MYSTAGOGY: January 2010

Friday, February 19, 2010

Three Miraculous Athonite Akathist Icons

Holy Monastery Dionysiou - Panagia of the Salutations the Myrrhgusher

According to an inscription on the back of this icon, it was given as a gift to Saint Dionysius, founder of the Holy Monastery of Dionysiou on Mount Athos, by Emperor Alexios Komnenos, upon his visit to Trebizond in Asia Minor. According to Holy Tradition, this is the same icon that Patriarch Sergius processed around the walls of Constantinople in 626 A.D. during the reign of Emperor Heraclius. At that time Constantinople was attacked by the Persians and "Scythians" (Avars and Slavs) but saved through the intervention of the Most Holy Theotokos. A sudden hurricane dispersed the fleet of the enemy, casting the vessels on the shore near the great Church of the Theotokos at Blachernae near the Golden Horn. The people spent the whole night in front of this icon thanking her for the unexpected deliverance. In memory of this event the Akathist Hymn is chanted in the Orthodox Church.

In 1592 Algerian pirates stole the icon, but after a fierce storm, a frightening dream, and a great miracle, the leader of the pirates was forced to return it to the monastery. They had hid it in a chest, but the icon shattered it and it was drenched in myrrh. Because of this miracle, some pirates repented and entered the monastery to become monastics.

In 1767 certain theives from Dalmatia stole the icon, and upon their return to Dalmatia were apprehended by Greek shepherds who took the icon and brought it to Skopelos. On Skopelos island the Greek community leaders elected by the Turks, known as Dimogerontes, denied to the Dionysian monks from Mount Athos the return of the icon when they came to request its return. After three months Skopelos was punished by a plague which brought great tragedy to the island, and the Dimogerontes repented and had the icon returned to Dionysiou Monastery and also established a metochion for the monastery on the island.

The icon is small and darkened by time. It is housed in a chapel dedicated to the icon at Dionysiou Monastery where the Akathist Hymn is sung daily.

Holy Monastery Hilandar - Panagia of the Akathist

The icon is on the iconostasis of Hilandar Monastery on Mount Athos. In 1837 a fire occurred at this monastery, and the monks were chanting the Akathist Hymn in front of this icon. Though the fire caused great destruction around it the icon itself remained untouched by the flames. The feast day of the icon is celebrated on January 12.

Holy Monastery Zographou - Panagia of the Akathist Proangellomeni (the Notifier) or "Chairovo"

You can read the full account and historical background behind this miraculous icon here. The feast of this icon is October 10.

Kontakion (Plagal of the Fourth Tone)
O Champion General, we your faithful inscribe to you the prize of victory as gratitude for being rescued from calamity, O Theotokos. But since you have invincible power, free us from all kinds of perils so that we may cry out to you: Rejoice, O Bride unwedded!

Theotokion (Tone Three)
Seeing the beauty of your Virginity, and how resplendently shone forth your chastity, amazed was Gabriel who cried to you thus, O Theotokos: What shall I present to you as a worthy encomium? What shall I address you as? At a loss and perplexed am I. As ordered, therefore, thus do I shout to you: Rejoice, O Maiden who are full of grace!

The Philanthropy of Saint Philothei the Athenian

Holy Martyr Philothea the Athenian (Feast Day - February 19)

Saint Philothei was born in Athens in 1522 to an illustrious family. Against her will, she was married to a man who proved to be most cruel. When he died three years later, the Saint took up the monastic life and established a convent, in which she became a true mother to her disciples. Many women enslaved and abused by the Muslim Turks also ran to her for refuge. Because of this, the Turkish rulers became enraged and came to her convent, dragged her by force out of the church, and beat her cruelly. After a few days, she reposed, giving thanks to God for all things. This came to pass in the year 1589. She was renowned for her almsgiving, and with Saints Hierotheus and Dionysius the Areopagite is considered a patron of the city of Athens.

From a Greek biography of the Saint:

Certainly philanthropy was one of Saint Philothei's main motives. At a time when there were no hospitals, no shelters for the poor, no homes for the elderly, no asylums, and no shelters for the protection of women, their place was taken by monastic institutions.

In addition to her dedication to a virtuous life, practicing philanthropy by offering protection, giving alms and ministering to the poor and sick, providing Christian education by teaching everyone ecclesiastical letters and liturgical knowledge, the holy woman contributed the following:

First, she founded schools for the children of the Athenians, to open their eyes to the tradition and renown of their ancestors. 'Lay hold of instruction, lest at any time the Lord be angry' (Ps. 2:12). Philothei brought this scriptural quotation to reality. Within her flickered the hope of the rebirth of the Byzantine Empire and...the early deliverance from the bestial yoke of the conquerors.

Second, Philothei aimed at protecting the daughters of Athens from the disgrace of conversion to Islam.... The danger of being subjected to conversion existed not only for the noble daughters who were forcibly abducted by the Turks because of their beauty and grace, but also for the simple ones, the peasant girls, who were forced to work in Turkish homes and farms in order to sustain themselves. Pressure, necessity and ignorance (the great deceiver) were causes in forcing the maidens into submission.

However, Philothei, with her convent of virgins (Παρθενώνα), her schools, her convent's metochia, and family ties, was capable of either strengthening those under duress or sending them away and hiding them. This was done until their consciences recovered or the danger subsided; and until fear was replaced by a spirit of faith and sacrifice for the sake of the Christian Faith.

N.B. Tomadakis, The Life and Service of Saint Philothei, University of Athens.

Apolytikion in the Plagal of the First Tone
The famed city of Athens doth honour Philothei, the righteous Martyr, whose relics it now revereth with joy; for while living in sobriety and holiness, she hath exchanged all earthly things for the everlasting life through great contests as a Martyr; and she entreateth the Saviour to grant His mercy unto all of us.

Kontakion in the Third Tone
We all honour Philothei with jubilation of spirit, as this day we rev'rently worship her ven'rable relics. For she lived her whole life working kindness and mercy; and the righteous one, receiving a martyr's ending, is deemed worthy to entreat God that all be granted eternal life with the Saints.

Procession with the incorrupt relics of St. Philothei in 2007

Church of St. Andrew, founded by St. Philothei after a vision

Woods Apology Clinton-esque

Woods Apology: Buddhist, Biblical and Bill Clinton-esque

By Cathy Lynn Grossman
USA TODAY
February 19, 2009

A deeply apologetic Tiger Woods today added to his lengthy litany of sins, regrets and promises of repentance that he needs to return to Buddhist traditions.

His mother taught him the traditions and moral philosophy but as an adult, he says, he drifted away. Now it's time to return to finding balance and being centered again.

Buddhism, he said, teaches that "a craving for things outside ourselves" can only lead to "unhappiness and a pointless search for security. Woods said he needed to stop "following every impulse" and "learn restraint."

Then, with several gulps and a weary, steady sad face, he said he was heading back to continue his therapy.

While his pledge is to return to Buddhist ways, his point-by-point apology was classically biblical -- it's the same "turning" process that Bill Clinton cited, reading from a Jewish prayer, when he apologized for his Lewinsky affair in 1998:

Admit your wrongs, take responsibility for them, express your regrets to all who were harmed, and spell out your path to return to integrity and righteousness.

Whether that's enough for Brit-Hume-Christian-style forgiveness -- or everyone else's -- remains to be seen.

Read full Tiger Woods apology here.
Read full Bill Clinton apology here.

Elton John: 'Jesus was a compassionate, super-intelligent gay man'

By Soraya Roberts
New York Daily News
Friday, February 19th 2010

Elton John has never been a big fan of religion.

“Religion promotes hatred and spite against gays," the openly gay performer told the Observer's Music Monthly magazine in 2006. “From my point of view, I would ban religion completely."

So it comes as a surprise that in Parade magazine this week, John claims that one of the central figures of Christianity is in fact a homosexual.

"I think Jesus was a compassionate, super-intelligent gay man who understood human problems," he tells Parade. "On the cross, he forgave the people who crucified him."

In the same breath, John renounces celebrity. The man who at the Grammys wore soot on his face and performed opposite the ultimate exhibitionist, Lady Gaga, says he is done with fame.

"Fame attracts lunatics," he tells the magazine. "I never had a bodyguard, ever, until Gianni [Versace] died. I don't like celebrity anymore."

John made headlines at the beginning of the year when it was announced he staged an intervention to help designer Donatella Versace kick her drug habit. Prior to that he had revealed he was also supporting rapper Eminem in his fight against substance abuse.

"Obedience" by St. Nikolai Velimirovich

Obedience without murmuring, salvation complete,
Among the spiritual, the first pearl; stone most precious.

This pearl, from Eve's necklace, unraveled,
And after it, all the goods, by God, bestowed.

The devil speaks both then and now: 'To God, do not listen,
Rather, according to the thoughts of your mind, live only!'

Thus speaks the devil from time immemorial who detested the light,
Thus speaking, the disobedient with his noose he fitted.

Christ came, to the people cried out: the obedient He summoned,
To every call, the disobedient did not respond.

