435, after seven years in Corinth, Patapios left his skete in the Geranian mountains to resume his journey to Constantinople taking with him the monk Sechnuti. In Constantinople, they secretly went to the Monastery of Blachernae, where he obtained a cell in the city wall. Patapios kept his identity a secret and resumed a life of strict fasting, vigil and prayer under the guise of a simple monk.

Here he performed many miracles of healing. After a life adorned with virtue and miracles, he died at the great age of eighty-three in 463 and was buried by his disciples in the Church of St. John the Baptist in Constantinople.

One thousand years after the repose of the Saint, when the Turks captured Constantinople in 1453, his relics where removed and taken to the little cave in Corinth (as he had requested during his lifetime). The Saint's body was hidden behind a western wall in the cave facing the iconostasis and chapel they built. The memory of the Saint's whereabouts soon disappeared.

In 1904 a local priest, Father Constantine Sosanis, was serving the chapel in this cave. He was an unnaturally tall priest who regularly served this small chapel and because of his height commissioned some changes to the chapel. The night before the works to the western wall were to commence, Fr. Constantine had a dream in which a monk warned him to "take care when you break the wall because I am on the other side. I am Saint Patapios of Egypt." He was found the next day under tiles holding a large wooden cross on his chest, a parchment scroll with his name, Roman coins, and large leaves covering his relics as fresh as they had been picked that very moment. A sweet odour also exuded from his relics.

The holy relic is now in a special wooden structure at the back of the cave. Inside the cave there are also Roman wall paintings from the 13th century, with three prominent figures of St. Patapios, St. Ipomoni and St. Nikon. The monastery church is dedicated to the Virgin Mary and contains at its center the Mother of God for veneration. The church also holds the relic skull of St. Ipomoni (Empress Helen Dragash) and part of the hip bone of St. Nikon.

In 1952 a Greek priest, Father Nektarios Kyriakos, built the all-female monastery on this site. The local people initially resisted this idea since the location of the monastery is very difficult to reach even to this day. After the founding of the monastery, Sister Patapia was nominated as Mother Superior, with Father Nektarios Kyriakos as its spiritual leader. Today, there are some forty nuns living in the cells of the foundation and the current Mother Superior is Mother Isidora.

Since St. Patapios' relics have been discovered, many people have been visited by the saint in visions and dreams asking them to visit "his house in Loutraki". He is especially known for healing cancer, and miracles occur throughout the world, including as far off as Australia and America.

Miracle - The Conversion of a Catholic

It was Pascha of 1986 on Mount Athos when Elder Martinianos of St. Panteleimon Skete in Kapsala, of the Holy Monastery Pantocratoros, related the following miracle of St. Patapios.

The Elder had a relative in West Germany named George. While in Germany, George married a German woman who was Catholic and had not been baptized Orthodox. They had married Orthodox, their two children received Orthodox baptism, but the wife continued to remain Catholic despite worshipping in Orthodox churches.

They returned to Greece to New Smyrna, their local parish being St. Sosti. In 1985 they decided to spend the summer in Loutraki of Corinth. One day they went up to the Monastery of Saint Patapios and venerated his holy relics. The husband entered first and venerated first. The wife was right behind him and, though Catholic, she also was going to venerate the relics, when suddenly she fainted and fell to the floor.

The husband immediately took her into his arms and with the help of other pilgrims brought her outside for some fresh air. Having recovered, they asked her why she fainted.

She answered, astonished:

"What, you didn't see, you didn't hear? The Saint pushed me and said: 'How can you, a heretic, approach me?'"

At that moment she asked that she be baptized Orthodox. After a few catechetical lessons at her parish, she was baptized Orthodox.

Today she continues to make her pilgrimage to the Holy Monastery of Saint Patapios, with great faith and reverence. And since her baptism, she has said that she feels like an entirely different person. In one telephone conversation, spoken of in the book by Monk Nikodemos Bilali who compiled the life and services of the Saint, she says:

"When I pray, I feel like God is mine, my Father, though before I felt nothing. Now I light my candle at the Iconostasi, I prepare prosphora, I Commune, I read lives of Saints, and my soul feels God near me. How can I explain this to you? It is something very different from before, a certainty that I am near God. And I ascribe this to Saint Patapios, whom I thank."

