The Diplomatic Potential of Romanity in the 21st Century

The National Herald
Christopher Tripoulas
October 01, 2009

In a recent interview with TNH (June 19, 2009), Thea Halo stressed the importance of the Christian genocide that took place in Asia Minor. Ms. Halo called for a concerted effort by all the ethnicities affected by the massacre (Greeks, Armenians, Assyrians) – the first genocide of the 20th century – as opposed to the go-at-it-alone approach presently being undertaken by individual ethnic groups. In doing so, she expresses the characteristic perspective of “Romanity” – which has been overshadowed since the rise of the nation state.

In a post-modern era, with the need for broad collaboration driving individual nations to come even closer through mutual participation in international unions, organizations, and other bodies (EU, NATO, etc.), it is evident that no nation – not even superpowers – can afford to stand alone. The eight years of Bush Administration isolationism that led to Barack Obama’s sweeping victory, amid widespread calls for America to restore its international image, is proof of this. Global developments show that the day may very well come when Romanity - written off as passe by 19th and 20th century Greek politicians eager to mimic the West - might return to the forefront.

On June 24th, Greek author/politician Nikos Dimou was quoted in the NY Times as saying “we used to call ourselves Romans.” Prolific theologian and author John Romanides argues that the revolutions sweeping through Europe in the 18th and 19th centuries were the product of oppressed Roman peoples rising up against Frankish warlords turned landowners. The late Samuel Huntington seems equally aware of this dynamic, maintaining that Orthodox societies are inherently different from the Protestant/Roman Catholic West. Preeminent Greek poet Kostis Palamas summed it up nicely quipping: “We are Hellenes in order to hoodwink the world, but in reality Romans.”

By no means should this be interpreted as an attempt to minimize our connection or relation with Hellenism. However, there is no such thing as a “bridge” that leads from antiquity to the modern era, without being grounded in our medieval Roman past. The term “Roman” is as close to heart a “Hellene” because one does not exist without the other. The Western Renaissance can never truly grasp Hellenism without being baptized in Romanity. And so, it is worth looking into what aspects of our Romanic heritage can be incorporated into the amalgam that is the European Union, and by extent Western culture. Orthodoxy must certainly play a central role. Also, priorities of traditionally Orthodox “Roman” societies, pushed aside with the formation of the modern nation state, must also return to the forefront (i.e., prevalence of a community of “persons” over a society of “individuals”).

Presenting the genocide in Anatolia in its Christian context is a good start. The undertaking would engage members of different ethnic groups who share similar characteristics in a common effort to commemorate the martyrdom of their ancestors. It would bring our communities closer together. It would also help reestablish Romanity as a force in international world affairs.

Meanwhile, there is a growing movement to promote cooperation between Orthodox Christian deputies in the European Parliament. In April 2009 MEPs from Cyprus and Romania broke party lines to join their Bulgarian counterparts in defending the rights of the Bulgarian Orthodox Church against a ruling made by the European Court of Human Rights over schismatics’ attempts to seize local churches. Similar views have been echoed by the new Patriarch of Moscow about trying to advance the values of Orthodox civilization in a Europe whose demographics are rapidly changing.

Efforts to have the Armenian genocide recognized have achieved a good deal of progress, but continually stumble upon the powerful Turkish lobby, and Turkey’s willingness to make good on threats of diplomatic/economic repercussions against nations recognizing the genocide. Turkey's geostrategic stock remains high, in spite of its refusal to allow US troops to pass through its land during the Iraqi War (a show of Muslim solidarity). Until the country is fully discredited in the eyes of its Western partners, or until it overextends itself in its bid to gain regional hegemony, it will prove difficult for smaller nations to go head-to-head with a country of 80 million, with the second largest army in NATO after only the U.S.

Even Greece has come under pressure from certain “new world order elements” or Realpolitik practitioners who “encourage” downplaying the Pontian Genocide and Asia Minor Catastrophe in history books, school curriculums, and political rhetoric. And so, rather than competing against each other to gain support for the recognition of an ethnic Pontian, Armenian, or Assyrian genocide, it would prove wiser to adopt a common strategy. Presenting the genocide as one against Christian Romans of Anatolia would likely muster more support because of the evident religious persecution committed. It would also demonstrate the diplomatic potential of Romanity as a multi-ethnic strategy in the 21st century.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Sacrilege at the Monastery of St. Naum at Lake Ochrid

December 11, 2009
VatopaidiFriend

Hotel Complex Saint Naum
Spa Center

An Orthodox monastery of the 10th century in FYROM has been transformed into a hotel spa and practice Hinduism!

The monastery of St. Naum is located on the southeast side of Lake Ochrid, in the immediate vicinity of the FYROM-Albanian border. Its building is linked to the name of St. Naum, the closest associate of St. Clement of Ochrid. Records about the life and work of St. Naum can be found in three literature works dedicated to his life. Also the Archbishop of Ochrid, Constantine Cavassila, wrote about him. In the Historical Archives of Ochrid there is a "Chronicle" written by a priest that lived in the second half of 19th century. It reveals a series of interesting details about the construction of the monastery, the estate of the church, and the lives of the monks. Among other things, there is a record about a disastrous fire that occurred on the night of 2nd and 3rd of February 1875, when the largest part of the monastery compound was burnt to ashes.

Towards the end of his life, St. Naum of Ochrid built the Monastery of the Holy Archangel where he was buried in 910. The church of Naum was similar to the monastery of Clement, St. Pantheleimon, and was built in a trefoil shape.