The scene of Paradise from Christ until now, repeats itself,
The obedient to Paradise is raised; the disobedient falls.

To his spiritual father, the true monk is obedient,
The father to the Church, the Church to Christ, her Lord.

Obedience, the reliable path toward salvation is,
Of the spiritual necklace; the first light, the first pearl.

Codex Sinaiticus Controversy Resolved

Controversy Over Ancient Greek Bible Resolved in Russia

18 February, 2010
RT

A document which confirms the British Library’s ownership of Codex Sinaiticus, an ancient hand-written copy of the Greek Bible, has been found in the archives of the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

The agreement was signed in 1869 by the archbishop of the St. Catherine Monastery at the foot of Mt. Sinai and a representative of the Russian Empire.

In the document, Sinai archbishop Kallistrat, on behalf of the monastery confirms that the manuscripts of the Old and the New Testament from the monastic library were officially handed over to the Russian Emperor. The monastery was paid 9,000 roubles for the scripture.

In 1933, Stalin sold the Bible, written in the 4th century in uncial letters, to the library of the British Museum for £100,000. A month after the transfer to London, the St. Catherine Monastery declared that it is the only rightful owner of the manuscript which, according to the statement, was taken from their library by deceit.

Recently, the monks have stopped pursuing ownership of the scripture, but still continue “to mourn its loss.” Now that the transfer of Codex Sinaiticus from the monastery to the Russian Empire has been officially proved legitimate, the rights of the British Library for possessing the ancient Bible are indisputable.

The document confirming the purchase of Codex Sinaiticus by the Russian Empire was allegedly rediscovered by an employee of the Russian National Library, who had been researching the story of the manuscript and had access to the Foreign Ministry’s archives.

Wife of Televangelist Benny Hinn Files for Divorce

February 18, 2010
Los Angeles Times

The wife of faith healer and televangelist Benny Hinn has filed for divorce in Orange County Superior Court.

Suzanne Hinn filed her divorce papers Feb. 1, according to the court website. Her attorney, Sorrell Trope, could not be reached for comment Thursday afternoon.

The couple married in 1979 and have three daughters and a son, according to a biography on posted on the website for Benny Hinn Ministries.

The silver-haired Hinn is one of the world's most financially successful faith healers.

He lives in a multimillon-dollar home near Salt Creek Beach Park in Dana Point. And he has flown around the world in a leased Gulfstream jet to lead his "Miracle Crusades," during which tens of thousands of followers have packed stadiums and auditoriums to hear Hinn preach about the Gospel and God's healing powers.

Hinn has been a pastor for more than 30 years but remains committed to "winning the lost at any cost," his website says.

Hinn's ministries are headquartered in Grapevine, Texas, and operates a television studio in Aliso Viejo.

Dumped But Dispassionate

A humorous article from The Onion Dome...

Single Orthodox Men Find Help in Dumped But Dispassionate

February, 2010

TROUGHWOOD, New York -- St. Vladyka's Press has released a new book, Dumped But Dispassionate: Orthodox Men Recovering From Rejection, a spiritual advice book on how to recover from the loss of being told to take a hike by lovely Orthodox women. The book encourages men to have unwavering faith in God, try to learn from the experience, and resist the urge to shout "IS OUTRAGE! I WANT TO BE ENGAGED!"

The book includes dumping diaries, in which men relate how, exactly, their sweeties gave them the boot. Here are some of the things they said:

"I'd rather be a virgin martyr than marry you."

"You and I together make as much sense as a Lenten cheesecake."

"Our relationship has me so depressed I'm inhaling incense."

"You said that you share my love of Orthodox music, but all you can sing is ninth tone."

"Go to the outer darkness where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth!"

"Send me postcards from Athos."

"If you don't leave me alone, I'll make you like Origen. I've got an oyster shell and I'm not afraid to use it!"

"The way you look at me makes me want a full-body headscarf."

"I kissed you on February 14th because it was Forgiveness Sunday, not because I'm your Valentine. Get over it!"

"The lives of saints tell of Fools for Christ, but you're just a Fool for Everything."

"You'd be cute in a klobuk."

"I do love you, but it's just agape now."

Five Rare Icons Stolen in 1978 Return to Greece

Five Rare Byzantine Fresco-Icons Stolen in 1978 Return to Greece

02/19/2010
ana-mpa.gr

Five rare Byzantine hagiography frescoes stolen in 1978 from the Palaiopanagia Church in Steni, Evia, returned to Greece from Basle, Switzerland at dawn Thursday.

The priceless fresco-icons, dating from the 13th and 16th centuries, stolen by Greek antiquities smugglers from the church in August 1978 and illegally sent out of the country were traced by the Greek authorities (Athens Security Police Antiquities Smuggling unit) in 2006 to a well-known Italian antiquities dealer, at a gallery he ran jointly with his German wife in Basle.

The Greek judicial authorities launched legal procedures for the return of the precious icons, on behalf of the Greek state, which lasted more than two years, instituting charges against the Italian antiquities dealer and all others involved, and sought the judicial assistance of the Swiss authorities for confiscation of the stolen icons. The Basle prosecutor's office in December 2009 issued a final judgement ordering the unconditional return of the frescoes to Greece.

The frescoes depict Saints Ermolaos, Nikitas, Makarios of Egypt and Nestor, and are unique examples of the school of painting prevalent in the 13th and 16th centuries on mainland Greece.

Palaiopanagia is a 12th century cross-shape roofed Byzantine church renowned for its exceptional art hagiographies that are distinguished for their precision of proportions and colors.

The five stolen frescoes are a point of reference in international and Greek studies, outstanding among which is a 1971 study co-authored by the present Archbishop of Athens and All Greece, Ieronymos titled "Medieval Monuments of Evia", which has been awarded by the Academy of Athens.

The study, in fact, was a key factor in definitively identifying the frescoes and positively establishing before the Swiss authorities that the five icons are protected Greek cultural monuments.

A Challenge to Anti-Dialogue 'Fanatics'

Ecumenical Patriarch Challenges Anti-Dialogue 'Fanatics'

February 19, 2010
Ekklesia

Indifference in regard to Christian unity is not an option for the disciples of Jesus, the Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew has stated in an encyclical issued on the occasion of the Sunday of Orthodoxy.

"It is not possible for the Lord to agonise over the unity of His disciples and for us to remain indifferent about the unity of all Christians," Bartholomew wrote in the encyclical. The Sunday of Orthodoxy is commemorated this year on 21 February 2010.

The encyclical refutes "fanatical" challenges brought against theological dialogues among different Orthodox churches and against ecumenical contacts with the wider community of Christians by "certain circles that exclusively claim for themselves the title of zealot and defender of Orthodoxy."

"They speak condescendingly of every effort for reconciliation among divided Christians and restoration of their unity as purportedly being 'the pan-heresy of ecumenism' without providing the slightest evidence that, in its contacts with non-Orthodox, the Orthodox Church has abandoned or denied the doctrines of the Ecumenical Councils and of the Church Fathers," Bartholomew criticises.

"The truth does not fear dialogue, because truth has never been endangered by dialogue," the encyclical letter states. "When in our day all people strive to resolve their differences through dialogue, Orthodoxy cannot proceed with intolerance and extremism."

"I am very grateful to the Ecumenical Patriarch for his strong commitment to dialogue and the unity of the church, despite the many pressures from fundamentalist circles among Orthodox believers" said the Rev Dr Olav Fykse Tveit, General Secretary of the World Council of Churches, (WCC) in response to the encyclical on 18 February.

"This encyclical," Tveit said, "reminds me of another famous text: the 1920 encyclical letter in which the Ecumenical Patriarch proposed the foundation of a fellowship of churches, providing a major impulse for the formation of the WCC."

The Feast of Orthodoxy is celebrated on the first Sunday of Lent in the Eastern Orthodox tradition. Originally commemorating the defeat of iconoclasm in the 9th century, the Sunday of Orthodoxy has gradually come to be understood in a more general sense as a feast in honour of the true faith.

The full text of the Patriarch's address is here: http://www.patriarchate.org/news/releases/orthodox-sun-2010

Defense of Bishop Artemije of Kosovo

Statement by James George Jatras Regarding Allegations of Misuse of Funds to Support Lobbying in the United States on Behalf of Serbs in Kosovo and Metohija

February 18, 2010
Washington

In connection with the suspension of His Grace, Bishop ARTEMIJE, from supervision of his Eparchy, allegations have been made to the effect that funds allocated for other purposes (variously reported as earmarked for humanitarian relief or for repair of churches) instead were used to pay for lobbying service by two firms with which I have been associated, Venable and Squire Sanders. To the best of my knowledge, this was first raised in Blic yesterday. Later that same day, an item appeared in a website purporting to be that of the Diocese of Ras and Prizren and Kosovo and Metohija, denouncing me for beginning circulation of an open appeal in defense of Vladika Artemije, which started yesterday.