Source

Visions of Saint Patapios

1. Saint Patapios had appeared in a vision to Fr. Nektarios, the founder of the Holy Monastery of Saint Patapios, while a student in Corinth. He began the architectural design of the Monastery in 1947.

During this time Metropolitan Prokopios of Corinth got sick and went to the hospital. Fr. Nektarios visited him on January 23, 1951 to pray over him. Once the Metropolitan saw him, he became very moved and said:

"Saint Patapios told me in my sleep that he wants his Monastery to happen! We cannot do otherwise!"

Then he gave the following commands:

a. For the chancellor of the Metropolis, Metropolitan Gabriel Kalokairinos, to get the keys to the cave which the priests of Loutraki had and give them to Fr. Nektarios.

b. For no priest to serve there without permission from the Metropolis.

c. For the Monastery to be recognized quickly after he proposed this to the Holy Synod.

d. To help financially to make sure this happens and for nuns to occupy the Monastery by August 1952.

Metropolitan Prokopios is considered the great founder of the Monastery. He fell asleep in the Lord on December 3, 1964 and is forever commemorated there with a plaque at the entrance. Upon his death he donated his entire vast library of books as well as other possessions from the Metropolis. May his memory be eternal!

2. The Monastery one day ran out of oil. Saint Patapios appeared to a gentleman in Koropi, Attica. He asked him for a barrel of oil. "Where do you want me to bring it old man?" The elder gave him the address to the Monastery and disappeared. The gentleman filled a barrel of oil and brought it to Loutraki. As difficult as it is to walk up to the Monastery, he did this carrying the barrel and brought it to the door.

3. The cave where the relics are is very cold and damp, and in the winter is frigid. Some prayed to the Saint: "Even the poorest houses have rags to use as rugs. Your little cave here has nothing, and we along with you are freezing. Do something to find something." That night Saint Patapios appeared to a woman in Corinth and gave her directions on the rug he wanted for his house in the cave. He wanted it to be black and red and gave the exact size he wanted, then asked her to bring it to the Monastery. The woman made it, brought it, layed it down in the cave, and it matched perfectly.

Source

Apolytikion in the Plagal of the Fourth Tone

The image of God, was faithfully preserved in you, O Father. For you took up the Cross and followed Christ. By Your actions you taught us to look beyond the flesh for it passes, rather to be concerned about the soul which is immortal. Wherefore, O Holy Patapius, your soul rejoices with the angels.

Kontakion in the Third Tone

Having found thy Church to be a place of spiritual healing, all the people flock with haste thereto, O Saint, and they ask thee to bestow the ready healing of their diseases and forgiveness of the sins they wrought in their lifetime; O Patapius most righteous, in every need, thou art the protector of all.

See also:
Saint Patapios Monastery
Monastery Photos
Synaxarion
A Miracle of Saint Patapios
Orthros and Divine Litugy at the Monastery

Address:
Ιερά μονή Οσίου Παταπίου Λουτρακίου 2002
230 00 Λουτράκι Greece

Telephone:
27440 22496

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

The Juridical Mentality of the West Annuls Christ’s Sacrifice

The juridical mentality of the West regarding the “Antilytron” is not in the least “innocent”.

Not only does it NOT constitute an “alternative” answer to the question of what role our Lord Jesus Christ’s sacrifice played, but on the contrary, IT ANNULS IT!

We have of course spoken in another article of the West’s juridical mentality as expressed in their perception of the “Antilytron”, as well as in the problems related to such a mentality. In that article, we had analyzed the hermeneutical and theological problems that such viewpoints presented. However, in the present article we would like to expand on one further point, namely, on how this juridical mentality and stance towards the Antilytron - when analysed carefully - essentially does not only NOT explain the meaning behind the Lord’s sacrifice, but on the contrary, it abolishes it altogether, as regards its significance in relation to Death.

For Western Man, to want to see the Lord’s sacrifice as a “juridical thriller”, not only misrepresents God as a tough judge and an unfair referee; it actually places that person at the opposite side of the upright (orthodox) faith.

Let us therefore suppose for the moment, that God could indeed (alternatively) be regarded as a tough judge who would “demand” the death of someone innocent in place of someone irreverent; a judge who would demand “ransoms” in order to free someone, or would judge mankind overall for the disobedience of only one. Let us suppose for the moment that sending someone innocent to the Cross in order to satisfy a (savage and primitive) thirst for blood is not a gruesomely irreverent and blasphemous act, and that it could (even in a crude manner) relate to God’s self-description of “Love”. Let us also suppose that someone could actually love such an unjust and demented judge.