In the course of the archaeological excavations carried out after the Second World War, only the foundations and part of the walls of that church were discovered. It is unknown when the church was ruined, but the assumption is that it happened before the arrival of the Turks.


During the Ottoman period (presumably 16th century), on the foundations of the original church, the church that exists today was built in two phases. Today the church is cruciform in a square space with a dome supported by four pillars. A similar dome with a tall tambour was added onto the narthex. The tomb of St. Naum is located on the southern side, in a separate chamber.

In the church there are no preserved frescoes from the time of St. Naum, nor have the excavations prove that there were any paintings in the beginning of the 10th century.

According to the inscriptions in the church, the frescoes were painted in the period of the priest Stefan, in 1806. They were painted by the fresco artist Trpo, son of the Master Constantine from Korcha, Albania.

Particularly impressive are the scenes from the life and miracles of St. Naum of Ochrid. They were painted in he second zone of the chapel above Naum’s tomb. The five painted scenes were passed from one generation to another, and are deemed to be the miracles of Naum. These are: “Harnessing the Bear”, “The Stupefied Monk Who Tried to Steal the Body of Saint Naum From His Tomb”, “Healing of the Mentally Disturbed”, “Horse Thief Who Was Caught at the Gates of the Monastery Church at Dawn” and “The Bucket Leaves Traces in the Rock”. The belief that St. Naum was capable to heal the mentally disturbed predominates. According to some sources, a “hospital” was operating within the monastery in 1662.

The iconostasis in the church was carved in 1711. The authors are unknown. They were influenced by the woodcarving traditions of Mount Athos and they created a genuine masterpiece. During the same year the artist Constantine painted the dais and the holiday icons. Most outstanding are the icons “Crucifixion” and “Entrance into Jerusalem”. The icons of the iconostasis are treated as one of the best achievements from the first part of 18th century.

Two Cyrillic and one glagolitic-cyrillic inscriptions dating from the period between the late 10th and 12th centuries can be found on the pillars of the parvis. These inscriptions testify about the development of the oldest Slavic scripts, Glagolitic and Cyrillic, in the Ochrid region.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Memorandum of the People of the Karpas Peninsula

9 December 2009
Hellenic Antidote

I've been given by Bishop Christoforos of Karpasia the following memorandum, which speaks for all the Greeks of this the most beautiful region of Cyprus, calling for it to be returned to its legitimate inhabitants and for it, in any future settlement, to be administered by the proposed Greek Cypriot constituent state.

Memorandum of the People of the Karpas Peninsula

In view of the current talks to resolve the Cyprus issue, being deeply concerned about the future of the Karpas peninsula (which is defined as the area starting from, at its western boundary, a line running from the villages of Akanthou and Trikomo and extending east to Cape St Andreas), we state here the position of the whole of the peninsula's Greek Cypriot people, who overwhelmingly form the population of Karpasia.

1. We state that we fully support a federal system of government that will be in accord with the summit agreements and the resolutions of the United Nations, which will make provision for the withdrawal of Turkish troops from Cyprus; confirm human rights and the three basic freedoms (freedom of settlement, freedom of movement and the freedom to own and use property); and which will exclude any right of unilateral military or other intervention. Consequently, we support the bi-communal talks currently taking place between President Dimitris Christofias and Mr Mehmet Ali Talat, hoping that these will come to a conclusion with an agreed solution.

2. The Third Vienna Agreement

After the capture and occupation by the Turkish army of the Karpas peninsula on 14 August 1974, some 12,600 Greek Cypriots remained in their homes in Karpasia – this amounted to two-thirds of the total Greek population of the peninsula. On the 2 August 1975, the Third Vienna Agreement was signed by Glafkos Clerides and Rauf Denktash, under the aegis of the UN secretary general, Kurt Waldheim. This agreement stipulated, inter alia, that every assistance would be afforded to the Greek Cypriots who remained in the Turkish-occupied north to live a normal life, including rights to education, the exercise of religious beliefs, medical care by doctors of their choice, as well as freedom of movement. In addition, the agreement allowed for those who had previously been expelled to be reunited with their families in Karpasia. This agreement was never implemented. In fact, the Turkish army continued to expel Karpas Greek Cypriots from their homes, so that by September 1976 only a few hundred Greek Cypriots were left, where they remain until today enclaved.
The immediate adoption and application of the Third Vienna Agreement will indicate Turkey's credibility and trustworthiness, prove that it has the potential to honour its signature in any future Cyprus agreement, and will afford the opportunity to the people of the Karpas peninsula to return to their homes, under Greek Cypriot administration.

3. The organisations, local authorities and the whole of the population of Karpasia unanimously state and demand that in any future settlement the Karpas peninsula forms part of the area to be administered by the proposed Greek Cypriot constituent state, for the following reasons:

a) This will result in natural justice, meet the expectations and justify the struggles and sacrifices, not only of the enclaved Karpas people, but all the Karpas people, who are overwhelmingly Greek Cypriot.

b) Cyprus is heavily dependent on tourism for its economic viability. With the Karpas peninsula as part of the proposed Greek Cypriot constituent state, this state will have access to a much greater portion of Cyprus' coastline. Currently, the Republic of Cyprus is in control of just 37.5% of the total length of the coastline of Cyprus.

c) The St Andreas Monastery located at the easternmost tip of the Karpas peninsula is the most important religious and cultural centre of Cyprus' Greek population. It must be liberated so that Greek Cypriots from all over the island can exercise their religious rights without hindrance or restrictions.

d) Such a settlement of the status of the Karpas peninsula is justified on historical and religious grounds, given that Karpasia has, down the ages, always been settled by Greek Christians.

