Sermon for the Third Wednesday of Great Lent

CATECHESIS 60: On Our Sudden Departure From Here and Teaching About Keeping Safe Watch Over our Senses and our Mind from Unseemly Desires.

By St. Theodore the Studite

Given on Wednesday of the 3rd Week.

Brethren and fathers, in the presence of our holy father and teacher we have no need to discourse; but nevertheless because of our custom let us say just a little. Day by day our life, as you see, is passing and we are getting nearer to death, and we must be removed hence and be joined to our brothers and fathers; so  there is need of much vigilance and attention and preparation of heart. We hear the story of the Flood being read, and the Lord in the Gospels saying: "As in the days of Noah they were eating, drinking, marrying, buying, selling and suddenly the flood came, so too it will be at the coming of the Son of Man" [Cf. Mt. 24:37-39; Lk. 17:26]. And perhaps we wonder in this case how insensibly they were disposed, and were not rather trembling and terrified. Let us be on the watch then lest we find ourselves without realizing it in the same state of which we accuse them. Already it is not the ark which is being got ready, which was being filled up during one hundred years, but every day the tomb is seen filled, into which we are about to crawl. Already each day death is at work [Cf. 2 Cor. 4:12], when each one of our brothers departs. Things here are more fearful than those there; and so we should be on our guard. I don’t say: we shouldn’t eat, drink, or clothe ourselves. I don’t say that; "but whether we eat, or drink, or whatever we do, let us do everything to the glory of God" [1 Cor. 10:31-32], giving no offence to Jews or Greeks or to the Church of God, as the Apostle teaches.

Yes, I exhort, yes, I implore, my brothers, "make my joy complete", as the Apostle again says, "be of the same mind, having the same love, being in full accord and of one mind. Do nothing from selfish ambition or vainglory; but in humility think of others as better than yourselves" [Phil. 2:2-3]. Let us secure our senses, sight, hearing, smell, taste, touch, for through them death enters. Let us bridle our mind to not be carried off to things it should not, not to step into the pitfall of unseemly things, not to picture to ourselves evil images nor to conceive sinful desires, from which we gain no profit or pleasure; on the contrary we are pained and crushed accomplishing nothing useful. There is one repose then and one pleasure, to cleanse the soul and to look towards dispassion. And let us not grow despondent [akedia] when called to repose and the joy of dispassion, but let us hasten and press forward intently with diligence to right every defect; and God is our helper; for the Lord is near those who wait for him. And by living thus may we reach the kingdom of heaven in Christ Jesus our Lord, to whom be glory and might with the Father and the Holy Spirit, now and ever and to the ages of ages. Amen.

Source

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Dr. George Bebis Interviewed About the Greek Archdiocese

The Metropolis' Brought "Fragmentation", says Professor George Bebis

Theodore Kalmoukos
January 10, 2010
Romfea.gr

"The creation of Metropolis' has brought much fragmentation to the Church of America," remarked the professor of Patristic Theology at Holy Cross Theological School, Dr. George Bebis, in an interview with the National Herald, adding that "it is impermissible to not hear the commemoration of the name of Archbishop Demetrios."

Almost ten years after his official retirement, the professor of Patristic Theology of the Theological School in Boston, Dr. George Bebis, not only teaches two courses a year, but he insists on teaching in the Greek language.

He is the only professor who teaches courses in Patristics in Greek, and furthermore receives a minimum nominal tip for one course and the other he teaches totally free. For the past six months he was teaching a class on the Lives and Sayings of the Fathers. Speaking with the National Herald, he said, "Of course I taught it in the Greek language, and occasionally I say and write certain things on the board in English."

Dr. Bebis graduated from the Holy Cross Theological School as well as from Harvard University, and in Athens he received his doctoral degree. With particular satisfaction he mentioned how "this year I didn't see many older aged students, but young students, and that is a good sign. I would like young students to continue coming from Greece. In fact, I have one student in my class from Greece named Konstantinos Vasilakis."

He went on to say, that "it is also good for Greece that students come from there to our School, and it is good for our School and our Church if they stay here and get ordained or take a path towards Theology." Professor George Bebis came to the Theological School in 1950 as a poor orphaned boy from Crete and he succeeded and distinguished himself on his own. To the question on how different and how similar the Theological School is from back then to today, he answered how "it was very much different; we spoke only Greek." He went on to say: "I remember I had a Greek typewriter and I wrote all my academic work in Greek."

When the National Herald pointed out how in half a century we found ourselves where we are today, Professor Bebis agreed, saying, "Yes, unfortunately." He further said: "Last year the Chief Secretary of the Patriarchate, Fr. Elpidophoros Lambrianidis, addressed this problem of opposition to the Greek language, because young students from the Antiochian Archdiocese and many of our own protested that his speech was too Greek. And Fr. Elpidophoros, to his honor, said 'What is this here, is it not a Greek Orthodox Theological School?'"

Speaking of the chanting in the chapel, Dr. Bebis said: "I haven't seen Mr. Ketzetsis (chanter and professor of Ecclesiastical Music) at the School since September. They invite him elsewhere and he goes and chants, and even during Holy Week he is absent even though he should be present to give an example at the chapel." He said: "Of course there is always room for improvement to make things better, but the Greekness is missing; I would like more Greekness. I emphasize that the chapel is the only place where they will learn to chant in Greek, but we gather the converts, the married, etc. instead and they begin to chant in English."

He also made the point how "since the Gospels were written in Greek, and the Fathers were written in Greek, the School is the only center where the future priests will learn Greek. If they don't learn it at the School, where will they learn it?" Furthermore he said: "And I do not emphasize this out of fanaticism or carelessness, but I believe it is the only place where the Greek language should be taught, the tradition of course." He insisted: "The School must remain Greek."

Speaking about Hellenic College, Dr. Bebis revealed: "When Archbishop Demetrios came to the first meeting some professors of the School stood up and asked for the elimination of Hellenic College, and it was the first time I saw Demetrios get angry and say, 'Hellenic College will remain.'" Mr. Bebis believes that "it must remain; we must support Hellenic College and make it a Center of Hellenic Studies." When asked if it was a failure of Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew, who recently visited America, to not visit the Theological School, to do a Memorial at the tomb of Iakovos, he said, "I sent him a gift and a letter in which I asked "are you not going to come to beautiful Boston?'"

To the question if in the end it was wrong for the Archdiocese to be split into Metropolis', Professor Bebis believes that "it is impermissible to not hear the commemoration of the name of Archbishop Demetrios."

He elaborated saying: "The creation of Metropolis' has brought much fragmentation to the Church of America." He explained how "the way the system is today, it is not right because there is only one Archbishop. Furthermore, the Metropolitans are in communion through the Archbishop with the Patriarch, and this is another proof that the chief shepherd is the Archbishop of America." When asked if today's hierarchs are something like helper bishops or Titular Metropolitans, he said: "Obviously, but they don't want this and there was a mess, and Bartholomew said 'ok, ok, I don't want a mess.'" Today the greatest fear of Mr. Bebis is "a split".

[For another interesting read, I recommend you read this piece about how Dr. Bebis and Fr. George Dragas, the two Holy Cross Patristic's professors, were excluded from being a part of the Pappas Patristic Institute and a Jesuit was chosen as it's chairman instead, though it should be an Orthodox Institute. - J.S.]

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

The Unknown Maiden

The Unknown Maiden (Feast Day - March 3)

by St. Nikolai Velimirovich

Coming from a wealthy home in Alexandria, she had a good father who suffered much and came to an evil end, and an evil mother who lived well, died peacefully and was buried with honors. Perplexed as to whether she should live according to the example of her father or her mother, this maiden had a vision which revealed to her the conditions of her mother and her father in the other world. She saw her father in the Kingdom of God and her mother in darkness and in torment. This vision helped the maiden to decide that she would dedicate her whole life to God and, like her father, would adhere to the commandments of God, without considering all the adversities and the misfortunes which she would have to endure. She was faithful to the will of God to the end and, with the help of God, was made worthy of the Kingdom of Heaven where she was reunited with her God-loving father.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Science Behind 'Holier-Than-Thou'

Scientists Break Down the Superiority Complex

By Lee Dye
ABC News
March 2010

Be honest about it. Deep down inside, you really do see yourself as morally superior to the average Joe.