If we were to accept all the above as an alternative answer to the question: “why did Christ finally die?”, then what would the repercussions be on the issue of “victory over death”, with such an admission?

According to the Christian perception of this event, the death of the Lord Jesus Christ was a blatant injustice.

Not only did it NOT “satisfy” God’s justice, but on the contrary, it offended it!

One must keep in mind that we will all die, and that none of us is devoid of responsibility in the face of death; because our sinfulness, our fallen nature, leads us to a multitude of transgressions during the course of our lives. Albeit this does NOT imply that God condemns us to death for our transgressions (in a juridical sense), it also does not give us the right to demand our exemption from the finale that is common to all living beings. Besides, what is it that we have - that the others don’t - to want to live without dying?

Every sin of ours constitutes an “incriminating document” against us; not for God, but for the devil. With every single sin of ours, we are “signing our own condemnation” to the dark world of Hades and are placing ourselves under the authority “of the one who has the power over death, namely the devil” (Hebr. 2:14). With every sin, the devil and “his dark power” acquires legal rights over us, because we ourselves place him in our lives, through disobedience. And thus, in death, he is the rightful owner of our soul. Because it is written: “The wages of sin is death” (Rom. 6:23).

But with Christ something else happened.

Christ, throughout His life, had NEVER sinned. He did not give the devil the slightest cause, the slightest reason to hold any authority whatsoever over Him. He did not allow the devil to have the slightest legal right over Him. The Lord Jesus Christ Himself had said: “Who among you can check me for sin?” (John 8:46) And He had furthermore said: “The ruler of this world (the devil), has no rights whatsoever over me” (John 14:30).

And thus we come to the Crucifixion.

Christ was the “bait”. He had PROVOKED the devil with His life, with His stance, with His teaching. He had defeated the devil at his every step. Christ forgave sins, healed illnesses, drove out demons, exposed wrongdoings and He accumulated followers. He had become a thorn in the eye of the devil and of course the devil wanted Him “out of the way”.

Indeed, this was accomplished, with the Crucifixion. Satan had fervently desired to be rid of the One who was “ruining things” for him. And now it appeared that he had achieved it, with Christ’s crucifixion sacrifice – the event that we all know. But then, just as Christ was leaving His last breath on the Cross and the Devil was rejoicing for having one less enemy, he suddenly suffered his greatest defeat.

Up until that time, all those who had died had JUSTLY DIED and had been led to the dark kingdom of Hades. Up until that time, the devil had justly demanded to have authority over those who during their lifetime had obeyed his will instead of God’s. God did not insist on saving those who had chosen sin during their lifetime.

Christ, on the other hand, was BLAMELESS. Satan therefore had no authority over Him! The devil had no legal right to say: “He is mine, and I am rightfully placing Him under my authority in Hades”. Christ DID NOT BELONG TO HIM. Satan had therefore overstepped the authority that was given to him.

Thus, by killing the SINLESS One, Satan exposed himself. He exposed himself as a predator, and death was exposed as a LAWLESS KINGDOM. That is why Christ now rightfully demanded SATISFACTION. He was the only One who was wronged by death, and therefore now rightfully demanded the abolition of Death. That is why He now also rightfully descended upon Hades with His angelic hosts, DEMANDING JUSTICE.

Lacking every kind of excuse, the devil no longer had any legal right to resort to, because he had been exposed before all of Creation as an unjust ruler, who had illegally detained the Righteous One. Thus the angelic forces had rightfully invaded Hades and demolished its age-old status quo, emptying its halls of all those souls who sought deliverance from the Sinless one; from the only One who had descended there and who could RIGHTFULLY demand His return to the world of the living. That is why Christ, with His Crucifixion sacrifice, “laid bare all principalities and powers; He fully humiliated them, publicly” (Col. 2:15).