4. We are convinced that the demands of the people of Karpasia are just and must be taken into account during the current talks. We will not accept a solution that will not make provision for the return of the Karpas peninsula. It must be realised by all concerned that for any solution to be viable, it must be just, otherwise, like the Annan plan, which was heavily biased against the Greek Cypriots, it will not be approved.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Does Science Have a Magisterium?

By Jay Richards
December 9, 2009
The American

At National Review Online, conservative curmudgeon John Derbyshire has weighed in on the Climategate scandal by encouraging conservatives not to jump on the anti-science bandwagon. I share his worry and find his advice is good so far as it goes; but I think Derbyshire’s defense of science might actually encourage the skepticism he wants to prevent. Most of the trouble comes from his invocation of the word “science,” and his claim that science has a magisterium.

His article is called “Trust Science.” I’m not sure what that means. What is “science,” and how do we “trust” it? Imagine if someone said: “Trust philosophy” or “Trust humanities” or “Trust religion.” The command in each case is far too vague to inspire confidence. “Science” isn’t a person or a finite set of propositions that can be tested or divine revelation. It’s not even a single institution. So how exactly do you trust it?

What we should trust is solid conclusions derived from valid reasoning based on publicly available empirical evidence, especially when it leads to reliable results—such as getting your 737 from Seattle to New York. But the abstract noun “science” is too vaporous to capture that. Perhaps “science at its best” would be a better substitute.

A related problem is that Derbyshire appeals to a scientific magisterium: “Science contains a core magisterium, which we can and do trust.” This should give anyone who has followed the climate change debate the creeps—a reaction Derbyshire anticipates in the column. But he seems blind to why talk of a scientific magisterium is creepy; so let me spell it out.

Other than listing the things Derbyshire thinks are settled and “without serious competitors,” he doesn’t really even identify what the magisterium is. This gives the impression that the magisterium is the subjectively determined list of things that people with power claim are settled. And that impression encourages the postmodern doubters of truth that Derbyshire hopes to keep back from the gates.

Science is different from the Catholic Church, which has a magisterium. This refers to the settled teaching authority of the Church, based on Scripture, the divine traditions reliably passed down from the apostles, guided by the Holy Spirit, and represented in the bishops in communion with the Bishop of Rome. And even this magisterium is only considered infallible under certain narrow circumstances. Although the Catholic explanation of the magisterium is subtle, the basic teachings of Catholicism—and the distinctions between negotiable and non-negotiable teachings—are contained in texts such as the Catechism. The magisterium is easily identified with a single institution, which one is free to trust or not to trust.

But science has none of that, and doesn’t claim to. It’s not a single institution. It doesn’t claim to be based on divine revelation or be guided by the Holy Spirit. It doesn’t have a priesthood or a central authority. It doesn’t even have a settled body of teachings. Science isn’t, and ought not to be, a surrogate religion.

Of course, most of what we believe to be scientifically verified truth is based on the testimony of scientists, textbooks, and journalists. In fact, most of what we all believe about most things is based on testimony. That’s okay. But anyone with a passing acquaintance with the history of science knows that every age has had a reigning intellectual orthodoxy or orthodoxies, declared to be “settled science” (a term Derbyshire summons) that were later seen to be erroneous. It doesn’t follow that because most scientists believe something to be true, or hold to a “consensus,” it ought to be doubted. Sometimes there are well-founded consensuses. But if you have good reason to be suspicious of a claim made by scientists, including lots of scientists, then you’re not under an intellectual obligation to submit to it.

In fact, no one appeals to consensus on the really solid stuff. Have you ever heard anyone cry consensus when talking about the Periodic Table of the Elements? More often than not, “consensus” is used to intimidate and silence dissenters. A scientific magisterium sounds like consensus-on-steroids, and brings to mind the big, state-funded “science” of which philosophers of science like Michael Polanyi have rightly been suspicious. It’s reminiscent of the way the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is often invoked to silence debate about the causes of climate change.

Derbyshire is right that no one, conservative or not, should infer from the collusion and evidence manipulation of leading climate scientists that science is just one more political power trip. But in light of Climategate and the previously known shenanigans confirmed by the scandal, it’s up to scientists and the journalists who serve as their megaphones to rise to the defense of science at its best—science based on solid, publically available evidence, valid arguments, and reasonable conclusions. We’ll see if they do that. In the meantime, invoking the authority of a scientific magisterium looks too much like an extreme form of an appeal to consensus, which may be one of the reasons for public skepticism in the first place.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

More U.S. Christians Mix in New Age Beliefs and Reject Authority

More U.S. Christians Mix in 'Eastern,' New Age Beliefs

Cathy Lynn Grossman
USA TODAY
December 9, 2009

Going to church this Sunday? Look around.
The chances are that one in five of the people there find "spiritual energy" in mountains or trees, and one in six believe in the "evil eye," that certain people can cast curses with a look — beliefs your Christian pastor doesn't preach.

In a Catholic church? Chances are that one in five members believe in reincarnation in a way never taught in catechism class — that you'll be reborn in this world again and again.

Elements of Eastern faiths and New Age thinking have been widely adopted by 65% of U.S. adults, including many who call themselves Protestants and Catholics, according to a survey by the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life released Wednesday.

Syncretism — mashing up contradictory beliefs like Catholic rocker Madonna's devotion to a Kabbalah-light version of Jewish mysticism — appears on the rise.

And, according to the survey's other major finding, devotion to one clear faith is fading.