I will address the accusation of the alleged misuse of funds in due course, below. But first it needs to be made clear what is going on here: that a concerted effort is being made to destroy the man who, more than anyone else, has become the symbol of Serbia's resistance to amputation and annihilation of Serbia's most important spiritual and national patrimony. Can anyone doubt that should it succeed what would be the consequence for the Serbs of Kosovo and Metohija and for the whole Serbian nation? Even if there are legitimate questions to be asked about administrative matters in the Diocese, everyone can see the methods being used to obliterate Vladika Artemije's public witness and to terrorize and intimidate his supporters. Who benefits from that?

This continues at:

http://benkovackoguvno.yuku.com/reply/59693/t/SPC-removes-Bishop-Artemije-from-power.html#reply-59693

Ethnic Cleansing - destruction of the church @ Yahoo! Video

Religion Among the Millennials

Faith Of Our Fathers? Survey Says Not So Much

Tom Henderson
Feb 18th 2010
Parent Dish

Young Americans are less religious than their parents, a new study shows.

"Faith of our fathers, holy faith, we shall be true to thee 'til death."

Maybe so. Maybe no. The old hymn might not ring true anymore.

A study released Wednesday by the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life concludes that young Americans are significantly less religious than their fathers, mothers and grandparents.

Pew researchers interviewed more than 35,000 Americans about their religious views.
They found one in four "millennials" (that is, people born after 1980 who came of age around the millennium) characterize themselves as atheist, agnostic or nothing in particular. Fewer than one in five members of Generation X (born between 1965 and 1980) expressed similar religious doubts when they were in their early 20s.

Only 13 percent of baby boomers (born between 1946 and 1964) were unaffiliated with a religious tradition when they were young adults, according to the survey and comparison with past data.

None of this means the younger generation doesn't have a prayer.

In fact, 45 percent of the millennials surveyed say they pray daily -- about the same percentage as generations past. They also believe in an afterlife and concepts such as heaven, hell and miracles at roughly the same percentages.

"While growing numbers of people are unaffiliated, it's not necessarily a sign that they're committed secularists," Greg Smith, a senior researcher at the Pew Forum, tells CNN. "We're seeing among young people that there are ways of practicing faith and being religious outside" of church.

Roughly two in three millennials surveyed say they believe in God with absolute certainty, similar to the number of Gen Xers who reported such certainty about God a decade ago.

People tend to get more religious as they get older, Pew researchers tell CNN. A third of baby boomers attend church at least once a week these days. Only a quarter of them did in the 1970s, according to Pew.

The Rev. J. Hill Jr. of New York's Riverside Church admits to CNN that church can be a hard sell sometimes for young folk. But he tells the news network he gets a big response when he rallies young people to help Hurricane Katrina victims in Louisiana.

"Church is difficult because young people today want to engage actively," Hill tells CNN. "They just want to experience God."

Health Benefits of Fasting Seen in Dolphins

[Be sure to check out these amazing pictures of dolphins in South Africa as well. - J.S.]

Dolphins Have Diabetes Off Switch

By Victoria Gill
Science reporter, BBC News
February 19, 2010

A study in dolphins has revealed genetic clues that could help medical researchers to treat type 2 diabetes.

Scientists from the US National Marine Mammal Foundation said that bottlenose dolphins are resistant to insulin - just like people with diabetes.

But in dolphins, they say, this resistance is switched on and off.

The researchers presented the findings at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) in San Diego.

They hope to collaborate with diabetes researchers to see if they can find and possibly even control an equivalent human "off switch".

The team, based in San Diego, took blood samples from trained dolphins that "snack" continuously during the day and fast overnight.

"The overnight changes in their blood chemistry match the changes in diabetic humans," explained Stephanie Venn-Watson, director of veterinary medicine at the foundation.

This means that insulin - the hormone that reduces the level of glucose in the blood - has no effect on the dolphins when they fast.

Big brains

In the morning, when they have their breakfast, they simply switch back into a non-fasting state, said Dr Venn-Watson. In diabetic people, chronic insulin resistance means having to carefully control blood glucose, usually with a diet low in sugar, to avoid a variety of medical complications.

But in dolphins, the resistance appears to be advantageous. Dr Venn-Watson explained that the mammals may have evolved this fasting-feeding switch to cope with a high-protein, low-carbohydrate diet of fish.

"Bottlenose dolphins have large brains that need sugar," Dr Venn-Watson explained. Since their diet is very low in sugar, "it works to their advantage to have a condition that keeps blood sugar in the body… to keep the brain well fed".

But other marine mammals, such as seals, do not have this switch, and Dr Venn-Watson thinks that the "big brain factor" could be what connects human and dolphin blood chemistry.

"We're really looking at two species that have big brains with high demands for blood glucose," she said.

"And we have found changes in dolphins that suggest that [this insulin resistance] could get pushed into a disease state. "If we started feeding dolphins Twinkies, they would have diabetes."

Genetic link

Since both the human genome and the dolphin genome have been sequenced, Dr Venn-Watson hopes to work with medical researchers to turn the discovery in dolphins into an eventual treatment for humans.

"There is no desire to make a dolphin a lab animal," she said. "But the genome has been mapped - so we can compare those genes with human genes."

Scientists at the Salk Institute in San Diego have already discovered a "fasting gene" that is abnormally turned on in people with diabetes, "so maybe this is a smoking gun for a key point to control human diabetes", Dr Venn-Watson said.

If scientists can find out what switches the fasting gene on and off in dolphins, they may be able to do the same thing in people.

Lori Schwacke, a scientist from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) in Charleston, South Carolina, said that the work demonstrated that there are interesting similarities between dolphins and humans.

Dr Schwacke, who is studying the effect of pollution on dolphins along the coast of the US state of Georgia, is also interested in the links between dolphin and human health.

"There are several interesting diseases that you only see in humans and dolphins," she told BBC News. In this case, Dr Venn-Watson said, "the fundamental difference is that dolphins can switch it off and humans can't".

Sexual Reorientation Therapy: An Orthodox Perspective

by Clark Carlton

Abstract
This article evaluates the phenomenon of sexual reorientation therapy from the standpoint of Orthodox Christian theology. It is argued that homosexual desire is the product of the fall of mankind and cannot be considered “normal.” At the same time, however, reorientation therapies, whether secular or Christian, are inherently reductionistic and fail to address the underlying spiritual pathologies involved in homosexual desire (or any other deep-seated passion). The purpose of therapeia in the Orthodox Church is the psycho-somatic transfiguration of the whole person into the image of Christ, not merely the cessation of homosexual activity or the “reidentification” of one's “lifestyle.”

I. INTRODUCTION

We are, so social conservatives tell us, in the midst of a “culture war,” and there is no public issue that sends more rhetorical lead flying than homosexuality. The year 2004 is a long way from the 1950s, with Ward and June Cleaver leading a traditional “nuclear family.” Much to the chagrin of Pat Buchanan and Cal Thomas, things that were once spoken of in hushed tones—if at all—are now public issues. Homosexuals are no longer willing to hide their identity and what is to them a basic fact of their lives; and social conservatives, both Christian and secular, can no longer pretend that homosexuals do not exist at every level of society. Americans have entered the twenty-first century pondering questions that would have been unimaginable to Ward and June: Should homosexuals be allowed to marry? Should they be allowed to serve openly in the armed forces, or even in the Boy Scouts? Should civil rights legislation be expanded to include “sexual orientation”? Or—and this is potentially the most explosive question of all—should homosexuals be offered the opportunity to change their orientation, to go “straight”?

Inasmuch as most of these questions are public policy issues that are to be decided either by the body politic or the courts, the historic position of the Christian Church on homosexuality is of little consequence for the general public. Regardless of the Church's view of the morality of homosexual acts, in a constitutional democracy such as ours, persons who identify themselves as homosexuals1 cannot be denied the basic civil rights guaranteed to all citizens. The question of reorientation therapy,2 however, is not only one that comes within the Church's purview; it is one that demands a response from the Church. This issue involves the determination of “normality” and the role of “therapy” in our modern culture.

I know of no one who suggests that homosexuals be forced into therapy against their will. All the literature that I have read explicitly states that desire for change is the crucial element in the success of reorientation therapy—so the question of the ethics of such therapy must turn on the propriety of the enterprise in and of itself. The dominant position of the secular therapeutic community is that such therapy is unethical because 1) it does not work, and 2) it may actually harm the patient. There is more to this approach, however. In its position statement on the issue, the American Psychiatric Association (APA) stated:

"Therefore, the American Psychiatric Association opposes any psychiatric treatment, such as “reparative” or “conversion” therapy which is based upon the assumption that homosexuality per se is a mental disorder or based upon thea priori assumption that the patient should change his/her homosexual orientation."3

A priori assumptions work both ways, however. This rejection of “conversion” therapy is clearly based on the a priori assumption that change is not possible, that homosexual orientation is in some sense “normal” for some people. In contrast to this presupposition, the position of the Orthodox Church in regard to homosexual activity is that homoerotic desire is the result of the fall of man and that homosexual activity is a sin.