Following the UNJUST MURDER of the Innocent one (the ONLY INNOCENT ONE), Death now looms ILLEGAL AND ABUSIVE. It now shows itself as a contra-natural state, and a process under abolition. Death now ceased to be “the natural meeting point of sinners” and has become “the reigning dynasty of the Devil, the unjust dictator”. Death was thus subjected to the gradual process of being abolished. Firstly through the righteous ones - who no longer pass through Hades, but instead enter the Paradise of souls - and then, (during the Second Coming of Christ) through the unrighteous ones - who will also receive bodies in order to be judged fairly; certainly more fairly than being indefinitely detained by the now exposed, illegal prison of Hades.

It is for this reason that Christ allowed Himself to be crucified and to die, albeit without deserving to. It was NOT to satisfy any supposed sense of “justice” of a demented “god”, who juridically demanded the death of one righteous person for the sake of the many unrighteous. On the contrary, He allowed Himself to become the bait, in order to EXPOSE the devil and his entire kingdom as ILLEGAL AND ABUSIVE. Christ could then justifiably demand their abolition, as recompense.

Christ was human when He died, and the injustice imposed on Him was imposed on His human nature; except that this human nature IS ALSO OURS. And in Christ, we now demand our OUR RIGHTS ALSO. United in the Body of Christ - The Church - we now demand our own exemption from Hades, as a counterbalance for the transgression that was imposed on our Head: on Christ. Thus, it is Christians who are now exempt from Hades and are led into the paradise of souls - another kingdom altogether, which does not belong to the Devil. Those who are left stranded with the devil (until the day of resurrection) are only the souls THAT HAVE WILLINGLY PREFERRED THE DEVIL, by denying their Only Saviour - the Only One with the right to demand their release from Hades.

Having seen how Christ’s sacrifice “functions” against Hades and Death, let us return to the issue of the Western juridical mentality regarding the sacrifice of Christ. Observe how - apart from blaspheming against God – this mentality also leads to the annulment of Christ’s sacrifice:

If Christ’s sacrifice had indeed taken place “upon demand” by God, simply to satisfy His sense of “divine justice” as the Westerners claim, then we must surmise that:

- NO INJUSTICE ACTUALLY TOOK PLACE (with Christ’s Crucifixion).

- Death and Hades operated within their legal boundaries.

- Christ JUSTLY DIED, because it was “upon demand” by God.

- The devil justly killed Christ in place of the guilty (since His death was the divine will of God).

- Death itself is NOT exposed as an ABUSIVE status, but on the contrary, it is projected as a NECESSITY and even as a REDEMPTIVE measure.

- The devil rightfully continues to maintain the kingdom of Hades under his authority, as he has not overstepped the authority given to him; on the contrary, he was “used”, in order for God’s sense of justice to be satisfied.

- Christ was therefore ILLICITLY RESURRECTED, given that He had restored what had been justly taken away from Him “upon demand” by God (His life).

If the Western juridical view regarding the Antilytron is accepted, then:

- Death is NOT ABOLISHED

- The devil is NOT EXPOSED

- Hades is NOT EMPTIED

- Human nature is NOT VINDICATED and...

- None of us can demand exemption from the kingdom of Hades, because both Christ and human nature WERE NOT WRONGED.

If the Western view on the Antilytron is true, then we had better search for another Saviour and another God, because this view is rife with charlatanism!

Source

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Orthodoxy and the Juridical Position: The Significance of the “Antilytron”

When Catholicism distanced itself from the Orthodox faith of the Church, its understanding of important issues pertaining to salvation was lost. Totally ignorant of how these issues can be misleading, Protestantism in its turn “inherited” the fallacious Papal positions and in fact, it quite often made them even hazier.

One such issue, which has been misconstrued to the point of blasphemy by the Westerners, is the issue of the “Antilytron” (anti = in place of, lytron = an offer for someone’s release/freedom).

In their pursuit of Thomas Aquinus’ erroneous theories, Westerners developed their own juridical system by which they explain the ‘function’ of our Lord Jesus Christ’s sacrifice for the salvation of mankind.

Although there may be small differences between the various Western faiths, they make the following, general assertions:

“Adam sinned, therefore in his person, all of mankind after him partook of sin. Everyone consequently had to undergo death, as they too were deemed guilty of the original sin. However, no sinner was as worthy as the relatively sin-free Adam to pay for the sins of all mankind. Thus, in order to satisfy His sense of justice, God sent the sinless Jesus Christ to suffer death in the place of mankind. This was the way that He 'paid for the release' of mankind – as Adam’s equal - and whomsoever believes in His sacrifice, is released from death.”