It turns out that you've got a lot of company. Most of us think we are above average in a lot of things, especially when it comes to morality, says David Dunning, professor of psychology at Cornell University.

People see themselves as being fairer, more altruistic, more self-sacrificing, more moral than most others, according to numerous studies, Dunning says.

In short, most of us think we really are "holier than thou," although we may not be willing to admit it. Most of us know we wouldn't do the awful things that set us apart from those ordinary people who stumble along the way — all those folks who are just average.

There's just one problem. Most of us can't be above average. By its definition, average is the mathematical median, so the majority can't be either above or below average.

So if most people see themselves as better than the average person, they have to be making one of two mistakes: Either they think they're a lot better than they really are, or those other folks out there aren't as bad as they seem.

Dunning and a graduate psychology student, Nick Epley, set out to find out which error we are making. Are we really as good as we think we are?

Misjudging Ourselves

In a word, no. That's according to their evidence, published in a recent issue of the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. The two set up a series of studies on the Cornell campus and got very "robust" results, according to Epley, who designed the experiments.

The participants were asked to predict what they and others would do in certain circumstances. In most cases, the participants predicted they would do the right thing a lot more often than their peers.

However, when the participants found themselves confronting those circumstances in the real world, they didn't do nearly as well as they had predicted. But they were right on the mark when it came to predicting what others would do.

So the error appears to be in how we perceive ourselves, not how we see others, the researchers conclude.

For example, each year the Cornell campus has a charity drive, called Daffodil Day, when students sell daffodils to raise money for the American Cancer Society. About a month before the drive, Epley asked about 250 students in a classroom if they would buy a daffodil during the drive.

"Over 80 percent said they would buy a daffodil," Dunning says. But they predicted that only about half of the other students in the room would be generous enough to buy one.

A couple of days after the drive, the researchers returned to the same classroom and asked the students how many had bought a daffodil.

"It turned out that only 43 percent of the people had," Dunning says. "That's close to what people had said about others, but its way off from what they had said about themselves."

In another experiment, conducted prior to the November national election, 84 percent of the participants said they would vote, but they expected only about 67 percent of their peers to vote.

"The actual rate of voting was 68 percent," Dunning says. Again, they had their peers down pat, but overestimated their own sense of civic responsibility.

We Are What We Hear

One can argue over whether voting has anything to do with morality, or whether buying a plastic daffodil is really an expression of personal ethics. Who's to say what's right or wrong?

The definition of morality is highly "idiosyncratic," Dunning says. We tend to see things as moral if they are the kind of things we do. If we give to charity, then giving is a moral obligation. Likewise if we consider ourselves honest, or loyal, or altruistic, or religious.

Our sense of morality, then, becomes an expression of ourselves.

But that doesn't explain why we seem to think we're so much better, so much "holier," than we really are.

Dunning says one reason our egos are inflated is we get a lot of positive feedback from our peers. Even if some people think you're "a jerk," he says, they aren't likely to say that to your face.

Instead, we're often told how neat we are, at least by our friends, so we tend to believe we are doing the right things. We're nice people, after all.

So our moral judgments become a self-fulfilling prophecy. If it's the kind of thing we do, it must be moral, or we wouldn't be doing it.

"We define morality by looking at our own behavior," Epley says.

But does believing that we are moral really have any effect on how we live?

Dunning thinks it probably does.

Living Up to Standards

"Once you say you are a moral, wonderful, generous person, you have to live up to those standards," Dunning says. "So even if you have overestimated yourself, you are constrained" by your self image, he adds.

Living in a world with people like that is preferable to living "in a world where people basically say they are selfish jerks," Dunning says, "because then they would be constrained to act like selfish jerks."

But there is a down side to all this self anointed sense of morality, he adds.

"If people think they are morally superior to others, they are going to be too harsh in judging other people," he says.

"They don't realize that in the same situation, they are going to act the same way."

Lee Dye’s column appears weekly on ABCNEWS.com. A former science writer for the Los Angeles Times, he now lives in Juneau, Alaska.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Moral Dilemmas of Globalization

by Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew

Speech given at the Annual Davos meeting of the World Economic Forum in 1999.

We should first like to express our joy that this meeting of distinguished and dynamic economists, political figures, and other eminent dignitaries has included on the agenda of its discussions the human dimension of globalization of the economy, as well as non-economic values. There is no doubt that when ranking values the human person occupies a place higher than economic activity. Neither is there any doubt that economic progress, which is present when there is growth in economic activity, becomes useful when and only when it serves to enhance the non-economic values that make up human culture. This is the reason that justifies our Modesty’s presence among this luminous gathering of eminent economic activists although we bear no relation to matters of economy.

The advance of humanity towards globalisation is a fact arising primarily out of the private sector, in particular they are the desires of multinational economic giants. This fact finds support in the incredible development of communications. Already the role of states is being constantly downgraded, with few exceptions; whereas the role of the economically powerful is growing in magnitude, even among the larger states.

As the Primate of the Ecumenical Patriarchate and the first bishop of the Orthodox Church throughout the world, we assure you that the Orthodox Church has experienced and cultivated the idea of spiritual ecumenicity. This is a form of globalization that proclaims that bonds of love, brotherhood and cooperation should unite all human beings of every race and language and of all cultures. It is true that the Church invites all to one faith, but it does not make brotherhood, love, and its concern for people contingent upon their joining this faith. Because the Church loves everyone, it also experiences the unity of humankind to its fullest. From this point of view, Christian ecumenicity differs substantially from globalization. The former is based on love for one’s brother and sister and respects the human person whom it also seeks to serve. The latter is primarily motivated by the desire to enlarge the market and to merge different cultures into a new one, in accordance with the convictions of those who are in a position to influence the worldwide public.

Unfortunately, globalization tends to evolve from a means of bringing the peoples of the world together as brothers and sisters, to a means of expanding economic dominance of the financial giants even over peoples to whom access was denied because of national borders and cultural barriers.

It is not our intention or responsibility to suggest ways and means by which this danger can be contained or eliminated. We do, however, have a duty to point out and proclaim that the highest pursuit of humanity is not economic enrichment or economic expansion.

The Gospel saying, “Man shall not live by bread alone” (Matt.4:4), should be more broadly understood. We cannot live by economic development alone, but we must seek the “word that proceeds from the mouth of God” (Matt.4:4), that is, the values and principles that transcend economic concerns. Once we accept these, the economy becomes a servant of humanity, not its master.

We believe that it can be understood by all, independently of religious conviction, that economic development in itself and the globalization that serves it lose their value when they cause privation among the many and an excessive concentration of wealth into the hands of the few. Moreover, evolution toward this direction is not without limitation, because beyond a certain limit the person dealing with financial matters receives a response well known since ancient times: “You can not take from one who has not”.

Solon the legislator declared that Athenian society was not functioning properly because of the excessive indebtedness of the majority of its citizens to the few and had instituted what was known as “seisachtheia”, that is, the writing-off of all debts. Although this seemed at first to be to the disadvantage of the rich, in the end it benefited the entire Athenian community because it allowed its members to act as free, creative and self-motivated citizens and not as each other’s slaves.

Also well-known is the decision of that pioneering American industrialist, the inventor of the assembly line, who raised the wages of his workers to make them capable of purchasing his products. (We are, of course, referring to the automobile manufacturer Henry Ford, who based his ideas on Taylor’s views on the rationalisation of labour.) These examples and many others show that economic progress is morally justifiable and successful only when all the members of the global community participate in it.