Of the 72% of Americans who attend religious services at least once a year (excluding holidays, weddings and funerals), 35% say they attend in multiple places, often hop-scotching across denominations.

They are like President Obama, who currently has no home church. He has worshiped at a Baptist church, an Episcopal one, and the non-denominational chapel at Camp David.

"Mixing and matching practices and beliefs is as much the norm as it is the exception," Pew's Alan Cooperman says. "Are they grazing, sampling, just curious? We really don't know."

Even so, says Pew researcher Greg Smith, "these findings all point toward a spiritual and religious openness — not necessarily a lack of seriousness."

Among the findings:

•26% of those who attend religious services say they do so at more than one place occasionally, and an additional 9% roam regularly from their home church for services.

•28% of people who attend church at least weekly say they visit multiple churches outside their own tradition.

•59% of less frequent church attendees say they attend worship at multiple places.

The survey of 2,003 adults Aug. 11-27 has a margin of error of plus or minus 2.5 percentage points. It measures Protestants, Catholics and the unaffiliated; there were not enough people of other faiths surveyed for analysis.

"For an extremely long time, most of us thought belonging or membership or home church was monogamous, even if it was serial monogamy, because we all know about church-switching," says sociologist of religion Scott Thumma, a professor at the Hartford Institute for Religion Research in Hartford, Conn. "Today, the individual rarely finds all their spiritual needs met in one congregation or one religion."

'Rampant confusion'

In the 1980s, Albert Mohler and Julia Jarvis were in graduate school together at Southern Baptist Seminary in Louisville.

Today, Mohler is president of the seminary and a leading voice for Baptist orthodoxy. He sees a "rampant confusion" about faith revealed in the Pew findings.

"This is a failure of the pulpit as much as of the pew to be clear about what is and is not compatible with Christianity and belief in salvation only through Christ," Mohler says.

Pew says two in three adults believe in or cite an experience with at least one supernatural phenomenon, including:

•26% find "spiritual energy" in physical things.

•25% believe in astrology.

•24% say people will be reborn in this world again and again.

•23% say yoga is a "spiritual practice."

Mohler calls these "the au courant confusions," attachments to the latest fashionable free-floating beliefs.

"One hundred years ago, it would have been 'spiritualism.' They wouldn't have known what yoga was but might have been attracted to the 'New Thought' of the time," Mohler says.

His former classmate giggles at that. She's an ordained minister in the progressive United Church of Christ and leads the Interfaith Family Project, which meets for weekly worship at a Silver Spring, Md., high school.

Jarvis, of Takoma Park, Md., also studies with Buddhist teacher Thich Nhat Hanh and finds a spiritual dimension in yoga.

"I don't do astrology, but my mother, who grew up in Birmingham, Ala., and was a staunch Baptist all her life, looked at her horoscope daily and totally believed it," Jarvis says.

Jarvis says her late mother, like 49% of adults in the Pew survey, also had a moment of "religious or spiritual awakening."

"My mother feared for years that I was no longer saved, but just two days before she died, she had an epiphany," Jarvis says. "She said she was 'told' in a spiritual experience to put aside all religious and political differences and just love each other. That was her blessing to me, and that's what I'm doing."

Regina Roman of Alexandria, Va., calls herself "a very grounded Episcopalian" who's active in her church. But, she says, "I'm also stretching the boundaries of how we are to be here and now in this day, age and culture."

She leads pilgrimages to Egypt, New Mexico and Ireland to help travelers discover the truths and visions in Coptic, Native American and Celtic traditions. Roman celebrated the winter solstice with a home ceremony for guests to delight in the sun's gifts.

"We are all in relationship with the cosmos. We need to honor that," says Roman, who doesn't see herself crossing barriers but rather "coming full circle" with ancient ideas.

"People have always mixed religions, either in ignorance or willfully," says Stephen Prothero, director of the Graduate Division of Religious and Theological Studies at Boston University.

Despite the late Pope John Paul II's warnings to explicitly avoid Buddhist and Hindu practices, Prothero says, "American Catholics are so used to not caring what the official church tells them on birth control, divorce, premarital sex and other points that they don't think they are un-Catholic when they believe and do what they please."

Combating syncretism has troubled popes for centuries, says the Rev. Dan Pattee, chairman of the theology department at Franciscan University in Steubenville, Ohio.

The problem with borrowing spiritual ideas is that "the life-giving truth becomes compromised as we understand it as Catholics," Pattee says.

The growth of mixing

Prothero sees a similar trend among Protestants, a "resistance to being told what to think."

"Even people who call themselves by denominational tags don't really feel the identity attachment to them as they once did," he says. "And without that identity marker, what's to prevent you from checking out some other church? Nothing much."

Cooperman notes that the new survey is measuring a phenomenon that may have been going on for decades. Also, it does not clearly establish how much is due to interfaith relationships.

A new study from InterfaithFamily.com, which encourages Jewish-Christian couples to raise their children as Jews, looks specifically at the Christmas/Hanukkah season. The findings are not scientific but give an indication that in intermarried couples rearing their children as Jews, most will celebrate Hanukkah — which begins on Friday night this year — at home. Less than 48% will celebrate Christmas, and largely in a secular fashion.

Pew specifically excludes the major holidays and life-cycle events to focus on ordinary worship practices. Its report says the findings on interfaith couples are "complex," in part because people in mixed marriages attend worship less frequently than those with a same-faith spouse.