But if we observe these assertions more carefully, we will realize that they are also irrational, and have nothing to do with the Christian faith, and especially with God’s justice and the incarnation of the Lord.

The Problems With the Juridical Position

First of all, let’s take a look at some of the initial problems that the above position creates:

a. If Adam was the one who sinned, why did God consider all of mankind guilty? Isn’t that unfair?

b. If, however, God didn’t consider all of mankind guilty, then what kind of justice was that which had to be satisfied, by demanding the death of someone who is not guilty?

c. Was Jesus Christ truly an equal to Adam, who was a mere creation?

d. What kind of judge is so unfair, as to consciously condemn someone innocent to death, in order to save someone guilty? This act would have been the pinnacle of injustice! It would have been far easier and more generous, to grant absolution to the guilty party, rather than allow someone innocent to die unjustly.

e. If the ‘offer for release’ (the Lord’s self-sacrifice) was in fact the offering demanded for the freeing of mankind from death (as in cases of abduction and the ransom demanded), then to whom was this ‘offering’ made?

f. If this ‘offering’ was made to God, then God must be identified as the ‘abductor’ who demands an offer for the release, and who would also be satisfied by one’s condemnation to death.

g. If the ‘offering’ was made to the Devil, then it must have occurred, despite the will of the just Lord. So, how did the Devil compel God to deliver His innocent Son to death, as an ‘offer for the release’ of mankind? That would mean the Devil has power over God!

The Significance of the Word “Lytron” (an offer for one’s release/freedom)

The various misinterpreters of this topic say that “Lytron” implies the compulsory payment of a certain sum of money for the release of a captive. But let’s see what the word really means, in the Holy Bible:

“When these things begin, you must rise up, and lift up your heads, for your final release is imminent” (Luke 21: 28).

“…we sigh, in anticipation of the adoption, of the release of our bodies” (Romans 8:23).

Given that the above words are used in reference to the Second Coming of the Lord, they cannot possibly imply a payment of any kind. It is therefore obvious, that the expression “final release” signifies a setting free, without any payment demanded.

”Blessed is the Lord God of Israel, for He visited and implemented the release of His people...” (Luke 1: 68).

In this excerpt also, it indicates that the “release” has already taken place (text is expressed in the past tense), before the time of the Lord’s sacrifice. We see therefore that nothing was actually “paid”, and that the word “lytron” is used in the sense of “releasing” or “liberating”.

Similarly, the word “lytron” when used in reference to the Lord’s sacrifice, doesn’t necessarily imply the payment of a certain amount; it bears the meaning that this sacrifice released/liberated us, WITHOUT A PAYMENT being involved, to anyone.

Was Jesus Adam’s Equal?

Heresies that do not admit the divinity of Jesus Christ are somewhat justified in making this mistake, hence, they are not able to comprehend the true meaning behind Jesus Christ’s sacrifice as analyzed below. Those however who are entirely inexcusable are the ones who – although admitting Christ’s divinity - maintain that Adam was the Lord Jesus’ equal.

Let’s take a look at a few Scriptural excerpts on this topic, where the superiority of Jesus’ sacrifice as compared to Adam’s disobedience is made very evident.

Romans 5: 15 - 20 (Greek original)

Αλλ' ουχ ως το παράπτωμα, ούτω και το χάρισμα. Ει γαρ τω τού ενός παραπτώματι οι πολλοί απέθανον, πολλώ μάλλον η χάρις του Θεού, και η δωρεά εν χάριτι τή τού ενός ανθρώπου Ιησού Χριστού, εις πολλούς επερίσσευσε.

Και ουχ ως δι ενός αμαρτήσαντος το δώρημα. Tο μεν γαρ κρίμα εξ ενός εις κατάκριμα, το δε χάρισμα εκ πολλών παραπτωμάτων εις δικαίωμα. Ει γαρ τω τού ενός παραπτώματι ο θάνατος εβασίλευσε δια τού ενός, πολλώ μάλλον οι την περίσειαν τής χάριτος, και την δωρεάν τής δικαιοσύνης λαμβάνοντες, εν ζωή βασιλεύσουσι δια τού ενός Ιησού Χριστού.