This situation sets before us new dimensions of economic morality of a global magnitude. However, although we are speaking of new challenges, we are dealing essentially with an aggravated form of ancient problems. The ancient Athenians excelled “not by bestowing any advantage on the rich, but by the poor sharing equally with the rich” (Euripides, Suppliants 407). When Athens fell into an anarchic democracy controlled by demagogues, its former glory was eclipsed, just as it was and still is in those societies which Aristotle called “oligarchies,” the presupposition of which is the possession of wealth (Politics IV, 8, 1294a).

It is a fact that as soon as respect for the human person is abandoned as an inviolable presupposition of our ethos and the principle of economy, power, and the ability to influence the masses are made into idols and worshipped as such. There arises an insatiable cupidity that inevitably leads the “haves” to increase what they possess, whether it is wealth, or political or military power, or the power to shape ideas or generally the power to influence the whole world.

We ought, however, to preserve all the remaining cultural values that pertain to humanity without, of course, putting up unnecessary barriers to useful economic development. Nevertheless, we also ought to be aware that the globalisation of abilities is only morally justified when accompanied by the global distribution of the benefits that flow from it.

Globalization thus proves to be a new vision for some and a new threat for others; a vision which promises much to a few and very little to many; a vision impressive to some extent in its conception and in its realisation. At the same time, however, it is also frightening to the degree that the dynamic of globalization exceeds the limits acceptable to the moral conscience and accessible to our regulatory rules and mechanisms. What is impressive, for example, is the almost automatic globalization of information, yet, at the same time, the potentiality for intentional misinformation is alarming. What is impressive is the globalization of knowledge and the participation of many in the farthest reaches of the macrocosm and the innermost depths of the microcosm. However, what is also fearful is the threat posed by the possible misuse of this accumulated knowledge.

The visions, the dangers, the threats, the dilemmas rise before us. The achievements of international cooperation in the sectors of economy, commerce, telecommunications and trade in general, to which the phenomenon of globalization is primarily attributed, are wonderful.

What, however, is the true gain for humanity as a whole if the economy, in succumbing to the sickness of elephantiasis, devours the other sectors of culture; namely, thought, the artistic will, and the contemplative side of human life? What is the true gain for humanity if it causes its creative powers to whither and enfeebles the fundamental principles of coexistence and survival, such as justice, reciprocity, solidarity between individuals and peoples, respect for the human person, that truly unshakeable bedrock of our existence and coexistence?

As a representative of the Orthodox Church, we are not opposed to the economic progress that serves humanity, nor are we bigoted or timorous in the presence of other faiths and ideologies. Our desire, however, is to safeguard the possibility for the members of every religious or cultural minority to maintain their distinctiveness and the particularity of their culture. We are in absolute agreement and are prepared to move ahead when Globalization opens doors for the cooperation of peoples.

The Ecumenical Patriarchate and we personally have already frequently invited adherents of divided faiths and ideologies and interests to put aside their differences, and reconcile and work together on a practical level. Globalization, however, as a means of making humanity homogeneous, of influencing the masses and causing a single, unified and unique mode of thought to prevail, will find us opposed. We also regard the use of globalisation exclusively for the enrichment of the few to the detriment of the many as something impermissible and to be avoided. And we invite all, rich and poor, to cooperate for the improvement of the standard of living of all people, for this is also in the interest of the “haves”, more than the one-sided increase in their economic worth is.

May God enlighten us all to be able to understand this truth.

2 February 1999

BARTHOLOMEW of Constantinople

Your fervent supplicant before God

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Victims of Radical Islam: Christianity’s Modern-Day Martyrs

The rise of Islamic extremism is putting increasing pressure on Christians in Muslim countries, who are the victims of murder, violence and discrimination. Christians are now considered the most persecuted religious group around the world. Paradoxically, their greatest hope could come from moderate political Islam.

February 26, 2010
Spiegel

Kevin Ang is cautious these days. He glances around, taking a look to the left down the long row of stores, then to the right toward the square, to check that no one is nearby. Only then does the church caretaker dig out his key, unlock the gate, and enter the Metro Tabernacle Church in a suburb of Kuala Lumpur.

The draft of air stirs charred Bible pages. The walls are sooty and the building smells of scorched plastic. Metro Tabernacle Church was the first of 11 churches set on fire by angry Muslims — all because of one word. “Allah,” Kevin Ang whispers.

It began with a question — should Christians here, like Muslims, be allowed to call their god “Allah,” since they don’t have any other word or language at their disposal? The Muslims claim Allah for themselves, both the word and the god, and fear that if Christians are allowed to use the same word for their own god, it could lead pious Muslims astray.

For three years there was a ban in place and the government confiscated Bibles that mentioned “Allah.” Then on Dec. 31 last year, Malaysia’s highest court reached a decision: The Christian God could also be called Allah.

Imams protested and disgruntled citizens threw Molotov cocktails at churches. Then, on top of everything, Prime Minister Najib Razak stated that he couldn’t stop people who might protest against specific developments in the country — and some took that as an invitation to violent action. First churches burned, then the other side retaliated with pigs’ heads placed in front of two mosques. Sixty percent of Malaysians are Muslims and 9 percent Christians, with the rest made up by Hindus, Buddhists, and Sikhs. They managed to live together well, until now.

It’s a battle over a single word, but it’s also about much more than that. The conflict has to do with the question of what rights the Christian minority in Malaysia is entitled to. Even more than that, it’s a question of politics. The ruling United Malays National Organization is losing supporters to Islamist hardliners — and wants to win them back with religious policies.

Those policies are receiving a receptive welcome. Some of Malaysia’s states interpret Sharia, the Islamic system of law and order, particularly strictly. The once liberal country is on the way to giving up freedom of religion — and what constitutes order is being defined ever more rigidly. If a Muslim woman drinks beer, she can be punished with six cane strokes. Some regions similarly forbid such things as brightly colored lipstick, thick make-up, or shoes with clattering high heels.


Expelled, Abducted and Murdered

Not only in Malaysia, but in many countries through the Muslim world, religion has gained influence over governmental policy in the last two decades. The militant Islamist group Hamas controls the Gaza Strip, while Islamist militias are fighting the governments of Nigeria and the Philippines. Somalia, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Yemen have fallen to a large extent into the hands of Islamists. And where Islamists are not yet in power, secular governing parties are trying to outstrip the more religious groups in a rush to the right.
This can be seen in Egypt, Algeria, Sudan, Indonesia to some extent, and also Malaysia.

Even though this Islamization often has more to do with politics than with religion, and even though it doesn’t necessarily lead to the persecution of Christians, it can still be said that where Islam gains importance, freedoms for members of other faiths shrink.

There are 2.2 billion Christians around the world. The Christian non-governmental organization Open Doors calculates that 100 million of them are being threatened or persecuted. They aren’t allowed to build churches, buy Bibles or obtain jobs. That’s the more harmless form of discrimination and it affects the majority of these 100 million Christians. The more brutal version sees them blackmailed, robbed, expelled, abducted or even murdered.

Bishop Margot Kässmann, who was head of the Protestant Church in Germany before stepping down on Feb. 24, believes Christians are “the most frequently persecuted religious group globally.” Germany’s 22 regional churches have proclaimed this coming Sunday to be the first commemoration day for persecuted Christians. Kässmann said she wanted to show solidarity with fellow Christians who “have great difficulty living out their beliefs freely in countries such as Indonesia, India, Iraq or Turkey.”

There are counterexamples as well, of course. In Lebanon and Syria, Christians are not discriminated against, and in fact play an important role in politics and society. And the persecution of Christian is by no means the domain of fanatical Muslims alone — Christians are also imprisoned, abused and murdered in countries such as Laos, Vietnam, China and Eritrea.


‘Creeping Genocide’ against Christians

Open Doors compiles a global “persecution index.” North Korea, where tens of thousands of Christians are serving time in work camps, has topped the list for many years. North Korea is followed, though, by Iran, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, the Maldives and Afghanistan. Of the first 10 countries on the list, eight are Islamic, and almost all have Islam as their state religion.