The faith-mixing trend has been building; other surveys in the past two years have touched on the swirling, unbounded paths of believers:

•Forty-seven percent to 59% of Americans have changed religions at least once, a Pew survey in April found. The top reasons for most: Their spiritual needs weren't being met, or they liked another faith more or changed religious or moral beliefs.

•The percentage of people who call themselves Christian has dropped more than 11% in a generation, and so many people declined any religious label that the "Nones," now 15% of the USA, are the third-largest "religious" group after Catholics and Baptists, according to the American Religious Identification Survey last March.

•Despite Americans' overwhelming allegiance to someone they call God (92%), in Pew's 2008 U.S. Religious Landscape Survey, 70% said "many religions can lead to eternal life," and 68% said "there's more than one true way to interpret the teachings of my religion."

•Most (55%) say a guardian angel has protected them from harm, and 52% believe in prophetic dreams, according to surveys by Baylor University released in 2006 and 2008.

In short, we believe our own experiences are authentic, and no "authority" can say otherwise.

That's a very "Eastern" notion, says Jim Todhunter of Bethesda, Md. Retired after three decades leading United Church of Christ congregations, he has studied in a Hindu ashram in India and practices Zen meditation and Christian contemplative prayer.

"In the Western religions — Judaism, Christianity and Islam — the focus is: 'What do you believe?' There is always a tremendous focus on doctrine and teachings," he says. "In the East, Buddhism and Hinduism in particular, the leading question is, 'Do you know God?' It's much more experience-based."

Either way, he adds, "however you meet God is wonderful."

RELIGION SURVEY RESULTS

Mixing religions: Many Americans have beliefs or experiences that conflict with basic Christian doctrines. People who say they believe:

Total / Christians

People will be reborn in this world again and again 24% / 22%

Yoga is a spiritual practice 23% / 21%

People with the "evil eye" can cast curses or harmful spells 16% / 17%

The position of stars/planets can affect people's lives 25% / 23%


Interfaith worship: A third of Americans say they attend multiple places of worship, including outside their own faith (excluding holidays or family events). People who say they attend:

Total / All Protestants / Catholics

Multiple places within own faith 11% / 9% / 21%

Services of one other faith 12% / 15% / 13%

Services of two other faiths 8% / 10% / 5%

Services of three or more faiths 4% / 4% / 1%


Attending other services: Attending worship services beyond their own faith is more common among Protestants (30%) than Catholics (19%):

One other faith / Two others / Three others

White evangelicals 15% / 9% / 3%

White mainline 11% / 8% / 5%

Black Protestants 18% / 14% / 9%


Mystical experiences: Half of all Americans say they have had a "religious or mystical experience or spiritual awakening":

Total

Black Protestants 71%

White evangelical Protestants 70%

Catholics 60%

White mainline Protestants 40%

Unaffiliated 30%


Spirit and nature: Many Christians have adopted beliefs or experiences that conflict with basic Christian doctrines. People who say they:

Total / Christians

Have been in touch with the dead 29% / 29%

Found "spiritual energy" in trees, etc. 26% / 23%

Had ghostly experience 18% / 17%

Consulted a psychic 15% / 14%


Source: 2009 Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life Survey of 2,003 U.S. adults. Margin of error +/- 2.5 percentage points

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Ancient Church Discovered In Israeli Prison May Become Pilgrimage Site

Discovery of World's Oldest Church May Turn Prison Into Tourist Site

By Eli Ashkenazi
12/07/2009
Haaretz

Megiddo prison, surrounded by prison guards on horseback supplemented by guard dogs, is not a place that many people would care to approach. But if a plan now in the final stages comes to fruition, it could become a tourist attraction drawing Israelis and tourists from around the world.

Behind the prison walls, the remains of the oldest Christian house of worship ever discovered were unearthed four years ago in the course of prison renovations. The plans that are coming together call for the relocation of the prison to a site a short distance away so that the archaeological site can be opened to the public.

Some prisoners, including both common criminals and security prisoners, were allowed to dig below the prison - jailbreak style - as part of the archaeological research. The ancient finds on the site have led to an agreement in principle involving the prison service, the Megiddo Regional Council and the Antiquities Authority for the relocation of the detention facility.

In 2005, work was undertaken to replace a tent encampment for prisoners with detention cells, and because the Megiddo area is known for its rich archaeological finds, the Antiquities Authority required a salvage dig be carried out.

At the edge of the site, a magnificent mosaic floor featuring important inscriptions, including a reference to Jesus, was found, along with the foundation of a building from the 3rd or 4th century C.E.

The finds were evidence that the site was used for Christian religious worship before Christianity became the official religion of the Roman empire, and it is thought to contain the remains of the oldest church in the world.

Officials involved in the dig explained that the finds show a link between the Roman army that encamped there then and communal Christian activity. At the center of the site remains of an altar or prayer table were found.

The site is also identified with the Talmudic-era Jewish village of Kfar Otnai, mentioned in Hebrew sources. The headquarters of the sixth Roman legion was established there along with the town of Maximilianopolis, which is mentioned in historical sources.

According to Hanan Erez, head of the regional council, "the discovery of the finds created great excitement in the Christian world and among researchers of early Christianity. The discovery was even a main topic of a conference of researchers in Washington three years ago."

Shortly after the discovery at the site, the Antiquities Authority quickly recommended the relocation of the prison so the site could be opened to the public. An agreement to that effect is now being worked out.

Megiddo council head Erez said: "On the site, a tourism complex is to be built, the central focus of which will be the ancient house of worship, alongside, of course, the Tel Megiddo archaeological site, which is also a significant site for the Christian world."