Άρα ουν, ως δι ενός παραπτώματος εις πάντας ανθρώπους εις κατάκριμα, ούτω και δι' ενός δικαιώματος εις πάντας ανθρώπους εις δικαίωσιν ζωής. Ώσπερ γαρ για τής παρακοής τού ενός ανθρώπου αμαρτωλοί κατεστάθησαν οι πολλοί, ούτω και δια τής υπακοής τού ενός, δίκαιοι καταστάθησαν οι πολλοί.

...ού δε επλεόνασεν η αμαρτία, υπερεπερίσσευσεν η χάρις...

Romans 5: 15 - 20 (Translation)

But, misbehaving is not the same as giving. Because, if through one’s [Adam’s] misbehavior the majority suffered death, by comparison the Grace of God and the gift in Grace of the one person, Jesus Christ, was made abundant to many.

And the gift was not as though from one who had sinned. While the judgment that befitted the one [Adam] resulted in condemnation, the gift [Christ’s sacrifice] that sprang from the misbehavior of many, resulted in vindication. For, if with the misbehavior of one [Adam], death came to reign on his account, on the contrary, those who received the surplus of Grace and the gift of justice shall reign in life, through the one: Jesus Christ.

So therefore, just as through one misbehavior [Adam’s] all people were condemned, thus through one justice [Christ’s], all people were vindicated for life. Because, just as through the disobedience of one [Adam], many became sinners, thus through the obedience of one [Christ], many became just.

Therefore, wherever sin was abundant, there Grace was excessively abundant.

What more can one say? It is clear here, that while Adam’s sin became the cause of sin for many, the Lord’s sacrifice was obviously far superior, in that it not only erased Adam’s sin, it erased all the accumulated sins of billions of sinners!

Woe may it be, if the Lord’s sacrifice had only the same worth as the imperfect Adam! Because the Lord, apart from being God, was also a perfect person. Adam on the other hand had not been created perfect, only “very good”. And the expression “very good” is a far cry from “perfect”, just as the expression “in his image” is lacking by comparison to the expression “in his likeness” (Genesis 1:31).

The Recipient of the Lytron

If the Lord’s sacrifice was the “price” paid for the release of mankind from the bonds of death, it could not have been paid to God, because the one who reigns over death is the devil, and not God:

"...so that through death, He [Christ] may abolish the one who held the power over death - that is, the devil – and release those who, through fear of death, were forever subject to bondage...” (Hebrews 2:14-15).

But then, if God had to pay something to the devil, it would mean that God didn’t have the power to impose His will “for free”. That would have made the devil a victor. However, the devil and all of his “crew” were in actual fact defeated, when Jesus died on the Cross (Colossians 2:13-15). If Satan were to receive a ‘release payment’ in order to set mankind free from the bonds of death, then Satan would have been victorious, and not Christ.

At any rate, the Holy Bible says that “God is Love”, not “justice”, so there is no chance that God would have wanted to sacrifice Love for the sake of a supposedly offended case of justice that required reciprocation. Not to mention that the death of an innocent person in the place of guilty persons would have signified injustice, and not justice.

God didn’t harbor any hatred for mankind on account of their sins! It was mankind that perceived God as a judge, on account of their own, unclean conscience: "...for, although we were enemies, we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son...” (Romans 5: 10).

God always loved us as a Father, and never demanded satisfaction for any supposedly “offended justice” of His. We see this, in John 4:9-10:

“In this was God’s love for us made evident: that He sent forth His only Son into the world, so that we might live through Him. In this is Love: it is not because we loved God, but because He loved us and sent forth His Son for the atonement of our sins.”

The Significance of the Lord’s Sacrifice

For Christians however, the significance of the Lord’s sacrifice is already known. Christians do not equate the worthiness of the Lord with Adam; they do not equate God with an unjust and insane assassin; they do not become the devil’s advocates.

The Church teaches that the Lord Jesus Christ became a perfect human so that - being one of our kind - He would defeat all those things that defeated and brought about sickness to human nature.

In His (Christ’s) person, human nature overcame sin, the devil and death. Because whoever allows himself to be defeated by someone, becomes that person’s slave. (2 Peter 2:19).

Therefore, in order for the Lord to rise from the dead and thus defeat death, He first had to die. But now, through faith in Jesus Christ, and in communion with His Body – the Church - every person can partake of this victory!

Source

See also: The Juridical Mentality of the West Annuls Christ’s Sacrifice

Tweet

Share on Tumblr