The systematic persecution of Christians in the 20th century — by Communists in the Soviet Union and China, but also by Nazis — claimed far more lives than anything that has happened so far in the 21st century. Now, however, it is not only totalitarian regimes persecuting Christians, but also residents of Islamic states, fanatical fundamentalists, and religious sects — and often simply supposedly pious citizens.

Gone is the era of tolerance, when Christians enjoyed a large degree of religious freedom under the protection of Muslim sultans as so-called “People of the Book” while at the same time medieval Europe was banishing its Jews and Muslims from the continent or even burning them at the stake. Also gone is the heyday of Arab secularism following World War II, when Christian Arabs advanced through the ranks of politics.

As political Islam grew stronger, devout believers’ aggression focused not only on corrupt local regimes, but also more and more on the ostensibly corrupting influence of Western Christians, for which local Christian minorities were held accountable. A new trend began, this time with Christians as the victims.

In Iraq, for example, Sunni terrorist groups prey specifically on people of other religions. The last Iraqi census in 1987 showed 1.4 million Christians living in the country. At the start of the American invasion in 2003, it was 550,000, and at present it is just under 400,000. Experts speak of a “creeping genocide.”


‘People Are Scared Out of Their Minds’

The situation in the region around the city of Mosul in northern Iraq is especially dramatic. The town of Alqosh lies high in the mountains above Mosul, Iraq’s second-largest city. Bassam Bashir, 41, can see his old hometown when he looks out his window there. Mosul is only 40 kilometers (25 miles) away, but inaccessible. The city is more dangerous than Baghdad, especially for men like Bassam Bashir, a Chaldean Catholic, teacher and fugitive within his own country.

Since the day in August 2008 when a militia abducted his father from his shop, Bashir has had to fear for his and his family’s lives. Police found his father’s corpse two days later in the Sinaa neighborhood on the Tigris River, the body perforated with bullet holes. There was no demand for ransom. Bashir’s father died for the simple reason that he was Christian.

And no one claims to have seen anything. “Of course they saw something,” Bashir says. “But people in Mosul are scared out of their minds.”

One week later, militiamen slit the throat of Bashir’s brother Tarik like a sacrificial lamb. “I buried my brother myself,” Bashir explains. Together with his wife Nafa and their two daughters, he fled to Alqosh the same day. The city is surrounded by vineyards and an armed Christian militia guards the entrance.


Tacit State Approval

Bashir’s family members aren’t the only ones who came to Alqosh as the series of murders in Mosul continued. Sixteen Christians were killed the next week, and bombs exploded in front of churches. Men in passing cars shouted at Christians that they had a choice — leave Mosul or convert to Islam. Out of over 1,500 Christian families in the city, only 50 stayed. Bassam Bashir says he won’t return until he can mourn for his father and brother in peace. Others who gave up hope entirely fled to neighboring countries like Jordan and even more to Syria.

In many Islamic countries, Christians are persecuted less brutally than in Iraq, but often no less effectively. In many cases, the persecution has the tacit approval of the government. In Algeria, for example, it takes the form of newspapers reporting that a priest tried to convert Muslims or insulted the Prophet Mohammed — and publishing the cleric’s address, in a clear call to vigilante justice. Or a public television station might broadcast programs with titles like “In the Clutches of Ignorance,” which describe Christians as Satanists who convert Muslims with the help of drugs. This happened in Uzbekistan, which ranks tenth on Open Doors’ “persecution index.”

Blasphemy is another frequently used allegation. Insulting the core values of Islam is a punishable offense in many Islamic countries. The allegation is often used against the opposition, whether that means journalists, dissidents or Christians. Imran Masih, for example, a Christian shopkeeper in Faisalabad, Pakistan, was given a life sentence on Jan. 11, according to sections 295 A and B of Pakistan’s legal code, which covers the crime of outraging religious feelings by desecrating the Koran. A neighboring shopkeeper had accused him of burning pages from the Koran. Masih says that he only burned old business records.

It’s a typical case for Pakistan, where the law against blasphemy seems to invite abuse — it’s an easy way for anyone to get rid of an enemy. Last year, 125 Christians were charged with blasphemy in Pakistan. Dozens of those already sentenced are on death row.


‘We Don’t Feel Safe Here’

Government-tolerated persecution occurs even in Turkey, the most secular and modern country in the Muslim world, where around 110,000 Christians make up less than a quarter of 1 percent of the population — but are discriminated against nonetheless. The persecution is not as open or as brutal as what happens in neighboring Iraq, but the consequences are similar. Christians in Turkey, who numbered well over 2 million people in the 19th century, are fighting for their continued existence.

It’s happening in the southeast of the country, for example, in Tur Abdin, whose name means “mountain of God’s servants.” It’s a hilly region full of fields, chalk cliffs, and centuries-old monasteries many. It’s home to the Syrian Orthodox Assyrians, or Aramaeans as they call themselves, members of one of the oldest Christian groups in the world. According to legend, the Three Wise Men brought the Christian belief system here from Bethlehem. The inhabitants of Tur Abdin still speak Aramaic, the language used by Jesus of Nazareth.

The world is much more familiar with the genocide committed against the Armenians by Ottoman troops in 1915 and 1916, but tens of thousands of Assyrians were also murdered during World War I. Half a million Assyrians are said to have lived in Tur Abdin at the beginning of the 20th century. Today there are barely 3,000. A Turkish district court threatened last year to appropriate the Assyrians’ spiritual center, the 1,600-year-old Mor Gabriel monastery, because the monks were believed to have acquired land unlawfully.

Three neighboring Muslim villages had complained they felt discriminated against by the monastery, which houses four monks, 14 nuns, and 40 students behind its walls.

“Even if it doesn’t want to admit it, Turkey has a problem with people of other faiths,” says Ishok Demir, a young Swiss man with Aramaean roots, who lives with his parents near Mor Gabriel. “We don’t feel safe here.”

More than anything, that has to do with the permanent place Armenians, Assyrians, Greeks, Catholics and Protestants have in the country’s nationalistic conspiracy theories. Those groups have always been seen as traitors, nonbelievers, spies and people who insult the Turkish nation. According to a survey carried out by the US-based Pew Research Center, 46 percent of Turks see Christianity as a violent religion. In a more recent Turkish study, 42 percent of those surveyed wouldn’t accept Christians as neighbors.

The repeated murders of Christians come, then, as no surprise. In 2006, for example, a Catholic priest was shot in Trabzon on the Black Sea coast. In 2007, three Christian missionaries were murdered in Malatya, a city in eastern Turkey. The perpetrators were radical nationalists, whose ideology was a mixture of exaggerated patriotism, racism and Islam.


Converts in Grave Danger

In even graver danger than traditional Christians, however, are Muslims who have converted to Christianity. Apostasy, or the renunciation of Islam, is punishable by death according to Islamic law — and the death penalty still applies in Iran, Yemen, Afghanistan, Somalia, Mauritania, Pakistan, Qatar and Saudi Arabia.

Even in Egypt, a secular country, converts draw the government’s wrath. The religion minister defended the legality of the death penalty for converts — although Egypt doesn’t even have such a law — with the argument that renunciation of Islam amounts to high treason. Such sentiments drove Mohammed Hegazy, 27, a convert to the Coptic Orthodox Church, into hiding two years ago. He was the first convert in Egypt to try to have his new religion entered officially onto his state-issued identity card. When he was refused, he went public. Numerous clerics called for his death in response.

Copts make up the largest Christian community in the Arab world and around 8 million Egyptians belong to the Coptic Church. They’re barred from high government positions, diplomatic service and the military, as well as from many state benefits. Universities have quotas for Coptic students considerably lower than their actual percentage within the population.