Thus, Orthodoxy approaches the question from a position that is diametrically opposed to that of the secular therapeutic community. One might expect, therefore, a positive evaluation of reorientation therapies from an Orthodox perspective. This, however, is not the case. While the Orthodox would certainly agree with advocates of such therapy that homosexual desire is not natural and is curable—to deny this would be tantamount to denying the power of God—the nature of reorientation therapies is in many respects at variance with the Orthodox understanding of therapy. In short, in spite of whatever religious motivations and trappings that may be added to popular reorientation therapies, they remain fundamentally secular enterprises. From an Orthodox perspective, this, in and of itself, is enough to guarantee that genuine healing does not take place. In what follows I shall endeavor to explain this.

II. THE ORTHODOX UNDERSTANDING OF HOMOSEXUALITY

To understand the Orthodox Christian approach to the question of homosexuality, we must turn to the first chapter of Romans. To be sure, there are many passages in the Scriptures in which homosexual activity of one sort or another is condemned; yet these passages fall short of providing a sound theological basis for addressing the issue. For one thing, there is no biblical word for “homosexual,” and the words translated as “homosexual” in some modern translations are problematic and open to varying interpretations. In the Old Testament (OT), homosexual acts are clearly and unambiguously condemned as “an abomination.” However, lots of things are condemned in the OT as an abomination, including falsifying weights and measures and (heterosexual) adultery. One cannot help but feel some sympathy with homosexuals who argue that the Christian use of the OT is highly selective. At any rate, no real theological reason is given in these passages; that homosexual acts are a sin is simply presented as a fact.

In Romans 1, however, St. Paul provides precisely a theological analysis of the phenomenon of homosexuality. Indeed, it would not be an overstatement to say that the two thousand year history of the Christian proscription against homosexual acts stands or falls with Romans 1. Of course, this chapter is not about homosexuality per se; it is about the fall of man. Whatever else one may wish to say about the subject, if one is to approach it from within a genuinely Christian standpoint, homosexuality must be placed within the context of the fall of man and its aftermath.

"For the invisible things of Him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: Because that, when they knew God, they glorified Him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things. Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen. For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet." (Romans 1:20-27)

This passage is most often interpreted from the standpoint of natural law theory. Homosexuality, according to this approach, is sinful because it is unnatural. Interestingly, contemporary homosexual apologists have turned this argument on its head. What St. Paul is condemning here, so the new theory goes, is someone who is naturally heterosexual performing homosexual acts. To the person who has a genuine homosexual orientation, however, homosexual desire and acts are perfectly natural. Therefore what St. Paul is condemning is not homosexuality per se, but those who act contrary to their own sexual nature.

Admittedly, this new twist on Romans 1 shows imagination. Indeed, were this passage really about natural law, this new interpretation would have to be given some credence. However, St. Paul's point in this chapter is not about natural law, but about the nature of the fall of man. From an Orthodox interpretation of this passage, three things become clear: First, homosexual desire is a result of the fall. Second, in a very real sense, homosexual desire is an image or icon of the fall itself. Third, homosexual desire is a passion, which can only be overcome through genuinely Christian—that is to say churchly—therapy.

Throughout both testaments the disexuality of human nature is presented typologically. That is, the difference between male and female is presented as a type of man's relationship with God. The male—the husband—is the type of God or Christ, while the female—the wife—is the type of humanity, Israel, or the Church. In Ephesians, St. Paul describes Christian marriage and then says that it is a great mystery, but he goes on to say that he is talking of the mystery of Christ and the Church. In Romans 1, St. Paul presents homosexual desire as the type of the fall itself; it is the type of creation's attempt at self-deification.4 Thus, homosexual desire is not only a product of the fall, the desire for “another of the same kind” instead of “another of a different kind” is an image of the very nature of the fall.5

III. THE ORTHODOX UNDERSTANDING OF THE PASSIONS

It is often argued that the writers of the Scriptures and the Fathers of the Church considered homosexual acts to be simply a choice, much in the same way that one chooses whether or not to cheat on one's spouse. While there is a good deal of truth to this—certainly neither St. Paul nor St. John Chrysostom knew anything of “homosexuality” as it is conceived in modern terms—we should not be too quick to dismiss the biblical and patristic injunctions against homosexuality as simply being the fruits of an unenlightened age. In Romans 1, St. Paul refers explicitly to homosexual desire, not merely homosexual acts. The point is that homosexuality is a lust; that is, a perversion of man's natural sexual energies. In other words, it is a passion.

For the most part, the Church Fathers adopted a three-part division of the soul common among Greek philosophers. In Book IV of The Republic, Plato speaks of the soul as divided into the rational, appetitive, and excitable parts.6 In the normally functioning soul, the rational aspect seeks the good and leads man toward it. Reason keeps the appetite under control, with the aid of the excitable power. For example, a married man notices a beautiful woman and feels the pangs of lust. He immediately reproaches—gets angry—with himself and reminds himself that he is married and that adultery would jeopardize his marriage. Thus rebuked, he fends off the lustful thoughts, and justice is established within his soul.

In a diseased or unjust soul, however, the appetites overrule reason and man lives not for the sake of the good, but for the sake of the gratification of desires. To use a modern example, consider someone who is addicted to cigarettes. The person surely knows by now that smoking is bad for the body. It has been clinically connected with emphysema, heart disease and cancer. The smoker knows smoking is bad, but continues to do it because he or she is in the control of the desire for nicotine. The appetites have charge of the person's life. When the appetite cannot be satiated—think of a smoker forced to endure an eight-hour smoke-free flight—he or she becomes irritable. Instead of siding with the reasoning aspect of the soul, the excitable faculty is employed by the appetites. This is why smokers, alcoholics, and drug addicts are willing to go to extraordinary means to satisfy their craving. The same aspect of the soul that gives courage to the hero in battle gives energy and determination to the soul enslaved to the appetites.

The Fathers generally adopted this Platonic schema, but went much further than Plato in elucidating how the soul works—developing a true psyche-ology. The passions, according to Orthodox tradition, are natural faculties and energies of the soul and body that have been corrupted, deformed, and diverted from their original—natural—purpose. This means that for the Orthodox, the healing of the passions involves not the eradication of the passions but their transformation—their transfiguration.7

Just as there are physical energies and faculties and spiritual energies and faculties in man, so there are passions of both the body and soul. Furthermore, the Fathers speak of both voluntary and involuntary passions. In other words, there are some passions that are so ingrained within us they are beyond our conscious decision-making power. This is a very important point for our present discussion.

Homosexual desire must be classed among the involuntary passions. It is commonplace among conservative Christians to treat homosexuality as if it were simply a matter of choice. Yet anyone who actually knows homosexual persons, and certainly anyone who has counseled them, knows this is not the case. One does not wake up one morning and suddenly “decide” to be attracted to persons of the same gender. However, to say that homosexual desire is an involuntary passion is in no way to diminish the fact that it is a passion—a corruption of man's natural sexual energies.

It is widely accepted in scientific circles that there may be a biological (genetic) predisposition in some people toward alcoholism or obesity. This does not change the fact, however, that drunkenness and gluttony are passions. Even if a genetic basis could be found for homosexuality, one could not then argue that homosexual desire is “normal” any more than one could argue that being an alcoholic or seriously obese is “normal.”

While the Orthodox Church has never accepted the idea of original sin prevalent in Western Christianity,8 Orthodoxy certainly realizes that we are born into a fallen world—a world that does not function as it was originally intended. Although we often speak of “fallen nature,” this term needs further refinement. According to St. Maximus the Confessor, it is not the principle (logos) of nature that is fallen, but rather nature's mode (tropos) of existence.9 God's creation is entirely good and remains so even after the fall of mankind. There is no place for the Calvinistic doctrine of total depravity in Orthodox theology. It is the way nature now operates that is affected by the fall.

The tragedy of man's predicament—and this has direct bearing on the topic of homosexual desire—is that we are so used to this fallen manner of existence that we take it for granted. The natural man, or the “fleshly man” as St. Paul would have it, considers his fallen mode of existence to be normal. Thus what we consider to be “natural” is from a biblical perspective unnatural or sub-natural, and what we consider to be “supernatural” is, in fact, the natural or normative state of existence. The homosexual feels that his desires are natural because that is all he has ever known, and no amount of “natural law theory” will convince him otherwise.

It is significant that there is no biblical word for “homosexual.” Indeed, there is no such word in either Latin or Greek; it is of modern origin. From this bit of linguistic archeology, we are able to draw a theological conclusion: for the writers of the Scriptures and for the Church Fathers, there is no “ontology” to homosexuality. This view is normative for the Christian Church. To be sure, there are persons who have a homoerotic orientation; this orientation may be exclusive and it may very well have some basis in genetics. But, from a genuinely biblical perspective, there is no such thing as “a homosexual.” For a man to describe himself as “gay” (or a woman as a “lesbian”) is to grant ontology to his desires and define himself according to his passions.

This self-identification is, of course, at the heart of the contemporary gay movement. This is precisely the one point where the Christian Church cannot deviate from Her historical stand without changing Her entire theology. For the Church to accept someone as “gay” would be to accept the fallen state of man as the natural state. The gay anthem, “I am what I am,” from the musical La Cage aux Folles, is instructive here. What a person is is a matter of biology and genetics; it is an objectification of human life based on the givenness of (fallen) nature. Who a person is—and this is what concerns the Orthodox theologian—is the product of man's freedom; it is the subjective realization of what it means to have been created in the image of God.