He noted that the plans for the funding of the project have been presented to the Finance Ministry. The plan calls for the state to guarantee the financing package.

The construction of the new nearby prison is part of a larger plan to build new prison facilities around the country.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Christmas Date Does NOT Have Pagan Origins

Did Christians "christianize" the pagan feast of Sol Invictus (Birth of the Unconquered Sun) and make it Christmas on December 25th?

The short answer is ABSOLUTELY NOT, and it is refreshing to see at least a few articles on the internet disproving this long held myth perpetuated by Atheists and Protestants.

Below are two of my favorite articles which undoubtedly demonstrate that the Christian celebration of Christmas on December 25 came before the pagan festival of Sol Invictus rather than the other way around:

Calculating Christmas

How December 25 Became Christmas

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Bulgarian Church May Not Switch to Old Calendar

December 8, 2009
Dveri

The changing of the calendar had been neither discussed, nor will be discussed at the Holy Synod meetings, said the spokesman of the Holy Synod Metropolitan Neophyte of Rousse.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Why Richard Dawkins Won’t Debate William Lane Craig

by Dr. William Dembski

William Lane Craig is not only one of the world’s leading Christian apologists but he has actually made outstanding original contributions to philosophy. Yes, Craig publishes popular-level books. Unlike Dawkins, however, who in 20-years plus has been purely a popularizer (of Darwinian evolution, materialist science, and atheism), Craig continues to publish at the highest levels of the academy addressing scholars of the highest caliber (and gaining their respect). Dawkins, by contrast, increasingly appeals to the lowest common denominator. It’s in this light that Dawkins glib dismissal of Craig should be viewed.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Second Pan-Orthodox Meeting Opens in Chambésy

Asia News
12/09/2009
by NAT da Polis

On the agenda the autonomy of the Churches born after the collapse of the USSR and the new churches of the Diaspora. Many of them want independence from Moscow. Bartholomew defends dialogue with Rome responding to entrenchment of dialogue, which leads only to "a dead end." Erdogan may give citizenship to the metropolitans of the Turkish Diaspora.

Istanbul (AsiaNews) - The 2nd round pan-Orthodox meeting opens today in Chemin de Chambésy in Switzerland, in preparation for the first pan-Orthodox Synod of the modern era. The first round last June, dealt with the issue of the Orthodox Diaspora, namely the management and jurisdiction of the Orthodox Churches founded by the Diaspora. This question has caused friction between Constantinople and Moscow, especially after the collapse of communist regimes and the subsequent massive migration of Eastern peoples outside their national borders. Until then, the Orthodox flock was under the jurisdiction of their national church, and the Diaspora under that of the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, according to the current canons of the Eastern Church.

The first meeting in June decided on the creation of Episcopal conferences in the countries of the Diaspora, who will refer to Constantinople; in today's meeting - which will last one week - the issue of autonomy and the autocephalous nature of the Orthodox Churches will be discussed . In short the debate will centre of the cannons to define and accept the autonomy and autocephalous status of the new Churches within the spectrum of the Orthodox world. The meeting aims to resolve issues that have emerged in the aftermath of the collapse of the Soviet Union and the consequent emergence of new nation states, whose churches have sought independence from the Patriarchate of Moscow, demanding so a return to the status they had before the birth of' USSR.

In a statement released yesterday the desire to end anomalies that have arisen over the course of time, largely due to historical junctures and the consequent pastoral needs of Orthodox flock, was expressed. The deep desire of Bartholomew I to proceed quickly in order to convene the first major pan-Orthodox Synod of the modern era was also noted.

In a homily he delivered on the feast of St. Andrew, November 30th in Istanbul, Bartholomew I focused on relations between the Orthodox churches and the Church of Rome. According to experts, the Patriarch has sent significant and important signals to the interested parties.

Regarding relations between the Orthodox Churches, Bartholomew said that "the role of Constantinople is one established by the canons of the Ecumenical Synods. It lies in the diaconate, having the responsibility for the coordination and expression of unanimity of the Orthodox Churches”. "Our primary goal - he continued - is the unity of Orthodoxy, because only then can there be witnesses to the truth of the Gospel in a modern world beset by many problems of many kinds. In this work of diaconate, the Church of Constantinople is forced to operate with great difficulty, because of the current context well known to all, but [it] finds solidarity in the Church of Old Rome, first of all, to whom we turn with loving thoughts at this time. "

The patriarch did not spare criticism of those in the Orthodox world who are against dialogue with the Church of Rome, saying that dialogue alone is the only way to peace and unity. "The peaceful adjustment of differences in relations between Christians - continued Bartholomew - does not mean detachment from the truth. Truth is not afraid of dialogue, but instead uses dialogue as a means to gain acceptance from those who have reservations. Arrogance and fanaticism causes the hardening of positions taken and entrenchment can only lead to a dead end. "

"Besides - concluded the Ecumenical Patriarch - dispassionate study without preconditions, will help us to understand the structure of the universal Church that was united the 1st millennium, and will also help us to understand our mistakes in the 2nd millennium."

Meanwhile in recent days very important news has emerged. At the suggestion of Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan, there is the possibility of granting citizenship to the metropolitans of the Turkish Diaspora. This fact satisfies the ecumenical will of Bartholomew and unlocks the door to the possibility that in future a bishop who now resides outside of Turkey may be elected Ecumenical Patriarch. According to current rules, only those who have Turkish citizenship have the right to be elected to the patriarchal throne. Until now 20 metropolitans of the Diaspora have already applied for Turkish citizenship. In the eventual granting of Turkish citizenship to metropolitans of the Diaspora diplomatic circles see the first proof of the sincere will of the Erdogan government to be open to minorities. In fact, it must also be remembered that in mid-December the European Union will examine progress made by Ankara in its march towards Europe.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Copenhagen Climate Summit in Disarray

Copenhagen Climate Summit in Disarray After 'Danish text' Leak

Developing countries react furiously to leaked draft agreement that would hand more power to rich nations, sideline the UN's negotiating role and abandon the Kyoto protocol.