Building new churches isn’t allowed, and the old ones are falling into disrepair thanks to a lack both of money and authorization to renovate. When girls are kidnapped and forcibly converted, the police don’t intervene. Thousands of pigs were also slaughtered under the pretense of confining swine flu. Naturally all were owned by Christians.


The Christian Virus

Six Copts were massacred on Jan. 6 — when Coptic celebrate Christmas Eve — in Nag Hammadi, a small city 80 kilometers (50 miles) north of the Valley of the Kings. Predictably, the speaker of the People’s Assembly, the lower house of the Egyptian parliament, called it an “individual criminal act.” When he added that the perpetrators wanted to revenge the rape of a Muslim girl by a Copt, it almost sounded like an excuse.

The government seems ready to admit to crime in Egypt, but not to religious tension.

Whenever clashes between religious groups occur, the government finds very secular causes behind them, such as arguments over land, revenge for crimes or personal disputes.

Nag Hammadi, with 30,000 residents, is a dusty trading town on the Nile. Even before the murders, it was a place where Christians and Muslims mistrusted one another. The two groups work together and have houses near each other, but they live, marry and die separately. Superstition is widespread and the Muslims, for example, fear they could catch the “Christian virus” by eating together with a Copt. It comes as no surprise that these murders occurred in Nag Hammadi, nor that they were followed by the country’s worst religious riots in years. Christian shops and Muslim houses were set on fire, and 28 Christians and 14 Muslims were arrested.

Nag Hammadi is now sealed off, with armed security forces in black uniforms guarding roads in and out of the city. They make sure no residents leave the city and no journalists enter it.

Three presumed perpetrators have since been arrested. All of them have prior criminal records. One admitted to the crime, but then recanted, saying he had been coerced by the intelligence service. The government seems to want the affair to disappear as quickly as possible. The alleged murderers will likely be set free again as soon as the furor has blown over.

More Rights for Christians?

But there are also a few small indications that the situation of embattled Christians in Islamic countries could improve — depending on the extent that nationalism and the radicalization of political Islam subsides again.

One of the contradictions of the Islamic world is that the best chances for Christians seem to crop up precisely where a major player actually comes from the political Islam camp. In Turkey it is Recep Tayyip Erdogan, a former Islamist and now the country’s prime minister, who has promised Turkey’s few remaining Christians more rights. He points to the history of the Ottoman Empire, in which Christians and Jews long had to pay a special tax, but in exchange, were granted freedom of religion and lived as respected fellow citizens.

A more relaxed attitude to its minorities would certainly signify progress for Turkey.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Another Patriarch Gives A Koran As A Gift!

"Muhammad wrote many ridiculous books." - St. John of Damascus

The official website of the Patriarchate of Alexandria has reported that Patriarch Theodoros II of Alexandria and All Africa met with the President of Sudan, Omar Hassan Ahmad Al-Bashir, on February 28, 2010 on a visit he made to Sudan. The Patriarch thanked the President for his love for Greece and the Greeks, while at the same time thanks was given by the President to the Patriarch for his love for the Sudanese people. The Patriarch also bestowed upon the President his prayer and blessing for his continued service towards Sudan and its future success.

So far so good. But...

As a gesture of good will the Patriarch gave the President a Koran with the official seal of the Patriarchate of Alexandria.

It seems it has become fashionable for our Patriarchs to give Koran's as gifts to Muslim leaders. As I have mentioned before, it is one thing to make a gesture of good will, and a totally different thing for an Orthodox Christian leader to give to a Muslim the gift of a book that at its core blasphemes what Orthodox Christians believe. And the President isn't even a religious leader, but a political leader. There is absolutely no excuse for such a scandalous and blasphemous action.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Radovan Karadzic: Muslim Slaughter a Myth

3 March 2010
Belfast Telegraph

The slaughter of 8,000 Muslims at Srebrenica during the Bosnian war was a myth staged to vilify the Serbs accused of their murder, former leader Radovan Karadzic claimed yesterday.

On the second day of his defence at the UN war crimes trial, he said genocide charges against him were riddled with false evidence. Prosecutors say Karadzic was the “supreme commander” of a campaign to kill or expel Muslims and Croats from eastern Bosnia and create an ethnically pure Serbian state.

He is charged with two counts of genocide and nine counts of murder, extermination, persecution, forced deportation and the seizing of 200 UN hostages. During seven hours stretched over two days, Karadzic gave a uniquely Serb view of events.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

The Purpose of Man According to the Greek Fathers

By Rev. Dr. John Romanides

If man was created according to the image of God for the purpose of being perfected and becoming like Him, he can attain it only by spiritual exercise of the will because only through true freedom is it possible for man, in his love, to become like God. True freedom is the love that distinguishes God as free of all necessity and selfishness. "Be ye therefore perfect as your Father who is in heaven is perfect"[1] does not mean that man must become perfect as the self-loving, self-contented God of philosophy and of certain Scholastics of the West, but perfect as the God of Holy Scripture and the Greek Fathers, who is free of all necessity and selfishness. The destiny of man, as imagined by Augustine, Aquinas, Calvin, Ritschl, and others of the West, is self-centred eudaemonia[2] attained by supposedly identifying the mind with the reality in the essence of God.[3] This is supposed to cause a cessation of all movement of the mind and will toward any other person or thing since there is nothing more desirable for the human intellect than the divine essence. For the Greek Fathers, however, the idea of a vision of the divine essence is blasphemous. Such theories of eudaemonia simply project and elevate to a divine level the force that rules in the world, the force of necessity and self-interest called "fate" by the ancients.[4] But man was not made for the purpose of finding satisfaction of the supposedly natural, self-centered longings within himself and, thus, of becoming unmoved and dispassionate. On the contrary, he was specifically made so he can love God and his fellow man with the same love that God has for the world. Love that arises out of self-interest is alien to the nature of God just as it is alien to the original destiny of man. Before the coming of the Lord, the devil appears standing before God, accusing the righteous of selfishness. Replying to the things that God said about the faith of Job, the "devil said before the Lord, 'Does Job worship the Lord for nothing? Hast Thou not made a hedge about him, and about his household, and all his possessions round about?'"[5]

Notes

1. Mt. 5:48

2. According to Romanides, eudaemonia is the self-centered quest for happiness. F. Copleston says that the system of ethics of Aquinas is a combination of Aristotelian eudaemonism and the Christian West's teaching of the beatific vision of the divine essence (Aquinas, p. 133).

3. He is speaking of the Platonic forms or ideas.

4. Tatian maintains that demons "introduced fate" to mankind.

5. Job 1:9-10

John S. Romanides, The Ancestral Sin, Zephyr Publishing, pp. 106, 107.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Papoulakis: A Pictorial of St. Joachim of Ithaka

"Papoulakis", Saint Joachim of Vatopaidi and Ithaka (Feast Day - March 2 and May 23)

For the Life and Miracles of St. Joachim with more pictures, refer to the links below:

Papoulakis: Saint Joachim of Vatopaidi (1)
Papoulakis: Saint Joachim of Vatopaidi (2)
Papoulakis: Saint Joachim of Vatopaidi (3)
Papoulakis: Saint Joachim of Vatopaidi (4)
Papoulakis: Saint Joachim of Vatopaidi (5)
Papoulakis: Saint Joachim of Vatopaidi (6)
Papoulakis: Saint Joachim of Vatopaidi (7)
Papoulakis: Saint Joachim of Vatopaidi (8)
Papoulakis: Saint Joachim of Vatopaidi (9)
Papoulakis: Saint Joachim of Vatopaidi (10)
Papoulakis: Saint Joachim of Vatopaidi (11)
Papoulakis: Saint Joachim of Vatopaidi (12)
Prophecies of St. Joachim "Papoulakis" of Ithaka (13)

Kalyvia, the birthplace of Saint Joachim.

The basement where Saint Joachim's step mother would often confine him as a child and abused him.

Saint Barbara Church, built by Papoulakos in the village of Stavros.