Like the inhabitants of Plato's cave, however, we are unaware of our true nature. We take the shadows for reality and define ourselves according to our passions. It is only when we encounter someone who is free of the passions, someone who lives life according to true nature, that we begin to realize our true situation. This realization, however, is at first traumatic. We refuse to believe it.10 A person truly free of the passions seems to us to be inhuman, a creature from another world. The world could not deal with Christ—the first authentically human person—and it has not dealt much better with His Saints. Yet, Saints there are, even today. The Saints are those who have been healed of the passions and who live life according to nature—what we mistakenly consider supernatural existence. They are living revelations of God, living revelations of what human life is supposed to be.

IV. ORTHODOX THEOLOGY AS THERAPY

According to the Greek bishop Hierotheos Vlachos, the Orthodox Church is a spiritual hospital, and its purpose is the healing of the human soul.11 Orthodoxy is a therapeutic science designed to heal the passions and lead man to his natural state in communion with God. The Orthodox Church honors the Saints because they are the living proof (martyrs—witnesses) that the therapy works, that it is possible for man to be healed.

Given this Orthodox insistence that Christianity is first and foremost a therapeutic science, one might reasonably expect a positive evaluation of Christian reorientation therapies. Sadly, however, this is not the case. While there are obvious parallels, the similarities between the Orthodox notion of therapy and that which is practiced within the Protestant world are superficial. To understand this, we must first take a closer look at the Orthodox understanding of therapy and cure and then examine current reorientation therapies in light of the Orthodox standard.

To understand the Orthodox notion of therapy, one must understand that for the Orthodox, sin is not God's problem, but man's. This may seem axiomatic, but in reality it is not. Since at least the time of Anselm's Cur deus homo, Western Christianity has been saddled with the notion that man's sin somehow affects God—it insults His infinite honor and calls forth His wrath. Such anthropomorphic notions are unacceptable to Orthodox theology, however, because they violate the first principle of theology, namely that there is no analogy of being between God and man. God is impassible and unchangeable. He has no pride to wound. Sin, therefore, does not affect God's ability to relate to man (as if God were an upper caste Hindu prevented from coming into contact with an Untouchable); it affects man's ability to relate to God.

In the Scriptures we are told that no one has ever seen God and lived and that God is a consuming fire, yet we are also told that the pure in heart shall see God, that Christians are called to become partakers of the divine nature. The difference is not that God hates sinners and loves the righteous (He loves both without differentiation), but that the sinner is prevented by his sin from experiencing God as light and life. For him, God's presence is fire and judgement. The Saint, on the other hand, is cleansed of his passions and, therefore, open to God's love. For him, God's presence is light and life. Metropolitan Hierotheos describes what the Orthodox mean by the cure of the soul:

"We are not struggling simply to become good people, adjusted to society. The aim of therapeutic treatment is not to make people sociable and to be an anthropocentric exercise, but it is to guide them to communion with God, and for this vision of God not to be a fire that will consume them but a light which will illuminate them." (1994, p. 270)12

One must understand that the passions are not merely bad habits, and the cure of the soul is not merely a matter of behavior modification. The passions are a spiritual pathology. They are deviations and malfunctions of man's most basic bodily and spiritual faculties. They are so ingrained within us that they appear quite natural. Furthermore, the passions are related to one another in very complex ways. To give but one example, the passion of anger is frequently tied to the passion of lust. For every passion that comes to the surface, manifesting itself in outward behavior, there is probably a complex of related passions at work in the deepest recesses of the soul.

How then are these passions cured and the heart cleansed? A person with cancer would not go to a university or a mall for treatment, but to a hospital, because that is where he or she will find treatment appropriate to the disease. In a hospital there are doctors who have knowledge of the disease and, through experience, have learned the best way to treat it. The hospital also contains the facilities and medicines needed to treat the disease.

According to Metropolitan Hierotheos, the Church is a spiritual hospital. The doctors are the spiritual fathers and mothers (usually, but not exclusively, monks and nuns). Their qualification is not an academic degree, but their experience of having undergone spiritual treatment themselves. They are at varying degrees along the way toward the cure of the soul, and they are able to direct others because of their own experience. The medicines and facilities of the hospital are the Holy Mysteries (sacraments). In Baptism, man is regenerated, is “born from above.” In the Holy Eucharist, man receives, according to the phrase of St. Ignatius of Antioch (1999, p. 151), the “medicine of immortality.” Confession and penance are the spiritual equivalent of surgery. It is in confession that the hidden tumors of the soul are laid bare for treatment. In addition to all of these, the physician will prescribe various therapies, much in the same way that a cardiologist will prescribe cardiac rehabilitation therapy. These therapies are the Church's ascetic disciplines: prayer, fasting, vigil, and obedience.

From the above, it is evident that the cure of the soul requires both the grace of God and the cooperation of the one seeking the cure. As the author of the Makarian Homilies puts it, “We do not reach the final stage of spiritual maturity through divine power and grace alone, without ourselves making every effort; but neither on the other hand do we attain the final measure of freedom and purity as a result of our own diligence and strength alone, apart from any divine assistance.”13 To return to the medical analogy, what good would it do for a doctor to prescribe expensive drugs to a bad cardiac patient, if the patient insists on smoking, continues to eat food with high levels of salt and cholesterol, and refuses to exercise?

I cannot stress enough the importance of ascetical effort. When confronted by obstinate demons whom the Apostles were not able to exercise, Christ exclaimed that such demons can be expelled only through prayer and fasting (cf. Mark 9:29). Of course, it is not beyond the power of God to simply remove passions or inordinate desires from us, but almost two thousand years of Christian history teaches that this is not the usual modus operandi. Indeed the ascetical Fathers repeatedly say that there is great virtue in the struggle itself.

Furthermore, simply refraining from outward sin is insufficient. In the context of homosexual desire, refraining from committing physical homosexual acts may not be terribly difficult for many homosexuals, but this is not the same thing as healing. For the Orthodox, the purpose of all spiritual effort is true God-likeness, not mere moral improvement. Indeed the passions of the soul are more insidious and dangerous than those of the body. Even if one has been able to manage one's bodily passions, that does not necessarily mean one has conquered all passions. Nor, indeed, does ascetical effort guarantee sanctification if there is no accompanying union with God. Ilias the Presbyter (1986, p. 55) writes:

"Bodily passions are like wild animals, while passions of the soul are like birds. The man engaged in ascetic practice can keep the animals out of the noetic vineyard; but unless he enters into a state of spiritual contemplation, he cannot keep the birds away, however much he strives to guard himself inwardly. The man engaged in ascetic practice cannot rise above ethical propriety, unless he goes beyond the natural law—as Abraham went forth from his own land—and beyond his own limited state of development—as Abraham left his kinsmen (cf. Gen. 12:1). In this way, as a mark of God's approval, he will be liberated from the all-embracing hold of pleasure; for it is this veil of pleasure, wrapped around us from our birth, that prevents us from receiving complete freedom."

The goal of Orthodox therapy, therefore, is dispassion, which opens the soul to the possibility of communion with God. As Bishop Hierotheos is at great pains to point out, however, this is not the same as the stoic concept of dispassion. The goal here is not an insensate state of apathy, but rather the redirection of man's natural energies (Hierotheos, 1994, p. 296). To put it another way, the goal is transformation rather than eradication. Bishop Hierotheos goes on to state that there are different levels of dispassion:

"St. Maximus sets out four degrees of dispassion. The first type of dispassion is observed in beginners and is “complete abstention from the actual committing of sin.” In this stage the man does not commit the acts outwardly. The second dispassion, which occurs in the virtuous, is the complete rejection in the mind of all assent to evil thoughts. The third dispassion, which is complete quiescence of passionate desire, is found in the deified, and the fourth is the complete purging even of passion-free images, in those who are perfect. It seems from this passage that according to the degree of a man's purity, the corresponding dispassion is manifested." (1994, pp. 299-300)

There is no way to adequately explain Orthodox ascetical theology in a few paragraphs. Allow me to conclude this section, however, with a brief summary that will at least provide some background for the critique of reorientation therapy that follows. (1) The goal of human life is union with God. This is conceived not in terms of moral imitation, but of genuine God-likeness (theosis, in Greek): to become by grace what God is by nature. (2) Sin is the barrier between God and man not because it offends God, but because it cripples man's ability to relate to God. (3) With the fall of man, sin becomes ingrained in man like a second nature. Sin is not merely the result of bad choices, but is rooted in the passions, which are the malfunctioning of man's natural capacities. (4) Salvation is not access to a cosmic theme park (the popular view of heaven), but union with God. Salvation presupposes, therefore, the healing of man's passions and the restoration of his natural faculties. (5) Salvation is, therefore, a process of healing—a therapeutic process. (6) In keeping with the original goal of creation (1, above), this therapeutic process has as its goal not moral improvement, but the total transformation of the passions and, ultimately, the transcendence of man's natural capacities.