The Danish Text
Video of the Conference

John Vidal in Copenhagen
guardian.co.uk
Tuesday 8 December 2009

The UN Copenhagen climate talks are in disarray today after developing countries reacted furiously to leaked documents that show world leaders will next week be asked to sign an agreement that hands more power to rich countries and sidelines the UN's role in all future climate change negotiations.

The document is also being interpreted by developing countries as setting unequal limits on per capita carbon emissions for developed and developing countries in 2050; meaning that people in rich countries would be permitted to emit nearly twice as much under the proposals.

The so-called Danish text, a secret draft agreement worked on by a group of individuals known as "the circle of commitment" – but understood to include the UK, US and Denmark – has only been shown to a handful of countries since it was finalised this week.

The agreement, leaked to the Guardian, is a departure from the Kyoto protocol's principle that rich nations, which have emitted the bulk of the CO2, should take on firm and binding commitments to reduce greenhouse gases, while poorer nations were not compelled to act. The draft hands effective control of climate change finance to the World Bank; would abandon the Kyoto protocol – the only legally binding treaty that the world has on emissions reductions; and would make any money to help poor countries adapt to climate change dependent on them taking a range of actions.

The document was described last night by one senior diplomat as "a very dangerous document for developing countries. It is a fundamental reworking of the UN balance of obligations. It is to be superimposed without discussion on the talks".

A confidential analysis of the text by developing countries also seen by the Guardian shows deep unease over details of the text. In particular, it is understood to:

• Force developing countries to agree to specific emission cuts and measures that were not part of the original UN agreement;

• Divide poor countries further by creating a new category of developing countries called "the most vulnerable";

• Weaken the UN's role in handling climate finance;

• Not allow poor countries to emit more than 1.44 tonnes of carbon per person by 2050, while allowing rich countries to emit 2.67 tonnes.

Developing countries that have seen the text are understood to be furious that it is being promoted by rich countries without their knowledge and without discussion in the negotiations.

"It is being done in secret. Clearly the intention is to get [Barack] Obama and the leaders of other rich countries to muscle it through when they arrive next week. It effectively is the end of the UN process," said one diplomat, who asked to remain nameless.

Antonio Hill, climate policy adviser for Oxfam International, said: "This is only a draft but it highlights the risk that when the big countries come together, the small ones get hurting. On every count the emission cuts need to be scaled up. It allows too many loopholes and does not suggest anything like the 40% cuts that science is saying is needed."

Hill continued: "It proposes a green fund to be run by a board but the big risk is that it will run by the World Bank and the Global Environment Facility [a partnership of 10 agencies including the World Bank and the UN Environment Programme] and not the UN. That would be a step backwards, and it tries to put constraints on developing countries when none were negotiated in earlier UN climate talks."

The text was intended by Denmark and rich countries to be a working framework, which would be adapted by countries over the next week. It is particularly inflammatory because it sidelines the UN negotiating process and suggests that rich countries are desperate for world leaders to have a text to work from when they arrive next week.

Few numbers or figures are included in the text because these would be filled in later by world leaders. However, it seeks to hold temperature rises to 2C and mentions the sum of $10bn a year to help poor countries adapt to climate change from 2012-15.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Global Cooling Documented in Last Decade

Contradicts data released at Copenhagen climate summit

December 08, 2009
Jerome R. Corsi
WorldNetDaily

The mainstream media is reporting the World Meteorological Organization's assessment of global average temperatures asserting this decade is "the warmest on record," without mentioning the WMO data actually documents the United States and Canada experienced cooler-than-average conditions since 2000.

The reports circulating from the U.N.'s climate summit in Copenhagen also don't mention scientific climate data that suggest the globe has cooled in the last 10 years.

Data from the U.S. National Climate Data Center indicate temperatures in the U.S. have cooled over the last decade at a rate that projects to a decline of 7.3 degrees Fahrenheit over the next century.

Read the rest of the story here...

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Famous Weather Scientist: Climategate 'tip of iceberg'

'Conspiracy would become manifest' if all climate research e-mails unveiled

December 08, 2009
By Bob Unruh
WorldNetDaily

The Colorado scientist described by the Washington Post as "the World's Most Famous Hurricane

Expert" says the "Climategate" e-mails from the United Kingdom that revealed possible data manipulation are evidence of a conspiracy among "warmists," those who believe man's actions are triggering possibly catastrophic climate change.


"The recent 'ClimateGate' revelations coming out of the UK University of East Anglia are but the tip of a giant iceberg of a well organized international climate warming conspiracy that has been gathering momentum for the last 25 years," said Colorado State University's William Gray.

His annual hurricane forecasts are the standard for weather prognostications. His work pioneered the science of forecasting hurricanes, and he has served as weather forecaster for the U.S. Air Force. He is emeritus professor of atmospheric science at CSU and heads the school's Department of Atmospheric Sciences Tropical Meteorology Project.

Gray was referring to e-mails and other information obtained by a hacker and posted on a Russian web server that included interactions among the world's most influential climate-change scientists.

One e-mail said: "I've just completed Mike's Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie from 1981 onwards) amd (sic) from 1961 for Keith's to hide the decline."

Another expressed internal doubts: "The fact is that we can't account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can't. The CERES data published in the August (Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society) 09 supplement on 2008 shows there should be even more warming: but the data are surely wrong. Our observing system is inadequate."

Further, an e-mail exchange suggested the suppression of information: "Can you delete any e-mails you may have had with Keith re (Assessment Report 4)? Keith will do likewise. He's not in at the moment – minor family crisis."

Gray said, "This conspiracy would become much more manifest if all the e-mails of the publically funded climate research groups of the U.S. and of foreign governments were ever made public."

His comments are posted at Climate Depot.com as world leaders are conferencing in Copenhagen to discuss taking drastic economic measures to curb "global warming."

Gray warns that the likely agreements coming out of Copenhagen, the cap-and-trade bill before Congress and the Environmental Protection Agency's decision announced this week to treat carbon dioxide as a pollutant "represents a grave threat to the industrial world's continued economic development."

"We should not allow these proposals to restrict our economic growth," Gray said. "Any United Nations climate bill our country might sign would act as an infringement on our country's sovereignty."

He said he probably would have been concerned about the possibility people are causing serious global climate degradation "had I not devoted my entire career of over half-a-century to the study and forecasting of meteorological and climate events."

"There has been an unrelenting quarter century of one-sided indoctrination of the Western world by the media and by various scientists and governments concerning a coming carbon dioxide … induced global warming disaster," he said. "These warming scenarios have been orchestrated by a combination of environmentalists, vested interest scientists wanting larger federal grants and publicity, the media which profits from doomsday scenario reporting, governmental bureaucrats who want more power over our lives, and socialists who want to level-out global living standards.

"These many alarmist groups appear to have little concern over whether their global warming prognostications are accurate, however. And they most certainly are not. The alarmists believe they will be able to scare enough of our citizens into believing their propaganda that the public will be willing to follow their advice on future energy usage and agree to a lowering of their standard of living in the name of climate salvation."

Gray said there still hasn't been an "honest and broad" scientific debate on the influence of CO2 on global temperature, contending the present models presented by scientists are flawed.

He cited a global warming of about 1 degree Fahrenheit over the last century, and that's "not a consequence of human activities."

"The disastrous economic consequences of restricting CO2 emissions from the present by as much as 20 percent by 2020 and 80 percent by 2050 (as being proposed in Copenhagen) have yet to be digested by the general public. Such CO2 output decreases would cause very large increases in our energy costs, a lowering of our standard of living, and do nothing of significance to improve our climate," he said.

Gray launched the practice of seasonal hurricane forecasts. After the 2005 Atlantic season, he said he was stepping down from the primary authorship of the CSU report, turning over those duties to Philip J. Klotzbach.

He's long described global warming as a hoax, telling the Post three years ago, "I am of the opinion that this is one of the greatest hoaxes ever perpetrated on the American people."

Myron Ebell of the GlobalWarming.org website, where "cooler heads prevail," said the e-mails obtained from the University of East Anglia were "shocking."

"It's kind of interesting to learn that petty politics seems to be more prevalent in the scientific community than in the political community," he said.

The documents, he said, "raise a huge number of questions about the integrity of a lot of people in the alarmist community."

"What I've seen there is a very strong effort to manage the issue by scientists and not as a scientific issue. It's very improper," he said. "One of the criticisms is that we need scientists to be scientists, and policy can be handled in public debate."

Phil Jones, head of East Anglia's Climate Research Unit, confirmed the documents appeared authentic. He has temporarily stepped down while an investigation is taking place.

Despite the advocacy of a financially vested former vice president, Al Gore, and others, public opinion about whether mankind is causing an ultimately catastrophic rise in global temperatures is shifting.

U.S. Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, has urged members of Congress to consider the joint opinion of nearly 32,000 scientists, including more than 9,000 Ph.D.s, who believe humans likely have little or nothing to do with any "global warming."

The Petition Project, launched some 10 years ago when the first few thousand signatures were gathered, has steadily grown without any special effort or campaign.

But in the last few years, and especially because of the release of Gore's movie "An Inconvenient Truth," the campaign has been reinvigorated.

"Mr. Gore's movie, asserting a 'consensus' and 'settled science' in agreement about human-caused global warming, conveyed the claims about human-caused global warming to ordinary moviegoers and to public-school children, to whom the film was widely distributed. Unfortunately, Mr. Gore's movie contains many very serious incorrect claims which no informed, honest scientist could endorse," project spokesman and founder Art Robinson has told WND.

Robinson, a research professor of chemistry, cofounded the Linus Pauling Institute of Science and Medicine with Linus Pauling in 1973, and later cofounded the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine.

Paul later cited the petition results in statement to Congress.

"Our energy policies must be based upon scientific truth – not fictional movies or self-interested international agendas," Paul said. "They should be based upon the accomplishments of technological free enterprise that have provided our modern civilization, including our energy industries. That free enterprise must not be hindered by bogus claims about imaginary disasters."

The petition states: "There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate. Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth."

Robinson has warned of serious political and economic consequences of assuming "global warming" results from mankind's actions.

"The campaign to severely ration hydrocarbon energy technology has now been markedly expanded," he said. "In the course of this campaign, many scientifically invalid claims about impending climate emergencies are being made. Simultaneously, proposed political actions to severely reduce hydrocarbon use now threaten the prosperity of Americans and the very existence of hundreds of millions of people in poorer countries," he told WND.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

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