The skoufi of Papoulakos, treasured by the family of K. Ravtopoulos in Avogi, Ithaka.

A tryptich icon Papoulakis gave as a gift and now in possession by the family of Mr. Spyridon Pavlatos.

A letter written by Saint Joachim.

Papoulakis' holy relics upon their discovery.

The washing of Papulakis' relics after their transfer.

From the first celebration of Saint Joachim's feast day.

The venerable skull of Papoulakis.

The tomb of St. Joachim, behind the Holy Altar of the Holy Church of Saint Barbara. It is shadowed by a tree he planted with his own hands.

The authorization of Saint Joachim's canonization.

Ἀπολυτίκιον. Ἦχος γ´. Θείας πίστεως.
Θεία χάριτι λελαμπρυσμένος κατεφώτισας τοὺς ἐν σκοτείᾳ ἀγνωσίας καὶ δουλώσεως πέλοντας ταῖς διδαχῶν καὶ θαυμάτων ἀκτῖσί σου, Ἰωακείμ, ἀσκητὰ ἐνθεώτατε· γόνε πάντιμε Ἰθάκης, Χριστὸν ἱκέτευε δωρήσασθαι ἡμῖν τὸ μέγα ἔλεος.

Apolytikion of St. Joachim in the Third Tone
Shining with divine grace, you illumined those caught in the darkness of ignorance and apostasy by your teachings and radiant wonders, Joachim, most-divine ascetic, all-precious offspring of Ithaki, entreat Christ to grant us great mercy.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Alexandros Papadiamandis on St. Nicholas Planas

By Alexandros Papadiamandis

Among the present-day priests in the cities and villages, there are still many who are virtuous and good. They are village-types, beneficent, respected, and venerable. Even though they may expound words, they know another manner of teaching the flock. I know of a priest in Athens. He is the most humble of priests and the most simple of men. For any divine service, if you give him one drachma, half a drachma, or one tenth, he takes it. If you do not give him anything, he does not ask. For three drachmas he does an all-night service: Compline, Vespers, Matins, Hours, and Liturgy, the whole thing lasting nine hours. If you give him only two drachmas, he does not complain. Every list bearing the names of the dead to be commemorated, when once given to him, he keeps always. For two and three years he continues to commemorate the names. At every Prothesis he commemorates two or three thousand names. He never becomes weary. His Prothesis lasts two hours. The Liturgy another two. After the dismissal of the Liturgy, he distributes to all present whatever pieces of prosphora or antidoron he has in the sanctuary. He keeps practically nothing.

Once, it chanced that he owed a small amount of money and wanted to pay it. He had ten or fifteen drachmas, all in copper. For two hours he counted, counted, counted, and could not determine how many drachmas there were. Finally, another Christian took on the effort to count them for him. He stutters a little, and is almost illiterate. In the prayers he says most of the words correctly, but in the Gospel most of them incorrectly. You will say, "Why this inconsistency?" He says the same prayers every day, whereas a certain portion of the Gospel he reads once, twice, or at most three times a year, with the exception of frequent portions which recur occasionally, as in the Blessing of the Waters and at the Paraklesis. The mistakes which he makes in reading are oftentimes comic. Yet, of those who hear, out of all the congregation, not one of us laughs. Why? We have become accustomed to him and we like him. He is worthy of love. He is simple and virtuous. He is worthy of the first Beatitude of the Saviour.

Now, suppose that this same priest had come out of some theological school, old or new. Would the difference in him be to the better? He would be smeared with a few imperfect, ill-digested, and confused teachings, with more pride and more demands. Would he be better for us?



From The Songs of God:

After three days we accompanied little Koula to the grave. The "professional" priests and the chanters chanted the usual hymns from the "Blessed are the blameless in the way" up to the "Let us give the final kiss". Papa-Nicholas, from the Island of Naxos, of the Church of Saint John in the Field, appeared as though he were doing a separate service. He murmured to himself, and his eyes seemed filled with tears. "What are you murmuring, Father?" I asked him from behind the stall on which he leaned. "I am saying the Funeral Service for Children to myself," answered Papa-Nicholas. The Service for Children befits this guileless man.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

The Enthroned (or "Reigning") Mother of God Icon

The "Enthroned" (or "Reigning") Icon of the Mother of God appeared on March 2, 1917, the day of Tsar Nicholas's abdication, in the village of Kolomskoye near Moscow.

In February 1917, an elderly woman named Eudokia saw the Mother of God in a dream telling her to go to Kolomskoye to find a large blackened icon in a church. After the vision was repeated three times, she went to Kolomskoye to search for the icon with the priest Nicholas.

In the basement of the church they found the icon and started wiping off the accumulated dust. Then they were able to see the Most Holy Theotokos wearing a crown and sitting on a throne. Immediately, Father Nicholas celebrated a service of Thanksgiving and an Akathist.

News of the icon's discovery spread throughout Russia, and there were several miracles of healing from physical and mental infirmities. As time went by, the icon renewed itself and became brighter and brighter. Particularly striking was the blood-red robe of the Virgin.

Since the icon was revealed just as the Tsar abdicated, many people believed that the Queen of Heaven had assumed royal authority over the Russian land, and so the icon became known as the "Enthroned" (or Reigning) icon. It was discovered that the icon had come from the Ascension convent in Moscow. In 1812, before Napoleon's invasion, this icon and others were sent to Kolomskoye's Ascension church for safekeeping. Apparently forgotten, the icons were never returned to Moscow.

A Service and Akathist to the "Enthroned" Icon were composed with the assistance of His Holiness Patriarch Tikhon (+ 1925). Many copies of the icon were venerated throughout Russia, but these were confiscated by the Soviets. The Service and Akathist to the icon were also forbidden to be served.

The original icon is in the Novodevichy Museum in Moscow, and there is a copy in the Church of the Kazan Mother of God in Kolomskoye.

The "Enthroned" or "Reigning" Icon, which belongs to the Panachranta type, shows the Theotokos seated on a throne with Her Son.

Source

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Saint Agathon of Egypt

Saint Agathon of Egypt, a contemporary of St Macarius the Great (January 19) and a disciple of St Lot (October 22), he lived in asceticism in a skete in Egypt. He was distinguished by exceptional meekness, accounting himself the most sinful of men.

Once, monks who had heard of his discernment came to St Agathon to see if they could make him lose his temper. They asked him, "Are you Abba Agathon, a fornicator and a proud man?"

"Yes, that is true," the monk replied.

"Are you the Agathon who is always talking nonsense?" the monks inquired.

"I am," the saint agreed.

"Are you Agathon the heretic?" the monks persisted.

St Agathon said, "I am not a heretic."

They asked the saint why he agreed with them when they accused him of vices, but then denied this last charge. Agathon replied, "I accepted the first accusations, since that was beneficial for my soul. But heresy is separation from God, and I do not wish to be separated from God."

Astonished at his discernment, they returned to their monastery, edified.

When asked which was more important for salvation, bodily asceticism or interior vigilance, St Agathon said, "Man is like a tree. Bodily asceticism is the foliage, but interior vigilance is the fruit. Holy Scripture says that "every tree which does not bring forth good fruit shall be cut down and thrown into the fire" (Mt.3:10). Therefore, we should focus our attention on the fruit. But a tree also needs the protection of its foliage, which is bodily asceticism."

St Agathon died in about the year 435. For three days before his repose the monk sat in silence and concentration, as though disturbed about something. When the monks questioned him, he answered that he saw himself before the Judgment Seat of God. "How is it possible that you, Father, should fear judgment?" they asked him.

"I have done my best to keep the commandments of the Lord, but I am a man. How can I be certain that my deeds have been pleasing to God?"

"Do you not trust that all the good deeds which you have accomplished are pleasing to God?" asked the monks.

"I have no such hope until I see God. His judgment is not man's judgment." Having said this, the saint departed to the Lord.