V. REORIENTATION THERAPY

With this background let us consider why modern reorientation therapy fails to “measure up,” as it were, to the Orthodox standard of therapy. There are two separate, albeit related, aspects of reorientation therapy that demand our attention. First of all, there is the psychological explanation that lies behind most versions of this therapy. This explanation seems to be shared by both secular and religiously oriented therapists. Second, there are specifically Christian programs that combine such therapy with prayer and support. I shall address each of these aspects in turn.

Not all reorientation therapists agree on the ultimate causes of homosexuality.14 However, it is safe to say that the predominant theory is that homosexuality is a developmental disorder regarding gender identity. For whatever reasons—and therapists who hold this view acknowledge that each case is different—the homosexual fails to identify properly with the same-sex parent, prompting a crisis of his or her own gender identity.15 This may or may not be accompanied by an overbearing relationship with the opposite-sex parent.16 This failure to identify with the same-sex parent occurs in very early childhood.

There are two problems with this theory. The first problem has to do with the determination of causality. As in many cases of concomitant variation, it is not immediately evident which is the cause and which is the effect. Even assuming that the majority of homosexuals have not properly gender identified with the same-sex parent, this may well be the effect of a prior disposition, rather than the cause of later homosexual desire.17 If this were the case, then gender identification therapy would be treating a symptom rather than the underlying cause.

The second problem is the sufficiency of this profile in explaining the origins of homosexuality. Quite simply, not all homosexuals fit the pattern. The stereotype of an effeminate man with an overbearing mother is just that, a stereotype. Furthermore, there are heterosexuals who fit the pattern to a tee. Part of the problem here is that therapists only work with a minute minority of homosexuals, namely those who are unhappy and come to the therapists for treatment. It may well be that a high percentage of those who come for treatment fit the profile, but that does not mean that all or even a high percentage of the homosexual population as a whole fits the pattern.

If I may be permitted to address the problem as a logician for a moment, I would put it this way: Let y stand for the occasion in question; in this case, homosexual orientation. Let A, B, C, D, E, and F stand for subjects, where half of the subjects are homosexual and half are not. Thus, we have Ay, By, Cy, D, E, and F. If we say that x is the determinative factor for occasion y in any given subject, then we should see this pattern: Ayx, Byx, Cyx, and D, E, F. However, the reality is more like this: Ayx, Byx, Cy, D, E, Fx. If this is indeed the case, what conclusions can be drawn? First of all the presence of factor x in a subject that does not exhibit occasiony tells us that whatever the relationship between xand y, x cannot be considered a sufficient cause for y. In other words, the instance of a heterosexual who fails to properly gender identify with the same-sex parent—and surely there are many—negates the possibility that failure to gender identify is the sole cause of homosexuality.18 In the same way, the absence of factor x in subjects with occasion y negates the possibility that x is a necessary cause for y. Thus, the failure to gender identify can be considered neither a necessary nor sufficient cause of homosexuality.

This does not mean that the failure to gender identify is not a possible cause (among many). From what I have read and observed, I would argue that homosexual orientation is a multifaceted phenomenon with perhaps a multitude of possible causes, some psychological and some, perhaps, genetic or biochemical. This is perfectly in keeping with the Orthodox view that the passions are a complicated complex of factors. The problem with reorientation therapy, however, is that it operates with the assumption that a gender-identity deficiency is the primary, if not the only, cause. Reorientation therapy is, therefore, reductionistic.

If Orthodox Christian theology is true, that is, if God has indeed created man in His image, and if, as St. Paul says, the union of man and woman in marriage is somehow related to the mystery of the union of Christ with His Bride, the Church, then homosexual desire must be as much of a spiritual condition as a psychological or physical condition. Thus, to treat homosexuality as merely a psychological developmental disorder is to ignore what may very well be the most important aspect of the issue. The case is somewhat analogous to the modern attitude toward demonic possession. As far as secular—and a great many Christian—therapists are concerned, “possession” is nothing more than some sort of psychotic episode or disorder. That one might actually be possessed by demons is never even considered. Now I am not suggesting that homosexuality is caused by demons, merely trying to point out that gender identity theory, whatever limited merits it may have, is at root a secular and reductionistic explanation for a phenomenon that is to a large degree spiritual and complex.

This brings us to specifically Christian therapeutic programs, such as those promoted by Exodus International. Although Exodus refers homosexuals to a variety of different ministries, there does seem to be a general acceptance of the gender-identity theory. This is evidenced most convincingly by the fact that Exodus and many of its partner ministries insist on the importance of non-sexual, same-sex relationships as a key factor in the healing process. However, these Christian therapies at least recognize the spiritual dimension of the problem.

Perhaps it is because of this realization that Christian reorientation theories are generally less bold in their claims of success than their secular counterparts. While all affirm that healing is possible, it is not so clear that all believe that homosexuals can be converted into fully functional heterosexuals without any remaining homoerotic desires. An Exodus FAQ puts it this way:

"What's your “success rate” in changing gays into straights?

"What you are really asking is whether there is realistic hope for change for men and women who do not want their sexual orientation to be homosexual. And the answer to that is yes!" (www.exodusnorthamerica.org)19

Further on in the same FAQ, it is stated: “Studies suggesting change rates in the range of 30-50% are not unusual, although 'success rates' vary considerably and the measurement of change is problematic.” On the face of it, there should be little problem in measuring success: one is either completely free of same-sex desire or one is not. But things are not that clear-cut and Christian reorientation advocates seem to realize this.20

The fact of the matter is that the number of people who claim to have lost all same-sex desire is very small—certainly less than 30%-50% of those who have undergone therapy. For the secular reorientation therapists, the primary goal seems to be functional heterosexuality, with a corresponding decrease in homosexual desire. This decrease, however, need not be complete for most theorists to claim “success.” Religion-based therapy programs, however, seem to focus more on behavior modification (avoiding sinful acts) and identity (disavowing the “gay” self-image). Indeed, when groups such as Exodus offer deliverance from homosexuality, it appears that they really mean deliverance from the “homosexual lifestyle.” This is not, however, the same thing as deliverance from a true homoerotic orientation.

I would argue that the closest analogy to Christian reorientation therapies would be Alcoholics Anonymous. The alcoholic is not said to be completely “cured,” but is helped to stay “on the wagon” and put his life back in order. Similarly, Christian programs provide the wherewithal for a person to leave the “homosexual lifestyle” and find a new identity as a Christian within a loving community that will reinforce positive behavior and inhibit negative behavior (sin).

No Orthodox Christian would deny that homosexual acts are sinful or that the “homosexual lifestyle” is self-destructive. Furthermore, the question of identity is of paramount importance: a Christian may certainly have homosexual desires, but a Christian cannot identify himself as “gay” and remain Christian. Thus, an Orthodox Christian would be hard pressed to find anything necessarily wrong with such an approach. Certainly it is better to abstain from sin than commit it. However, this is a far cry from dispassion, which is the goal of Orthodox therapy.

My problem with reorientation therapies, whether secular or Christian, is not that they are incapable of producing some change, but that this change is less than the healing of the passions. Where secular therapy is concerned, simply replacing homosexual lust with heterosexual lust is but a shallow victory. Christian therapy, on the other hand, seems much less concerned with producing functioning heterosexuals than with healing emotional wounds and providing the person struggling with homosexuality the support needed to “re-identify” himself as a Christian and to avoid the commission of homosexual acts (in thought as well as deed). To this end, Christian therapy is much to be preferred over secular therapy. Yet, at the risk of beating a dead horse, this is not the same as dispassion and union with God.

Why are the Orthodox so insistent on this point? The answer lies in the Orthodox understanding of salvation outlined above. Sin is not a legal barrier between man and God; it is a disease that renders man incapable of receiving God's love as light and life. The Orthodox do not assume, as do many Evangelical Protestants, that because one had initiated a “relationship with Christ” one is definitively and irrevocably “saved.” On the contrary, salvation is viewed as a process. The transfiguration of the passions is a necessary element of this process. Thus, ethics, for the Orthodox, is a matter of salvation.

The Orthodox Church fully agrees with St. Cyprian's famous statement that there is no salvation outside the Church. This is a confession that the Church—and the Church alone—possesses the therapeutic science necessary to heal man of his passions. Admittedly, this is not a very “ecumenical” sentiment, but it is the belief of the Orthodox Church. When, therefore, an Orthodox Christian is asked to evaluate sexual reorientation therapies from an ethical perspective, he is bound to do so against the backdrop of his own Orthodox understanding of sin and salvation.

There is nothing inherently wrong with either the secular or the Christian reorientation therapies. Surely it is ethical to offer those struggling with homosexual desire the opportunity to find healing. Thus, all of these therapies are fine as far as they go; it is just that from the standpoint of eternity, they do not go very far.

NOTES

1 For reasons that shall become apparent, I am reluctant to use the term “homosexual.” At this point in the discussion, suffice it to say that the more correct term would be “person(s) with a homosexual orientation.” As this phrase is exceedingly cumbersome, however, I am yielding to the modern convention of using the term “homosexual.” My use of “homosexual” as a substantive, however, should not be construed to imply any “ontology” of sexual orientation.

2 Alternate terms are “reparative” and “conversion” therapy.

3 The statement was prepared by the APA Committee on Gay, Lesbian and Bisexual Issues and is dated September 11, 1998. The statement was unanimously adopted by the APA's Board of Trustees during its meeting of December 11/12, 1998.

4 Notice that St. Paul mentions women turning away from the natural desire for men before speaking of male homosexual desire. This is the only place I know of where the writers of Scripture mention lesbianism. This makes perfect sense in this context, however, for in the Pauline typology it is creation—the female—that has turned from its natural desire for God—the male. Paul mentions male homosexual desire almost as an afterthought. This is not to suggest that male homosexuality is less sinful or somehow less of an image of the fall—no doubt St. Paul wanted to avoid that interpretation—but it does explain why St. Paul mentions lesbianism here.

5 There is an inherent narcissism in homosexual desire, but is this not also an image of the fallen state of humanity—human nature obsessed with itself?

6 Plato (1968, 435a-445e). For a detailed discussion of the patristic appropriation of this schema see Staniloae (2002, pp. 96-108).

7 Some Fathers treat the passions as an inherent evil to be eradicated. I would argue, however, that this is a minority viewpoint. See Bishop Kallistos Ware's definition of “passion” in The Philokalia, Vol. 1, pp. 363-364. Boston: Faber and Faber, 1988.

8 Cf. Romanides (2002, esp. pp. 17-39).

9 Cf. Maximus the Confessor, Opscula Theologica et Polemica 20 (PG 91, 236C-D). “Pure and simply human, our will is not in any way impeccable, because of its inclination which is produced sometimes in one sense, sometimes in another. This inclination does not change the nature, but it detours the movement, or to speak in a manner more correctly, it changes the mode. It is clear in fact that the one who does many things contrary to reason never transforms his rational nature into irrational.”

10 In Book VII of The Republic (515c-e), Plato states that the man suddenly released from his fetters and turned toward the reality of life outside the cave would not, at first, believe his eyes.

11 In this section, I have drawn heavily from the writings of Metropolitan Hierotheos. I particularly recommend The Illness and Cure of the Soul in the Orthodox Tradition (1993) and Orthodox Psychotherapy: The Science of the Fathers (1994).

12 Cf. this passage from the Makarian homilies: “What is the will of God that St. Paul urges and invites each of us to attain? It is total cleansing from sin, freedom from the shameful passions, and the acquisition of the highest virtue. In other words, it is the purification and sanctification of the heart that comes about through fully experienced and conscious participation in the perfect and divine Spirit.” (St. Makarios of Egypt, 1986, p. 285).

13 St. Makarios of Egypt (1986, p. 285).

14 Some therapists are agnostic on the subject, tailoring their therapy to the desire of the patient. If the patient is unhappy as a homosexual and wants to change, the therapist will act accordingly. This is done without any prejudice as to the normality of homosexuality.

15 One of the chief proponents of this theory is an Orthodox Christian, Dr. Elizabeth Moberly. Cf. Moberly 1982 & 1983.

16 The overbearing mother and the “momma's boy” is a common stereotype. However, the point of the gender identity theory is that it is not the relationship with the opposite-sex parent that is determinative, but the failure to identify with the same-sex parent.

17 Andrew Sullivan (1995, p.10) makes this point. This is perhaps the most cogently presented argument for the rights of homosexuals.

18 Lest I be accused of sleight of hand here, while a sufficient cause need not be the sole cause, the sole cause must be the sufficient cause.

19 I am normally loath to reference internet sites in formal papers. I am making an exception in this case because this material is not scholarly material available from a library. Those who wish to view Exodus materials may do so at www.exodusnorthamerica.org

20 This same ambiguity as to what constitutes success is to be found in Orthodox writers as well. Fr. John Breck (1998, pp. 116-117) lauds organizations such as Exodus as “invaluable” and affirms the possibility of true change, yet in the very next paragraph he writes, “It is clear, however, that the homosexual condition is often irreversible: the orientation is permanent.”

REFERENCES

1. Breck, Fr. John (1998) The sacred gift of life: Orthodox Christianity and bioethics SVS Press , Crestwood, NY
2. (1999) Epistle to the Ephesians. The Apostolic Fathers: Greek texts and English translations Baker Books , Grand Rapids
3. (1986) Gnomic Anthology IV. The Philokalia 3 , Faber and Faber , Boston
4. (1986) Spiritual Perfection. The Philokalia Faber and Faber , Boston
5. (1857) Opscula Theologica et Polemica; Patrologia Graeca 91 , pp. 9-285.
6. Moberly, E. (1982) Psychogenesis: The early development of gender identity Kegan Paul , London
7. Moberly, E. (1983) Homosexuality: A new Christian ethic James Clarke , Cambridge
8. Plato (1968) The Republic of Plato Basic Books
9. Romanides, J. (2002) The Ancestral Sin Zephyr , G. S. Gabriel, Ridgewood, NJ
10. Staniloae, D. (2002) Orthodox Spirituality St. Tikhon's Seminary Press , South Canaan, PA
11. Sullivan, A. (1995) Virtually normal: An argument about homosexuality Vintage, New York
12. Vlachos, Hierotheos. (1993) The illness and cure of the soul in the Orthodox tradition Birth of the Theotokos Monastery , Levadia, Greece
13. Vlachos, Hierotheos. (1994) Orthodox psychotherapy: The science of the Fathers Birth of the Theotokos Monastery , Levadia, Greece

Christian Bioethics, Volume 10, Issue 2 & 3 January 2004 , pages 137 - 153.

Thursday, February 18, 2010

"Three Hermits" by Leo Tolstoy

AN OLD LEGEND CURRENT IN THE VOLGA DISTRICT (1886)

'And in praying use not vain repetitions, as the Gentiles do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking. Be not therefore like unto them: for your Father knoweth what things ye have need of, before ye ask Him.' - Matt. 6:7-8.

A BISHOP was sailing from Archangel to the Solovétsk Monastery; and on the same vessel were a number of pilgrims on their way to visit the shrines at that place. The voyage was a smooth one. The wind favourable, and the weather fair. The pilgrims lay on deck, eating, or sat in groups talking to one another. The Bishop, too, came on deck, and as he was pacing up and down, he noticed a group of men standing near the prow and listening to a fisherman who was pointing to the sea and telling them something. The Bishop stopped, and looked in the direction in which the man was pointing. He could see nothing however, but the sea glistening in the sunshine. He drew nearer to listen, but when the man saw him, he took off his cap and was silent. The rest of the people also took off their caps, and bowed.

'Do not let me disturb you, friends,' said the Bishop. 'I came to hear what this good man was saying.'

'The fisherman was telling us about the hermits,' replied one, a tradesman, rather bolder than the rest.

'What hermits?' asked the Bishop, going to the side of the vessel and seating himself on a box. 'Tell me about them. I should like to hear. What were you pointing at?'

'Why, that little island you can just see over there,' answered the man, pointing to a spot ahead and a little to the right. 'That is the island where the hermits live for the salvation of their souls.'

'Where is the island?' asked the Bishop. 'I see nothing.'

'There, in the distance, if you will please look along my hand. Do you see that little cloud? Below it and a bit to the left, there is just a faint streak. That is the island.'

The Bishop looked carefully, but his unaccustomed eyes could make out nothing but the water shimmering in the sun.

'I cannot see it,' he said. 'But who are the hermits that live there?'

'They are holy men,' answered the fisherman. 'I had long heard tell of them, but never chanced to see them myself till the year before last.'

And the fisherman related how once, when he was out fishing, he had been stranded at night upon that island, not knowing where he was. In the morning, as he wandered about the island, he came across an earth hut, and met an old man standing near it. Presently two others came out, and after having fed him, and dried his things, they helped him mend his boat.

'And what are they like?' asked the Bishop.

'One is a small man and his back is bent. He wears a priest's cassock and is very old; he must be more than a hundred, I should say. He is so old that the white of his beard is taking a greenish tinge, but he is always smiling, and his face is as bright as an angel's from heaven. The second is taller, but he also is very old. He wears tattered, peasant coat. His beard is broad, and of a yellowish grey colour. He is a strong man. Before I had time to help him, he turned my boat over as if it were only a pail. He too, is kindly and cheerful. The third is tall, and has a beard as white as snow and reaching to his knees. He is stern, with over-hanging eyebrows; and he wears nothing but a mat tied round his waist.'

'And did they speak to you?' asked the Bishop.

'For the most part they did everything in silence and spoke but little even to one another. One of them would just give a glance, and the others would understand him. I asked the tallest whether they had lived there long. He frowned, and muttered something as if he were angry; but the oldest one took his hand and smiled, and then the tall one was quiet. The oldest one only said: "Have mercy upon us," and smiled.'

While the fisherman was talking, the ship had drawn nearer to the island.

'There, now you can see it plainly, if your Grace will please to look,' said the tradesman, pointing with his hand.

The Bishop looked, and now he really saw a dark streak -- which was the island. Having looked at it a while, he left the prow of the vessel, and going to the stern, asked the helmsman:

'What island is that?'

'That one,' replied the man, 'has no name. There are many such in this sea.'

'Is it true that there are hermits who live there for the salvation of their souls?'

'So it is said, your Grace, but I don't know if it's true. Fishermen say they have seen them; but of course they may only be spinning yarns.'

'I should like to land on the island and see these men,' said the Bishop. 'How could I manage it?'

'The ship cannot get close to the island,' replied the helmsman, 'but you might be rowed there in a boat. You had better speak to the captain.'

The captain was sent for and came.

'I should like to see these hermits,' said the Bishop. 'Could I not be rowed ashore?'

The captain tried to dissuade him.

'Of course it could be done,' said he, 'but we should lose much time. And if I might venture to say so to your Grace, the old men are not worth your pains. I have heard say that they are foolish old fellows, who understand nothing, and never speak a word, any more than the fish in the sea.'

'I wish to see them,' said the Bishop, 'and I will pay you for your trouble and loss of time. Please let me have a boat.'

There was no help for it; so the order was given. The sailors trimmed the sails, the steersman put up the helm, and the ship's course was set for the island. A chair was placed at the prow for the Bishop, and he sat there, looking ahead. The passengers all collected at the prow, and gazed at the island. Those who had the sharpest eyes could presently make out the rocks on it, and then a mud hut was seen. At last one man saw the hermits themselves. The captain brought a telescope and, after looking through it, handed it to the Bishop.

'It's right enough. There are three men standing on the shore. There, a little to the right of that big rock.'

The Bishop took the telescope, got it into position, and he saw the three men: a tall one, a shorter one, and one very small and bent, standing on the shore and holding each other by the hand.

The captain turned to the Bishop.

'The vessel can get no nearer in than this, your Grace. If you wish to go ashore, we must ask you to go in the boat, while we anchor here.'

The cable was quickly let out, the anchor cast, and the sails furled. There was a jerk, and the vessel shook. Then a boat having been lowered, the oarsmen jumped in, and the Bishop descended the ladder and took his seat. The men pulled at their oars, and the boat moved rapidly towards the island. When they came within a stone's throw they saw three old men: a tall one with only a mat tied round his waist: a shorter one in a tattered peasant coat, and a very old one bent with age and wearing an old cassock -- all three standing hand in hand.

The oarsmen pulled in to the shore, and held on with the boathook while the Bishop got out.

The old men bowed to him, and he gave them his benediction, at which they bowed still lower. Then the Bishop began to speak to them.

'I have heard,' he said, 'that you, godly men, live here saving your own souls, and praying to our Lord Christ for your fellow men. I, an unworthy servant of Christ, am called, by God's mercy, to keep and teach His flock. I wished to see you, servants of God, and to do what I can to teach you, also.'

The old men looked at each other smiling, but remained silent.

'Tell me,' said the Bishop, 'what you are doing to save your souls, and how you serve God on this island.'

The second hermit sighed, and looked at the oldest, the very ancient one. The latter smiled, and said:

'We do not know how to serve God. We only serve and support ourselves, servant of God.'

'But how do you pray to God?' asked the Bishop.

'We pray in this way,' replied the hermit. 'Three are ye, three are we, have mercy upon us.'

And when the old man said this, all three raised their eyes to heaven, and repeated:

'Three are ye, three are we, have mercy upon us!'

The Bishop smiled.

'You have evidently heard something about the Holy Trinity,' said he. 'But you do not pray aright. You have won my affection, godly men. I see you wish to please the Lord, but you do not know how to serve Him. That is not the way to pray; but listen to me, and I will teach you. I will teach you, not a way of my own, but the way in which God in the Holy Scriptures has commanded all men to pray to Him.'

And the Bishop began explaining to the hermits how God had revealed Himself to men; telling them of God the Father, and God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost.

'God the Son came down on earth,' said he, 'to save men, and this is how He taught us all to pray. Listen and repeat after me: "Our Father."'

And the first old man repeated after him, 'Our Father,' and the second said, 'Our Father,' and the third said, 'Our Father.'

'Which art in heaven,' continued the Bishop.

The first hermit repeated, 'Which art in heaven,' but the second blundered over the words, and the tall hermit could not say them properly. His hair had grown over his mouth so that he could not speak plainly. The very old hermit, having no teeth, also mumbled indistinctly.

The Bishop repeated the words again, and the old men repeated them after him. The Bishop sat down on a stone, and the old men stood before him, watching his mouth, and repeating the words as he uttered them. And all day long the Bishop laboured, saying a word twenty, thirty, a hundred times over, and the old men repeated it after him. They blundered, and he corrected them, and made them begin again.

The Bishop did not leave off till he had taught them the whole of the Lord's prayer so that they could not only repeat it after him, but could say it by themselves. The middle one was the first to know it, and to repeat the whole of it alone. The Bishop made him say it again and again, and at last the others could say it too.

It was getting dark, and the moon was appearing over the water, before the Bishop rose to return to the vessel. When he took leave of the old men, they all bowed down to the ground before him. He raised them, and kissed each of them, telling them to pray as he had taught them. Then he got into the boat and returned to the ship.

And as he sat in the boat and was rowed to the ship he could hear the three voices of the hermits loudly repeating the Lord's prayer. As the boat drew near the vessel their voices could no longer be heard, but they could still be seen in the moonlight, standing as he had left them on the shore, the shortest in the middle, the tallest on the right, the middle one on the left. As soon as the Bishop had reached the vessel and got on board, the anchor was weighed and the sails unfurled. The wind filled them, and the ship sailed away, and the Bishop took a seat in the stern and watched the island they had left. For a time he could still see the hermits, but presently they disappeared from sight, though the island was still visible. At last it too vanished, and only the sea was to be seen, rippling in the moonlight.

The pilgrims lay down to sleep, and all was quiet on deck. The Bishop did not wish to sleep, but sat alone at the stern, gazing at the sea where the island was no longer visible, and thinking of the good old men. He thought how pleased they had been to learn the Lord's prayer; and he thanked God for having sent him to teach and help such godly men.

So the Bishop sat, thinking, and gazing at the sea where the island had disappeared. And the moonlight flickered before his eyes, sparkling, now here, now there, upon the waves. Suddenly he saw something white and shining, on the bright path which the moon cast across the sea. Was it a seagull, or the little gleaming sail of some small boat? The Bishop fixed his eyes on it, wondering.

'It must be a boat sailing after us,' thought he 'but it is overtaking us very rapidly. It was far, far away a minute ago, but now it is much nearer. It cannot be a boat, for I can see no sail; but whatever it may be, it is following us, and catching us up.'

And he could not make out what it was. Not a boat, nor a bird, nor a fish! It was too large for a man, and besides a man could not be out there in the midst of the sea. The Bishop rose, and said to the helmsman:

'Look there, what is that, my friend? What is it?' the Bishop repeated, though he could now see plainly what it was -- the three hermits running upon the water, all gleaming white, their grey beards shining, and approaching the ship as quickly as though it were not morning.

The steersman looked and let go the helm in terror.

'Oh Lord! The hermits are running after us on the water as though it were dry land!'

The passengers hearing him, jumped up, and crowded to the stern. They saw the hermits coming along hand in hand, and the two outer ones beckoning the ship to stop. All three were gliding along upon the water without moving their feet. Before the ship could be stopped, the hermits had reached it, and raising their heads, all three as with one voice, began to say:

'We have forgotten your teaching, servant of God. As long as we kept repeating it we remembered, but when we stopped saying it for a time, a word dropped out, and now it has all gone to pieces. We can remember nothing of it. Teach us again.'

The Bishop crossed himself, and leaning over the ship's side, said:

'Your own prayer will reach the Lord, men of God. It is not for me to teach you. Pray for us sinners.'

And the Bishop bowed low before the old men; and they turned and went back across the sea. And a light shone until daybreak on the spot where they were lost to sight.

MYSTAGOGY

MYSTAGOGY

Support Mystagogy

Blog Archive

Topics

Friday, February 19, 2010

Three Miraculous Athonite Akathist Icons

The Philanthropy of Saint Philothei the Athenian

Woods Apology Clinton-esque

Elton John: 'Jesus was a compassionate, super-intelligent gay man'

"Obedience" by St. Nikolai Velimirovich

Codex Sinaiticus Controversy Resolved

Wife of Televangelist Benny Hinn Files for Divorce

Dumped But Dispassionate

Five Rare Icons Stolen in 1978 Return to Greece

A Challenge to Anti-Dialogue 'Fanatics'

Defense of Bishop Artemije of Kosovo

Religion Among the Millennials

Health Benefits of Fasting Seen in Dolphins

Sexual Reorientation Therapy: An Orthodox Perspective

Thursday, February 18, 2010

"Three Hermits" by Leo Tolstoy

MYSTAGOGY

Support Mystagogy

Blog Archive

Topics

Subscribe To

Friday, February 19, 2010

Thursday, February 18, 2010