St Agathon is commemorated on January 8 on the Greek calendar and March 2 on the Russian..

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

"60 Minutes" Report on the Armenian Genocide

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=6253043n

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Evolution: A New Fundamentalism

Fr. Serafim Gascoigne

The theory of evolution has become a part of our everyday thinking and behaviour. In most people's minds, the word evolution is synonymous with progress and presupposes growth towards a better future. This progress is measured in terms of social, political, and religious growth or achievement and has become part of our everyday vocabulary – an integral part of how we act and think. All aspects of life are now modeled on evolution. For example, there is scientific evolution, a nihilistic philosophy which sees man as a piece of driftwood thrown up by time onto the shores of existence. There is social and political evolution that measures progress and human development in terms of the intellect and the amazing achievements of technology. And finally, there is religious evolution: religion that is evolving towards the “Omega Point” envisioned by Pierre Teilhard de Chardin (d. 1955) or towards the “Age of the Spirit” anticipated in the works of Nikolay Berdyayev (d. 1948). Currently there is ecumenism, with its roots in the Masonic movement, which promotes evolution towards universal brotherhood under a supreme deity.

For many people, evolution is also synonymous with Charles Darwin and his theory of biological evolution. In fact for over a century Darwin's theory has been a basic element of scientific and cultural thought. Life, according to his theory of evolution, is ever moving from a preexistent form to a more complex – and therefore better – form. Although the factual evidence to support this view is virtually nonexistent, scientists nevertheless accept evolution as a priori in scientific research. Oddly enough, Darwin was not the actual inventor of the theory of evolution; evolutionary ideas and interpretations were being discussed in the second half of the eighteenth and the first half of the nineteenth centuries by such scientists as Denis Diderot (d. 1784), Benjamin Franklin (d. 1790) and Jean-Baptiste Lamarck (d. 1829). I believe also that evolutionary ideas have been developing for much longer than we normally imagine and have, therefore, greatly influenced the development of western civilization. Blessed Justin (Popovich) of Serbia (d. 1979), in his book Orthodox Faith and Life in Christ, identifies Darwin's views with New Age Religion. To understand this, let us examine the historical perspective that preceded the emergence of Darwinism and in particular, the writings of the German philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer (d. 1860) and the influence his philosophy exerted on other evolutionary thinkers

An Historical Perspective

Western Christianity and consequently Western civilization promoted humanism from early times. The deviant theology of the Latin church readily provided the impetus for the cultivation of Humanistic thinking. From the first few centuries of Christianity in Rome, there was a rebirth of pagan Caesar worship, which in subsequent centuries was inappropriately transferred to the Patriarch of Rome, a process that eventually culminated in the anti-Christian doctrine of the infallibility of the Pope. The teaching about Papal supremacy over the Church (the Body of the God-Man Christ) inevitably replaced the God-Man as Head of the Church with a man, in the person of the Pope of Rome.

The belief in this doctrine later provided fuel for the Renaissance. Man, being at the center of the universe did not need God. The significance of this human idolatry was not simply political but cosmological, for man now became the focal point of theological thought, which in turn, fostered humanism. The Pope is the intermediary between God and man, and curiously enough does not have to be a priest, but can be a layman. It is not, of course the object of this article to examine the details of this degeneration in the concept of Church from a Divine-human community to a human-secular one. However we need to be aware of the historical development of humanism, in order to grasp the significance of its effect upon our thinking today.

In time, this humanistic idolatry gave rise to the divinization of science and civilization, and in our own time, the divinization of education, the main object of which is to illumine man without Christ. When the God-Man, that is Christ, is eliminated, man becomes the center of the universe. This is to fulfill the aspiration of Satan, who told our ancestors that they would become gods without God. Removing Christ from man, we produce the mechanistic man of the Empiricist philosophers, such as John Locke (d. 1704) and David Hume (d. 1776). According to these Empiricists, the nature of man is derived from the senses. Unfortunately, this new man of Empiricism proved very primitive and terribly boorish. So the next stage in history was to progress to man as intellect, building on the rationalistic philosophies of Rene Descartes (d. 1650) and culminating in Immanuel Kant (d. 1804).

But the true nature of man, argued Schopenhauer in the nineteenth century, is volition. Man's essence cannot be summed up in his senses or in his reason, since he is neither of these. Rather, he is foremost comprised of volition. Man as volition is the true man. For Schopenhauer, the nature of man is based on his will to live. However, individual wills produce strife and, therefore, only through the renunciation of self-desire can one find peace. Schopenhauer's philosophy was based on his study of Kant and, in addition, the mystical works of Hinduism and Buddhism, and the Western mysticism of Meister Eckhart (d. 1327) and Jakob Boehme (d.
1624). His book Die Welt als Wille and Vorstellung (The World as Will and Idea, 1819) greatly influenced Friedrich Nietzsche (d. 1900) and, later, Darwin. Nietzsche developed the ideas of Schopenhauer further by promoting man as an inferior being who aspires to the Uebermensch – “Superman” – of the future. The production of this Superman, according to Nietzsche, is the reason for the existence of the earth and the purpose of history. Superman represents the goal of human evolution.

Because of his exercise of creative power and his ability to rise above transient sensual pleasure, Superman is spiritual man. In today's language, he recognizes his own characteristic of creative-intuitive power as opposed to critical-rational power. He is the final stage in evolution. “What is ape to man? He is an object of laughter… This must be true for what man is to the Superman” (Thus Spake Zarathustra, 1891). In this worldview, man is nothing but the (missing!) link between animal and Superman. A grim product of the philosophy of the Superman was Dachau, for volition destroys compassion and conscience. Admittedly, the Nazi phenomenon was a perversion of Nietzsche's thought, but it is nonetheless the Superman concept that forms the basis for many fascist and socialist ideologies.

A Scientific Perspective

The historical advancement of evolutionary thought reached a watershed with Darwin's introduction of the theory of biological evolutionism. By placing evolution on a scientific footing, Darwin ensured its survival as an axiom of modern thought. Darwin and those of like mind directed their search for the new man among inferior creatures in order, using the animal kingdom as justification to create man without God. The outcome of these efforts was the reduction of the theory of evolution to a kind of religious fundamentalism. Time and again, Darwinism has been used to cover up scientific ignorance of how the wonders of the world could have been created. In America in the earlier part of this century, Darwinism was supported by such eminent figures as the paleontologist Henry Osborn (d. 1935), whose scientific opinion was greatly influenced by the discoveries of “Piltdown Man” (a hoax using a chimpanzee's skull and reluctantly recognized many years later by the British Museum, which had to change its display of the ascent of man) and “Nebraska Man” (another one using a pig's tooth).

The opinions of such eminent scientists as Osborn were based on the premise that, however wrong the current answers were to their views of evolution, they would stand until a better answer arrived. This scientifically untenable attitude is comparable to saying that a criminal defendant should not be allowed to present an alibi unless he can also show who in fact committed the crime. Such fundamentalism bases itself on a technique known as reductionism, the attempt to boil down complex systems or phenomena into simple terms or easily digestible facts, the ideal goal being to discover the lowest common denominator. (Incidentally, in the sphere of religion, the ecumenical movement is the embodiment par excellence of the philosophical application of reductionism.) The driving supposition here is that all living phenomena may be explained by molecular biology. According to reductionism, just one or two basic molecular causes account for all living phenomena. There is, indeed, no phenomenon in a living system that is not molecular, yet there is none that is only molecular either. The living cell is a system and, however much we study its constituent parts, these parts are not the cell in toto, but simply its characteristics. Knowing how reflexes work in an artist does not tell us about his style or his subject matter; the study of a telephone directory does not tell us about the richness of life in the city.

As the biologist Paul Weiss writes: “It is one thing not to the see the forest for the trees, but then to go on to deny the reality of the forest is a more serious matter; for it is not just a case of myopia, but one of self-inflicted blindness” (Beyond Reductionism: The Alpbach Symposium, London: Koestler & Smythies, 1972). Reductionism is still popular today, despite the fact that many scientists are uncomfortable with such a fundamentalist approach to scientific research. Because in the last three hundred years the scientific application of reductionism has been so successful in gaining control over the forces of nature, our present society is far more receptive to rational-mechanistic philosophies (e.g. Ludwig Feuerbach (d. 1872 – “We are what we eat”) than to other philosophies, simply because it considers such views innately “more scientific” than other alternatives.

Reductionism leads to a view of the universe as a great system of physical forces, and the mind with all its powers of imagination and creative insights as a mere by-product of these forces. Viktor Frankl in Vienna has concluded that reductionism has led to some of the major psychiatric disorders current in the world today (Beyond Reductionism). In fact, it has led to a new type of neurosis called the existential vacuum. If man is no more than the product of some chemical determinism, he then has no meaning. Frankl aptly describes reductionism as the nihilism of today. However, reductionism is not necessarily the view of all scientists. There are those such as Weiss and Von Bertalanffy, who are concerned with biological systems and organization. For example, Bertalanffy states:

“There is a non-random feature, perhaps at the very basis of natural order, which may well have to be taken ultimately into account by biological theorists. Where is the mind? If we dissect the brain, we don't find the mind. The brain is a system and is more than its constituent parts. We have to move from entities to qualities possessed by a system as a whole, which cannot be split up and located. We often think that when we have completed our study of one we know all about two, because two is one and one. We forget that we still have to make a study of ‘and'. At the molecular level, we study ‘and' – that is to say, organization" (Beyond Reductionism).

Again, the square is contained in the cube. It serves as its foundation and basis. However, if we say that the cube is nothing but a square, then we are shutting out a whole dimension, the third dimension. The blinkered vision of Darwin and the reductionists is ironically condemned by their mentor Schopenhauer: “Every man takes the limits of his own field of vision for the limits of the world” (Studies in Pessimism, 1851).

To be a true scientist, one has to have faith. To be objective without a hunch is not to be scientific, but to be technical. Such “objectivity” is characteristic of the technocrat, not the true scientist. This applies especially to modern medicine, in which doctors have become simple technicians, rather than physicians, regarding man as merely a biological machine. Such an approach in turn breeds discontent. People demand better results, more health and more security. They want a techno-kingdom on earth, which will replace the heavenly one. Here, especially we can see the inherent fundamentalism of current evolutionary thought; a blind faith in the inevitability of progress and the belief that things can only get better. As Hoelderlin (19th century) referring to political systems in his day, reminds us: “What has always made the state a hell on earth has been precisely that man has tried to make it his heaven”.

A Social Perspective

With its new found scientific credibility, evolution rapidly permeated all fields of inquiry, eventually resulting in a radically new social perspective. In the words of Theodosius Dobzhansky: “Evolution need no longer be a destiny imposed from without: it may conceivably be controlled by man, in accordance with his wisdom and his values”. Acclaimed by the American Academy of Sciences and St. Vladimir's Theological Seminary, he is billed as “the greatest evolutionist of our century and a lifelong Russian Orthodox” (P.E. Johnson, Darwin on Trial, Chicago: InterVarsity Press). While Dobzhansky's Orthodoxy is obviously nominal, he is beyond doubt a true believer in the New Fundamentalism: “Evolution is much more than a theory – it is a general postulate to which all theories, all systems henceforth must bow and which they must satisfy in order to be thinkable and true. Evolution is a light which illumines all facts, a trajectory which all lines of thought must follow”.

In short, Evolution is the god we must worship. We are, therefore, basically passionate stone-age people who are capable of creating technology, but not controlling it. If humanity is to avoid extinction, it must summon up the political will to take control of evolution and make it in the future a matter of human choice, rather than blind selection. What concerns me is that the influence of evolutionary thinking in our lives is subtly hidden and thus taken for granted. It has gradually taken root in our collective subconscious. Thus, in schools it a “given” that man evolved from apes. Lax chronological interpretations and the assumption that things are improving all the time are handily used to gloss over the painfully evident deficiencies of the theory of evolution. For those who have accepted evolution – deficiencies or not -, God has become redundant. But it is precisely through the correct understanding of man that we come to know God. St. Gregory of Nyssa (395) confirms this when he says: “For it seems to me, the make-up of man is awesome and inexplicable, portraying many hidden mysteries of God in itself”.

What are the implications of evolutionism for Orthodox Christians?

Evolution has given rise to the dominance of the brain – the intellect. Paradoxically, one can be highly intelligent, yet stupid at the same time. But the evolutionists, man's intelligence puts him at the pinnacle of creation. It is his brain that is important and not his heart, since the latter is only a pump! Technology is founded upon intelligence, not the heart. But as Orthodox Christians, we know that without the heart, there is no morality. When Antichrist comes, he will find a planet of spiritual morons, a highly intelligent species which is nonetheless spiritually ignorant. Intelligence, according to St. Anthony of Egypt (d. 356) is the fear of God, not sophistry, clever argumentation, or learning (i.e., technology) per se. You may counter: “Did not God use evolution in His creation? I am willing, as a rational being and an Orthodox Christian, to accept theistic evolution, but not the ‘Big Bang' theory of the atheists”.

But in saying this, you are rejecting the miraculous creation of the universe. You are implying that suffering, sin and death are somehow intrinsic to God's creation, thereby refuting the Christian doctrine that man originally fell and continually falls through the spiritually destructive exercise of his own will. Again, you may say that you do not support the theory of evolution, that in fact, you do not believe in it. If this is true, then why do you subscribe to liberal thinking in education, child-rearing and health? Why do you have a passion for comfort- to reach out for the pill of pleasure? If you fail to lead an ascetic life, you are not an Orthodox Christian, but a hedonist, a crypto-evolutionist! Evolution is setting us up for a takeover by demonic forces which will be able to exploit our spiritual ignorance. And do not think that a knowledge of the Fathers, of theology, will help us. If we succumb to the Zeitgeist, the spirit of the age, psychologically and intellectually, we will not be able to resist these forces.

The Case for "Devolution"

The Orthodox standpoint - agreeable to true scientists who objectively acknowledge the inexorable reality of entropy - posits universal devolution: “The world doth wax old as doth a garment”. Civilization as we know it is declining, not progressing. We witness everyday the breakdown of morality and the falling away from the faith. But, nevertheless, secular society is confident and optimistic about the future, since we are becoming “gods” as Satan promised in the garden. We are becoming gods who can control our own destiny. Thus as early as 1933, John Dewey (d. 1952) could write: “If blind nature has somehow produced a human species with the capacity to rule the earth wisely, and if this capacity has previously been invisible only because it was smothered by superstition, then the prospects for human freedom and happiness are unbounded”.

Unfortunately, Dewey could not foresee the product of his educational philosophy- Homo technicus. Instead of being a demigod, Homo technicus as a species is, in fact, subhuman. He is subhuman since everything that is supernatural or spiritual has been ripped from him. His reasoning is based on Psychologie ohne Seele (“Psychology Without Soul”). This man has finally devolved to a totally materialistic life in which he can find satisfaction only in whatever is earthly and not heavenly. An officer of the Allied Forces, upon entering Dachau camp asked: “Where is God to allow such suffering?” A survivor answered him: “We know where God is, but where is man?”

The evolutionists are proud that they are not descended from Christ and His Heavenly Father, but from apes instead. They are perfectly able to become false gods, simply because they recognize no other God than themselves. “We want to be free. Evolution is the star that guides us”, they cry.

Our answer as Orthodox Christians must be: “Some glory in chariots and some in horses; but we will glory in the Name of the Lord our God” (Psalm 19:7).

Fr. Serafim Gascoigne is the Rector of Holy Protection of the Theotokos Orthodox Church in Seattle, Washington, a parish of the Patriarchate of Jerusalem.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr