St. Luke of Crimea: Science and Religion

"When we examine contemporary science as developed by scientists such as Lamark and Darwin, we see the antithesis and I would say the complete disagreement that exists between science and religion, on topics that concern the more basic problems of existence and knowledge. For this, an enlightened mind cannot accept at the same time both one and the other and must chose between religion and science."

A well known German Zoologist, Ernst Haeckel (1834-1919), who was a good follower of Darwin, wrote these words some 65 years ago, in his book, "The Riddle of the Universe" that was very successful and as it seemed, had proved that faith is absurd. So says Haeckel that every enlightened man must choose between science and religion and should follow either one or the other. He considered it necessary that such men should deny religion because a logical man cannot deny science.

Truly, is this necessary? No, not at all, for we know that many and great scientists were at the same time great believers. For example, such was the Polish astronomer Copernicus who laid the foundation of all contemporary astronomy. Copernicus was not only a believer but was also a cleric. Another great scientist, Newton, whenever he mentioned the word God, he removed his hat. He was a great believer. A great bacteriologist of our time and almost a contemporary, Pasteur, who laid the basis of contemporary bacteriology, he would start every scientific work with a prayer to God. Some ten years ago a great scientist passed away, who was our countryman, physiologist Pavlov, who was the creator of the new physiology of the brain. He too was a great believer. Would Haeckel therefore dare say that these men did not have enlightened minds because they believed in God?

So what happens now? Why even today there are some scientists, professors at Universities whom I personally know and are great believers. Why don't all the scientists deny religion but only those who think the same as Haeckel? Because these people believe only in materialism and deny the spiritual world, they do not believe in life after death, they do not accept the immortality of the soul, and of course they do not accept the resurrection of the dead. They say that science is capable of everything, that there is no secret in nature that science cannot discover. What can we answer to these?

We shall respond to them this way. You are totally right. We cannot limit the human mind that searches nature. We know that today, science knows only a part of the things we have of nature. We also understand that the possibilities of science are great. In this they are right and we don't doubt it. What then do we doubt? Why don't we deny religion like them and consider it contrary to scientific knowledge?

It is because we believe wholeheartedly that there is a spiritual world. We are certain that apart from the material world there is an infinite and incomparably superior spiritual world. We believe in the existence of spiritual beings that have higher intellect than us humans. We believe wholeheartedly that above this spiritual and material world there is the Great and Almighty God.

What we doubt is the right of science to research with its methods the spiritual world. Because the spiritual world cannot be researched with the methods used to research the material world. Such methods are totally inappropriate to research the spiritual world.

How do we know that there is a spiritual world? Who told us that it exists? If we are asked by people who do not believe in Divine Revelation, we shall answer them thus: "Our heart told us". For there are two ways for one to know something, the first is that which is spoken by Haeckel, which is used by science to learn of the material world. There is however another way that is unknown to science, and does not wish to know it. It is the knowledge through the heart. Our heart is not only the central organ of the circulation system, it is an organ with which we know the other world and receive the highest knowledge. It is the organ that gives us the capability to communicate with God and the world above. Only in this we disagree with science.

Praising the great successes and achievements of science, we do not doubt at all its great importance and we do not confine scientific knowledge. We only tell the scientists "You do not have the capability with your methods to research the spiritual world, we however can with our heart."

There are many unexplainable phenomena which concern the spiritual world that are real (as are some type of material phenomena). There are therefore phenomena that science will never be able to explain because it does not use the appropriate methods.

Let science explain how the prophecies were made regarding the coming of the Messiah, which were all fulfilled. Could science tell us how the great prophet Isaiah, some 700 years before the birth of Christ, foretold the most important events in His life and for which he was named the evangelist of the Old Testament? Could it explain the far-sighted grace possessed by the saints and to tell us with which physical methods the saints inherited this grace and how they could understand the heart and read the thoughts of a person they had just met for the first time? They would see a person for the first time and they will call him by his name. Without waiting for the visitor to ask, they would answer on what troubled him.

If they can, let them explain it to us. Let them explain with what method the saints foretold the great historical events which were accurately fulfilled as they were prophesied. Let them explain the visitation from the other world and the appearance of the dead to the living.

They shall never explain it to us because they are too far from the basis of religion - from faith. If you read the books of the scientists who try to reconstruct religion, you will see how superficially they look at things. They do not understand the essence of religion yet they criticize it. Their criticism does not touch the essence of faith, since they are unable to understand the types, the expressions of religious feeling. The essence of religion they do not understand. Why not? Because the Lord Jesus Christ says "No one can come to me unless My Father who sent Me draws him to Me"(John 6:44).

So it is necessary that we be drawn by the Heavenly Father, and it is necessary that the grace of the Holy Spirit enlighten our heart and our mind. To dwell in our heart and mind through this enlightenment, the Holy Spirit and the ones who were found worthy to receive the gift of the Holy Spirit, those in whose heart lives Christ and His Father, know the essence of faith. The others, outside the faith cannot understand anything.

Let us hear the criticism against Haeckel from a French philosopher Emile Boutroux (1845-1921). So says Boutroux" "The criticisms of Haeckel concern much more the ways, than the essence, which (the ways) he observes with such a materialistic and narrow view, that they cannot be accepted by religious people. Thus the criticism of religion by Haeckel is not referred to, not even in one of the principles that constitutes religion."

This is therefore our opinion regarding Haeckel's book "The Riddle of the Universe" which up to day is considered the "Bible" for all those who criticize religion, which they deny and find it contrary to science. Do you see how poor and tasteless arguments they use? Don't become scandalized when you hear what they say about religion, since they themselves cannot understand its essence. You people, who may not have much of a relationship with science and do not know much about philosophy, remember always the most basic beginning, which was well known by the early Christians. They considered poor, the person who knew all the sciences yet he knew not God. On the other hand, they considered blessed the person who knew God, even if he knew absolutely nothing about the worldly things.

Guard this truth like the best treasure of the heart, walk straight without looking right or left. Let us not bother with what we hear against religion, losing our bearings. Let us hold on to our faith which is the eternal indisputable truth. Amen.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

A Tour of St. Irene Chrysovalantou Monastery in Lykovrisi

Many thanks to my sister Vaso, my mother, and my niece Christiana (you can see my nephews Pano and Demetri as well) for taking this rare video footage of the Holy Monastery of Saint Irene Chrysovalantou in Lykovrisi, Athens. This was filmed in the summer of 2009.

To read more about Saint Irene Chrysovalantou and her Monastery in Lykovrisi, see here, here and here.

If videos don't work, just click on them and they will take you to the originals on Youtube.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Adam's Lament

Outside the empty Paradise, Adam folds his hands,
Banished and alienated he throbbed from pain;
The angels of heaven, until then his companions,
As beautiful dreams, flew hurriedly away,
Before the banished one, before the cursed one,
Until yesterday, the mighty proprietor of Paradise!
And Adam sobbed on the cold boulder:
"Woe to my descendants! Woe to me a sinner!
For one moment, my Creator I despised
To be despised by all that was created
Throughout the days and nights,
Throughout the centuries long,
Instead of God, a serpent to have for a companion!
Instead of me, over all created things to rule,
Over me, now, everything will rule:
The winds and the heat, the elements of nature,
The beasts and scorpions, repulsive things and serpents.
Instead of freedom, behold, fear grips me,
And confuses my thoughts and chills me to the bone.
There is only One Who is able to help:
The One that I offended--Have mercy O God!"

- St. Nikolai Velimirovich

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Why Galileo Was Wrong, Even Though He Was Right

March 7, 2010
by Cornelius Hunter
Darwin's God

In the early seventeenth century a courageous and brilliant scientist, Galileo Galileo, confirmed heliocentrism, the idea first proposed a century earlier by Nicolaus Copernicus that the sun was at the center of the universe. Heliocentrism challenged geocentrism, the religiously motivated idea that a stationary earth was at the center of the universe. Galileo explained why heliocentrism was true and not surprisingly the church strongly opposed and persecuted the scientist. Ultimately, however, the truth could not be denied and church was forced to, once again, reluctantly give in to the objective truths of science.

That was the false history of the Galileo Affair according to later revisionists who promoted the view that science and religion were in conflict. In fact while Galileo indeed was brilliant, he also made it difficult for friendly voices to support him. Furthermore he did not confirm heliocentrism, and heliocentrism was not the only viable alternative to geocentrism. And geocentrism was hardly religiously motivated. The church had little objection to heliocentrism when Copernicus wrote of the model in the sixteenth century, and Copernicus was not the first to consider the idea.

The Galileo Affair is far more complex than the simple-minded warfare thesis supposes. Yes Pope John Paul II issued a declaration in 1992 acknowledging the church's errors. And the church was no doubt mistaken. But the church's action in the Galileo Affair was far more complex than simply opposing a scientific finding out of religious conviction (Galileo's trial focused on his insubordination, not heliocentrism). In fact, there were at least four reasons why the church opposed Galileo's heliocentrism which confound the naive warfare thesis.

First, in Galileo's day internal church politics had made it less receptive to new ideas such as heliocentrism. Second, Galileo's disobedience and style--such as satirizing his friend Pope Urban VIII who had been a supporter--fomented opposition. Third, it was understood that science could devise models that, on the one hand fit the data but on the other hand were not true or approximately so. In fact, geocentrism modeled the celestial motions quite accurately. And finally, in some cases where geocentrism did fail, another alternative--Tycho Brahe's hybrid model--succeeded.

An important failure of geocentrism were the phases of Venus which indicated it circled the sun, not Earth. Galileo expounded upon this point, but what he failed to mention was that the Tychonic system, in which the sun circles the earth and the inner planets in turn circle the sun, handled the phases of Venus just fine.

In fact new research reported on this week indicates another problem with Galileo's firmly held views. When observing stars through a telescope, as Galileo did, they do not appear as points of light, as they should, but as a small extended area, or disk, as did the planets. This disk appearance is due to the diffraction of light which was unknown at the time.

Of course the stars were assumed to be like the sun, and therefore much larger than the planets. Given their larger size the observed small disk meant they must have been much farther away than the planets. But the calculated distances to the stars were thousands of times less than what we now calculate. Yes the stars were far away, but those small disks were misleading. The diffracting light made the stars appear closer than they actually are.

Galileo was therefore assuming the stars were much closer than they actually are. Why is this important? Consider objects you observe out the window as you sit in a moving train. A nearby tree may be behind a closer tree, but as the train moves you will see the farther tree emerge as your angle changes. Two stars in the sky, on the other hand, do not move in relation to each other as you move along, because they are so far away.

Because Galileo calculated the stars to be much closer than they actually are, he would necessarily expect to see some change in their relative positions as the earth circled the sun in his heliocentric model. But no such relative change was observed. It was an important failure of Galileo's model which, again, he did not mention. And again, it was an observation that the Tychonic system handled just fine.

What the new research points out is that a contemporary of Galileo, the German astronomer Simon Marius, famous for naming the moons of Jupiter, was aware of these implications and followed them to their logical conclusion.

While Galileo was making high claims for heliocentrism, Marius had made clear in his 1614 book Mundus Iovialis (The Jovian World), that the observations confirmed the earth-centered Tychonic system.

The new paper, aptly entitled "How Marius Was Right and Galileo Was Wrong Even Though Galileo Was Right and Marius Was Wrong," is another example of how not just science, but the history of science, is more complicated than self-serving black-white renditions would have it.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

The Desperation of the Multiverse Theory

Multiverse Mavens Hoisted on Own Petard

6 March 2010
Barry Arrington
UncommonDescent

Several factors are combining to increase belief (of the “faith” variety, not the “demonstrated fact” variety) in the multiverse among materialists. Two of these factors are relevant to ID at the biological and cosmological levels. At the biological level materialists are beginning to understand that the probability that life arose by random material processes is so low (estimated in this article written by materialists to be 10 raised to -1018) that infinite universes are required for it to have occurred, the implication being that we just happen to live in the ever-so-lucky universe where it all came together.

At the cosmological level, the probability that the fine tuning of the universe necessary for the existence of life arose by sheer coincidence is so low that again the multiverse is invoked to provide infinite “probabilistic resources” to do the job (see here).

Of course, there is another possible explanation for both the emergence of life and the fine tuning of the universe. These phenomena may be the results of acts of a super powerful being whom we might call God.

Obviously, the whole reason materialists have invoked the multiverse in the first place is to avoid resorting to agency to explain the emergence of life and cosmological fine tuning. But isn’t it obvious that given the very premises invoked by materialists in the multiverse scenarios that we can just as easily conclude that God exists.

Here is how the logic runs: The materialists says, “Yes, the probability that life emerged through random material processes is vanishingly small, but in an infinite multiverse everything that is not logically impossible is in fact instantiated, and we just happen to live in the lucky universe where life was instantiated. Similarly, we happen to live in the Goldilocks universe (which, again, is one of infinite universes) where the physical constants are just right for the existence of life.”

But the theist can play this game too. “The existence of God is not logically impossible. In an infinite number of universes everything that is not logically impossible is in fact instantiated, and we just happen to live in one of those universes in which God is instantiated.”

I do not believe in the multiverse. The entire concept is a desperation “Hail Mary” pass in which logical positivists and their materialist fellow travelers are attempting to save a philosophical construct on the brink of destruction. The point is that materialists’ own multiverse premise leads to the conclusion that God exists more readily than the opposite conclusion. Ironically, far from excluding the existence of God, if the multiverse exists, God must also exist.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

'Mystical' Stone Puts Plumber On New Path

March 2010
Ananova

A Polish plumber has become a faith healer after finding a 'mystical' stone while digging up drains under his house.

Jacek Slominski has been swamped by demands from hundreds of patients since he pulled the stone from the earth where it had lain undisturbed for hundreds of years.

"It has a huge Z carved into it and as soon as I touched it I felt this tremendous energy coming from it," he said.

"I've had a bad back for years but all of a sudden all the pain left me and never returned," he added at his home in Bialystok.

Now Mr Slominski has become a full time healer and claims that patients travel hundreds of miles just to touch his healing stone. "I don't understand it but it works and it's better than fixing broken toilets," he said.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Icon of Virgin Mary Weeps In France

Virgin Mary Icon 'Crying Tears of Oil' in France

An image of the Virgin Mary has been crying tears of oil, its owner has claimed, in a story that has drawn hundreds of visitors to the man's home in France.

08 Mar 2010
Telegraph UK

Esat Altindagoglu has been inundated with more than 50 visitors a day hoping to see the "miracle" at his house near Paris.

The one-foot high painting was given to his wife Sevin by a Lebanese priest on her birthday in 2006, the Turkish-born salesman said.

It began weeping oil on February 12 this year, and had been "crying" every day since, he claimed.

He said: "As word spread, people started arriving from France, then from all over Europe.

"I've been having between 50 and 60 people a day turning up for more than three weeks now."

An Orthodox priest had now agreed to say mass at his home in Garges-les-Gonesse this week to thank the Virgin Mary, Mr Altindagoglu said.

He added: "Apparently the next step is to have the weeping witnessed by a bishop so the miracle can be officially recognised by the church."

Over the centuries there have been hundreds of incidents of statues said to have wept blood, oil or water.

But the only one ever approved as a miracle by the Pope was Our Lady of Akita in Japan, in 1973, with all the others ruled out as hoaxes.

See more here.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Idle Chit Chat Can Make You Unhappy

06 Mar 2010
Telegraph UK

Having a profound conversation can boost happiness levels, but trivial chatter can be depressing, scientists say.

Psychologists investigated whether happy and unhappy people differed because of the types of conversations they engaged in.

Volunteers wore an unobtrusive recording device to monitor conversations with friends and colleagues for four days.

Researchers then listened to the recordings and identified them as trivial small talk or substantive discussions.

In addition, the volunteers completed personality and wellbeing assessments.

Reporting the findings in the journal Psychological Science, the researchers said the recordings revealed some startling findings.

Greater wellbeing was related to spending less time alone and more time talking to others. The happiest participants spent 25 per cent less time alone and 70 per cent more time talking than the unhappiest.

But the researchers were surprised to discover that the type of conversations people took part in also affected their happiness levels.

The happiest participants had twice as many deep and meaningful conversations and one third as much small talk as the unhappiest.

Matthias Mehl, an assistant professor of psychology at the University of Arizona, said: "These findings suggest that the happy life is social and conversationally deep rather than solitary and superficial."

The researchers conclude that profound conversations may have the potential to make people happier.

They said: "Just as self-disclosure can instill a sense of intimacy in a relationship, deep conversations may instill a sense of meaning in interaction with partners."

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Lost Jewish Tribe 'Found in Zimbabwe'

By Steve Vickers
BBC News
Harare

The Lemba people of Zimbabwe and South Africa may look like their compatriots, but they follow a very different set of customs and traditions.

They do not eat pork, they practise male circumcision, they ritually slaughter their animals, some of their men wear skull caps and they put the Star of David on their gravestones.

Their oral traditions claim that their ancestors were Jews who fled the Holy Land about 2,500 years ago.

It may sound like another myth of a lost tribe of Israel, but British scientists have carried out DNA tests which have confirmed their Semitic origin.

These tests back up the group's belief that a group of perhaps seven men married African women and settled on the continent. The Lemba, who number perhaps 80,000, live in central Zimbabwe and the north of South Africa.

And they also have a prized religious artefact that they say connects them to their Jewish ancestry - a replica of the Biblical Ark of the Covenant known as the ngoma lungundu, meaning "the drum that thunders".

The object went on display recently at a Harare museum to much fanfare, and instilled pride in many of the Lemba.

"For me it's the starting point," says religious singer Fungisai Zvakavapano-Mashavave.

"Very few people knew about us and this is the time to come out. I'm very proud to realise that we have a rich culture and I'm proud to be a Lemba.

"We have been a very secretive people, because we believe we are a special people."

Religion vs culture

The Lemba have many customs and regulations that tally with Jewish tradition.

They wear skull caps, practise circumcision, which is not a tradition for most Zimbabweans, avoid eating pork and food with animal blood, and have 12 tribes.

They slaughter animals in the same way as Jewish people, and they put the Jewish Star of David on their tombstones.

Members of the priestly clan of the Lemba, known as the Buba, were even discovered to have a genetic element also found among the Jewish priestly line.

"This was amazing," said Prof Tudor Parfitt, from the University of London.

"It looks as if the Jewish priesthood continued in the West by people called Cohen, and in same way it was continued by the priestly clan of the Lemba.

"They have a common ancestor who geneticists say lived about 3,000 years ago somewhere in north Arabia, which is the time of Moses and Aaron when the Jewish priesthood started."

Prof Parfitt is a world-renowned expert, having spent 20 years researching the Lemba, and living with them for six months.

The Lemba have a sacred prayer language which is a mixture of Hebrew and Arabic, pointing to their roots in Israel and Yemen.

Despite their ties to Judaism, many of the Lemba in Zimbabwe are Christians, while some are Muslims.

"Christianity is my religion, and Judaism is my culture," explains Perez Hamandishe, a pastor and member of parliament from the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC).

Despite their centuries-old traditions, some younger Lemba are taking a more liberal view.

"In the old days you didn't marry a non-Lemba, but these days we interact with others," says Alex Makotore, son of the late Chief Mposi from the Lemba "headquarters" in Mberengwa.

"I feel special in my heart but not in front of others such that I'm separated from them. Culture is dynamic."

Crowds

The oral traditions of the Lemba say that the ngoma lungundu is the Biblical wooden Ark made by Moses, and that centuries ago a small group of men began a long journey carrying it from Yemen to southern Africa.

The object went missing during the 1970s and was eventually rediscovered in Harare in 2007 by Prof Parfitt.

"Many people say that the story is far-fetched, but the oral traditions of the Lemba have been backed up by science," he says.

Carbon dating shows the ngoma to be nearly 700 years old - pretty ancient, if not as old as Bible stories would suggest.

But Prof Parfitt says this is because the ngoma was used in battles, and would explode and be rebuilt.

The ngoma now on display was a replica, he says, possibly built from the remains of the original.

"So it's the closest descendant of the Ark that we know of," Prof Parfitt says.

Large crowds came to see the unveiling of the ngoma and to attend lectures on the identity of the Lemba.

For David Maramwidze, an elder in his village, the discovery of the ngoma has been a defining moment.

"Hearing from those professors in Harare and seeing the ngoma makes it clear that we are a great people and I'm very proud," he says.

"I heard about it all my life and it was hard for me to believe, because I had no idea of what it really is.

"I'm still seeing the picture of the ngoma in my mind and it will never come out from my brain. Now we want it to be given back to the Lemba people."

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Sermon for the Third Sunday of Great Lent

CATECHESIS 63: Historical, Concerning the Christians Who Were Massacred in Bulgaria During the Holy Lent, On Account of Meat-eating.

by St. Theodore the Studite

Given On the 3rd Sunday.

Brethren and fathers, in the present instruction I want to urge you to consolation from a certain story. The story is this: In Bulgaria, as those who were accurately informed have reported, an evil decree went out from the ruler there that the Christians in captivity and our brothers were to eat meat during the period of the holy Forty Days; those who obeyed would live, those who disobeyed would be killed. The word of the godless was exceedingly strong and the people assembled and there was weeping and groans and much lamentation with women and children, on the one side of those clinging to the Christian law, on the other of those quailing before the death of the flesh. Finally — ah, the pitiable announcement — they were defeated and submitted to the godless order. Fourteen of them though broke away and stood apart saying it was not possible either to obey or to eat meat in violation of the Christian law. At this, appeals and exhortations by the people were made: 'Let them yield to constraint, not die foolishly, and through repentance they can be restored again.' But nothing could persuade them or weaken them from keeping their gaze fixed on God and on the blessedness that was laid up in his promises. The Scythian then, when he saw the implacable determination of the men, thought to subdue the rest by means of one, and having slain him he at once distributed his children and his wife among the Scythians as slaves, so that the others weakened by this would be brought over. But they rather remained unbowed and shouted out, ‘We are Christians, and our lot is that of our dead brother’. At this confession they were crucified on planks and died in the Lord.

You see, therefore, brethren, that even now too the Gospel of the kingdom of God is active. 'One who loves father or mother,' it says, 'more than me is not worthy of me; and one who loves son or daughter or wife more than me is not worthy of me; and one who does not take up his cross and follow after me, is not worthy of me' [Matt. 10:37-38]. And again, 'Do not fear those who kill the body, but cannot kill the soul; rather fear one who can destroy both soul and body in Gehenna' [Matt. 10:28]. They were obedient then to the commands of the Gospel, they obeyed the authority of the Lord and were wreathed with the crown of martyrdom, imitating the holy Maccabees and doubling their number, for the Maccabees were seven, but they were fourteen; the former so as not to taste swine’s meat in violation of the law, the latter so as not to partake of any meat in violation of the Christian rule; this latter seems stricter, because for the Maccabees partaking of pork was utterly forbidden, but for these men it was permissible to partake of any meat under necessity, as St Basil says. But since the order from the Scythians was aimed at the rejection of the faith, they refused; but they considered all things as secondary for the love of Christ. O blessed men! O blessed action! in a single instant to have received in exchange eternal rest! What will they say to this, those who deny that heretical communion is a breach of faith? For if there there was a breach of faith by the people over eating meat, how much more here over the heretically sacrificed communion. Where too are those who say that there is no ground for martyrdom in the image of Christ? For if there there was ground for martyrdom for those who did not eat meat, how much more here is the ground for martyrdom resplendent for those who have not denied. But the heretics, because they are dark themselves, also speak things that are dark as they try to embroil others in their own falls.

But let us, brethren, glorify our good God, who glorifies those who have glorified Him, who reveals martyrs in this generation too, as we reflect on the fact that if men who were apparently lowly, uneducated, married and with children gave everything up for the love of Christ, how much more should we, who are unmarried and outside the world, when the moment calls, become as zealous as the saints. But this is for a day when Christ calls us; now though, let us stand firm for the uninterrupted martyrdom according to the conscience. Let us not bow the knee to Baal, brethren, and let us not give in when struck by thoughts [logismoi], but let us rather quench the fiery arrows of the evil one with tears, with supplications, with compunction, with the other batterings of the body, so that we too may be able to say with the Apostle, 'Every day I die, that is as certain as the boast in you, which I have in Christ Jesus our Lord' [1 Cor. 15:31]; and with the holy David, 'Because for You we die all the day, we were reckoned as sheep for the slaughter' [Ps. 43:23]. With them may we be found worthy to become heirs of the kingdom of heaven, in Christ Jesus our Lord, to whom be glory and might, with the Father and the Holy Spirit, now and for ever and to the ages of ages. Amen.

Source

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

An Evolving Alphabet

Read more here: How the Alphabet Was Born from Hieroglyphs

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Do Not Let The Passions Take Root

A thick rope is made from thin, fibrous strands of hemp. One thin fiber cannot hold you tied nor can it strangle you. For you will easily, as in jest, break it and free yourself from it. If you are tied by a thick rope, you can be held bound and even be strangled by it. Neither can you break it easily nor free yourself from it.

As a thick rope consists of thin and weak fibers, so the passions of man consist of minor sins. Man can break off and turn away from the beginnings of minor sins. But, when sin after sin is repeated, the weave becomes all the more stronger and stronger until in the end a passion is created, which then turns man into some kind of monster as only it knows how. You cannot easily cut it off, nor distance yourself from it, nor can you divorce yourself from it.

O, if only men would beware and take care of the beginnings of sins! Then, they would not have to endure much in freeing themselves from passions. "To cut off rooted passions is as difficult as cutting off the fingers," said a monk from the Holy Mountain. To free himself from sinful passions, St. Emilianus was helped by thinking thoughts of death and, understandably, the Grace of God, without which it is extremely difficult to rid oneself of the fetters of passion. To think often of impending death, to repent and to implore Grace from Almighty God, these three save a man from the bondage of sin.

St. Sisoes was asked, "At which time can passions be uprooted?" The saint replied, "As soon as one passion takes root in you, uproot it immediately."

- St. Nikoali Velimirovich, Prologue

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

"The Life In Christ" by Fr. John Romanides

INTRODUCTION

In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, Amen.

Dr. Andrew Sopko once remarked that Fr. John Romanides “manifests a rather elusive presence, remaining on the periphery of many of the predominant themes occupying Orthodox theology today.” One explanation Sopko proffers for Fr. John’s continued obscurity is that half of his work was written in Greek and the other half in English, and since Greek is not commonly spoken in the West, few are in a position to “see the complete picture.” Until now, the existence of a sermon by Fr. John in French, composed in the mid-fifties while he was a student at L’Institut de Theologie Orthodoxe Saint-Serge, further complicated the situation. We have translated this worthy but unnoticed piece — Fr. John’s “La Vie dans Christ” — as a continuation of Fr. Alexios Trader’s admirable achievement in translating Patristic Theology: The University Lectures of John Romanides, published by Uncut Mountain Press earlier this year. Now efforts can be focused on Fr. John’s many great works in Greek that have yet to be translated, chief amongst them the masterful Romeosyne, Romania, Rumeli.

In “The Life in Christ” Fr. John’s message is urgent: Today’s Orthodox have forgotten the meaning of life in the Holy Sacraments. True membership in the Body of Christ is grounded in a day-to-day crucifixion of one’s sentimental, eudaemonistic love. Such a crucifixion gradually replaces self-centered love with the kenotic love of the Cross, which “seeketh not its own.” However, this call to arms bears no resemblance to the revivalism of American Protestantism, because for Fr. John the spiritual ascesis of the individual Christian is inseparable from life in the Holy Sacraments. Sacramental life, in turn, is always presented as a literal union of love between actual people who are waging unremitting warfare against Satan, side by side with the Holy Angels as well as with the Saints of all eras.

In Fr. John’s important early essay, “Man and His True Life According to the Greek Orthodox Service Books,” Holy Baptism is viewed as the culmination of an arduous catechesis of self-denial and noetic purification, at the end of which the newly-illumined “can freely choose to die with Christ to the vanity of the ways of this world and live within the love of the corporate life in the body of Christ.” The same hesychastic notion of sacramental life is found in “The Life in Christ,” where Fr. John proclaims that: "The one who is a living member of the Body of Christ is one who is dead to the power of death and who lives in the renewal of the Spirit of life. For this very reason, those who denied Christ during persecution, even after hours of torture, were considered excommunicated."

Fr. John’s “coenobitic” Church corresponds to Fr. Alexander Golitzin’s vision of the Church as a single Temple which is also Threefold: 1) the Cardial Temple, where man purifies his heart to receive the Holy Spirit; 2) the Physical Temple, where the faithful gather to communally fight the devil; 3) and the Heavenly Temple, where those faithful on the other side of death ceaselessly offer “Holy things to the Holy.”

In closing, let us note that “The Life in Christ” contributes to Fr. John’s “neopatristic synthesis” by its insistence that the life in Christ is always a rediscovery of the mind of Christ, which does not change. Why is it that many Orthodox traditionalists who seek to preserve the true fullness of the Church’s life end up as mere "conservatives,” unable to discern what is changeless from what must change in the maintenance of a living Tradition? Fr. John, though his immediate audience in “The Life in Christ” was the youth of a secularized French society in the 1950s, formulates an answer which applies equally to today’s troubled seekers who would recover Orthodox Tradition in their own lives: Just as the essential methods and aims of the devil never change, likewise the Orthodox method for defeating the devil does not change, but is preserved in the spiritual “[g]uidance, participation in prayer, and communion” which together constitute hesychasm. “The Life in Christ” evinces Fr. John’s belief that hesychasm is the only life that truly is in Christ, since its Orthodox therapeutic cure is grounded solely in the reality of Christ in the Holy Sacraments of the Church.

The Life in Christ

By Protopresbyter John Romanides

The sacred task that faces Orthodoxy today, and in particular its youth, who are often lost in the liberalism of past generations, is the rediscovery of the Paschal victory in the daily life of the Church. The common faith and worship of the Apostles and the Fathers remains essentially unchanged in our liturgical and canonical books, but in practice, in the spirit of clergy and faithful, there is great confusion, no doubt due to a lack of spiritual understanding of the very nature of the work of Christ in the Church. Thus many people who claim to be Orthodox and who sincerely want to be, conceive of the life of the Church according to vague personal sentiments and not according to the spirit of the Apostles and Fathers of the Church. What is lacking is a living acceptance (acceptation vivante) that presupposes the sacramental life of the Church.

This lack of understanding explains to a large extent the weaknesses of the Church in the Western world and, in particular, characterizes its attitude toward various schisms and heresies. Those who cannot understand that “The Spirit itself bears witness to our spirit that we are children of God” (Rom. 8:16) cannot preach the truth, but must ask themselves the question: Are not they themselves outside the Truth and, therefore, dead members of the Church?

1. Presuppositions of Sacramental Life

In contrast to most Western religions that generally accept death as a normal phenomenon, or even regard it as a result of a legal decision of God to punish the sinner, the Patristic Tradition of the [Christian] East takes very seriously the fact that death is intrinsically linked to sin (I Cor. 15:56) and that it is under the power of the Devil (Heb. 2:14). The Fathers of the [Christian] East rejected the idea that God is the author of death, that the world is “normal” in its current condition, and that man can live a “normal” life solely based on following natural laws that are assumed to govern the universe.

The Orthodox conception of the universe is incompatible with a static system of natural moral laws. The world is, on the contrary, seen as a field of action and struggle of living persons. A living and personal God is the originator of creation in its entirety. His omnipresence does not exclude, however, other wills, themselves established by Him even with the power to dismiss the will of their Creator. Thus, the Devil is not only able to exist, but also to aspire to the destruction of works of God. He does this by trying to lure the creation toward the nothingness from which it was formed. Death, which is a “return to nothingness” (St. Athanasius, Incarnatio Verbi, 4-5), constitutes the very essence of demonic power in creation (Rom. 8:19-22). The resurrection of Christ in the very reality of his flesh and his bones (Luke 24:39) not only serves as proof of the “abnormal” character of death, but also designates it as the true enemy (I Cor. 15:26). But if death is an abnormal phenomenon, there can be nothing resembling a “moral law” inherent in the universe. The Bible, at least, does not know of one (Rom. 8: 19-22). Otherwise, the Lord Jesus Christ gave himself in vain “for our sins so that we might uproot this present evil age.”

The destiny of man has been perfection since his origin, and is the same today: to become perfect, as God is perfect (Eph. 5:1, 4:13). The achievement of this perfection was rendered impossible by the coming of death into the world (Rom. 5:12), for “the sting of death is sin” (I Cor 15:56). Once submitted to the power of death, man can only concern himself with the sufficiency of the flesh (Rom. 7:14-25). His instinct for self-preservation saturates his everyday life and often leads him to be unfair to others for personal gain (I Thes. 4:4). A man subjected to the fear of death (Heb 2:15) cannot live the life of love of the Creator and be an imitator of God (Eph 5:1). Death and the instinct for self-preservation are at the root of sin that separates man from unity in love, life, and divine truth. According to St. Cyril of Alexandria, death is the enemy that prevents man from loving God and neighbor without anxiety or concern for his own security and his own comfort. For fear of becoming valueless and meaningless, man seeks to demonstrate to himself and to others that he is really worth something. He is then obliged to make himself appear, at least from a certain point of view, superior to others. He loves those who flatter him and hates those who insult him. An insult profoundly affects a man who is afraid of becoming insignificant! Whoever the world sees as a “natural man” almost always lives a life of half-lies and of disappointments. He cannot love his friends who give him a sense of security, while his instinct for self-preservation, both moral and physical, causes him to hate his enemies (Matt. 5:46-48; Luke 6:32-36).

Death is the source of individualism: it has the power to enslave the free will of man completely to the “body of death” (Rom. 7:18). It is death which, by reducing mankind to self-centeredness and egotism, blinds men to the truth. And the truth is rejected by many, because it is too difficult to accept. Man always prefers to accept a truth that satisfies his personal desires. Mankind seeks security and happiness rather than the sufferance of a love that is a self-offering (Philip. 1: 27-29). The natural man seeks a sentimental religion of security in moral precepts and simple rules that generate feelings of comfort, but require no effort at self-denial in “death with Christ to the elements of the world” (Col. 2:20). The Apostles and Fathers do not transmit to us a faith accomplished in “feelings of piety or comfort”. Instead, on every page they raise a cry of victory over death and corruption. “O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is your victory? ...Thanks be to God who gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ” (I Cor. 15: 55-57).

The victory of Christ over the devil has destroyed the power of death that separated man from God and neighbor (Eph. 2:13-22). This victory over death and corruption has been accomplished in the flesh of Christ (ibid. 2:15), as well as among the just ones who have died before (I Pet. 3:19). “Christ is risen from the dead, trampling down death by death, and upon those in the tombs bestowing life” (Paschal Hymn). The Kingdom of God is already established, both beyond the grave and on this side of it (Eph. 2:19). The gates of hell cannot prevail over the Body of Christ (Mat. 16:18). The power of death cannot seize the kingdom of life. Each day the Devil and his kingdom moves a little closer to their final defeat (I Cor. 15:26), which is assured in the Body of Christ.

2. Sacramental Participation in the Victory of the Cross

Participation in the victory of the Cross is not only a hope for the future, but a present reality (Eph. 2:13-22). It is given to those who are baptized (Rom. 6:3-4) and grafted into the Body of Christ (Jn. 15:1-8). There is nevertheless no magical guarantee of salvation and of continued participation in the life of Christ (Rom. 9:19-20).

Christ came to destroy the power of disunity, uniting those who believe in him in his own Body. The external sign of the Church is unity of love (Jn. 17:21), while the center and the source of this unity is the Eucharist: “Since there is one bread, we who are several, are one body, because we are all part of one Bread” (I Cor. 6:19-20). Baptism and Confirmation grafts us to the Body of Christ, while the Eucharist keeps us alive in Christ and united with each other by the inhabitation of the Holy Spirit in our body (I Cor. 6:19-20). Faith is insufficient for salvation. The catechumens who were already “believers” had to stay vigilant before receiving baptism in rejecting anything that the world sees as “normal life” in the corrupt body of sin and death, to be resurrected in the unity of the Spirit, that is to say, to be united with other members of a local community in Christ and the communal life of love. Orthodoxy knows nothing of a sentimental love for humanity. It is with concrete individuals that we must be united to live in Christ. The only way that leads to the love of Christ is that of a real love for others. “I tell you the truth, whenever you have done these things to one of these, my brethren, it is to me that you have done them” (Mt. 15:20).

Love in the Body of Christ does not consist in vague abstractions expressing the need to serve ideologies or human causes. Love, according to the image of Christ, consists in being crucified to the world and is the liberation of the self from all vague ideas in order to live in the complexity of communal life, seeking to love Christ in the body of brethren who have a very real existence. It is easy to talk about love and goodness, but it is very difficult to enter into sincere and intimate relationships with people of diverse origins. It is, however, the death and resurrection in Christ that has established a community of saints who think not of themselves, nor of their own opinions, but continually express their love for Christ and other men, seeking to humble themselves as Christ was humiliated. What was not possible under the law of death has become possible through unity in the Spirit of life.

3. How We Today Achieve the Victory of the Cross

Throughout its history the Church has had to fight sin and corruption within its own members, and often within its clergy. However, in every epoch She knew how to implement the appropriate means, as She always remained able to recognize the enemy. The Church exists in the truth not because all its members are without sin, but because the sacramental life is always present in Her and against Her the Devil is defenseless. “When you often assemble in one place (epi to auto), the power of Satan is destroyed” (St. Ignatius of Antioch, Letter to the Ephesians, 13). Whenever members of a community gather to celebrate the Eucharist and are in the condition to exchange the kiss of peace to commune together in the Body and Blood of Christ, the devil is defeated. However, when a member of the Body of Christ communes unworthily, he eats and drinks damnation (I Cor. 11:29). When a Christian does not commune at all with the Body and Blood of Christ in every Eucharist, he is spiritually dead (Jn. 6:53). The Church has categorically refused to endorse the practice whereby a large number of Christians attend the Eucharist, while a few commune. Guidance, participation in prayer and communion are inseparable (7th Apostolic Canon; St. John Chrysostom, 3rd Homily On Ephesians). “Let no one be deceived: if somebody is outside the sanctuary, he is deprived of the Bread of God...he who does not gather together with the Church has shown his pride and has condemned himself” (St. Ignatius of Antioch, Eph. 5). The Biblical and Patristic tradition is unanimous on one point: The one who is a living member of the Body of Christ is one who is dead to the power of death and who lives in the renewal of the Spirit of life. For this very reason, those who denied Christ during persecution, even after hours of torture, were considered excommunicated. Once a Christian died with Christ in baptism, he was expected to be ready to die anytime in the name of Christ. “Whoever denies me before men I will deny also before my Father in heaven” (Mat. 10:33). The 10th Canon of the First Ecumenical Council does not merely prohibit the ordination of anyone who has denied Christ during the persecution, but declares the automatic invalidation of any such ordination, even if it took place in ignorance of the ordainer. All who have performed such an ordination are themselves deprived of the priesthood. What serious breakers of the vows of baptism are those who are too lazy to go to church. The approval that our clergy today gives our sacramental practice is even more unacceptable! If the Christian was excommunicated for having denied Christ after hours of physical torture, those who week after week excommunicate themselves are all the more condemnable.

The character and methods of the Devil have not changed. He has remained similar to himself, as Paul described, capable of “transforming into an angel of light” (2 Cor. 11:15). The power of death in the world remains the same. The means of salvation, the death of baptism and the life of the Eucharist, have thus remained the same (at least in the liturgical books of the Church). The canons of the Church were never changed. We always read the same Scriptures approved by the Fathers. How then can we explain our modern weaknesses? They have never been so evident.

There can be only one answer to this question. The members of the Church are not fighting evil in the spirit of the Bible. Too many Christians employ the Church for their own interests and interpret the doctrine of Christ according to their own feelings. The essential task of the Orthodox youth today must be to return to the truth of the Apostles and the Fathers and to not walk according to the laws of the prince of darkness and the elements of this world. It is for this reason that Christ died. To deny this is to deny his Cross and the blood of martyrs. Before criticizing the “inflexibility” of patristic doctrine, the modern Orthodox must return to the presuppositions of life in Christ in Scripture and be careful not to pervert the doctrine of Christ.

”La Vie dans Christ” originally appeared in SYNAXE No 21 (p.26-28) and No 22 (p.23-26). To God Be Glory, Amen.

Translated from the French with an Introduction by James L. Kelley

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Monastery of the Holy Cross in Jerusalem

The present Sunday, the Third Sunday of Great Lent, the Orthodox Church invites us to focus on the Holy Cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, a source of blessing and support for this period of fasting and of our entire life in general.

Below is some information on the historical Monastery of the Holy Cross in Jerusalem, a monastery inextricably related to the whole history of Orthodoxy's most precious emblem.

The Monastery of the Cross is a solitary Roman monastery located outside the Old City of Jerusalem. Its name is based on the tradition that it stands where the tree grew that was used to make Christ's cross.

The Holy Tree, according to the tradition of the Monastery, was based on a triplet seeding (olive + cypress + cedar) that Abraham gave to Lot. Lot planted the tree at this site and watered it with waters he fetched from the Jordan river. The tree was later used to create the Holy Cross on which Jesus was crucified. A room inside the Monastery marks the site of the tree. (Pictures below commemorate this event).

There was a Christian church on this site in the 5th century said to have been built by Saint Helen, the mother of Emperor Constantine I, but it was destroyed by the Persians in 614 AD (you can see part of the original mosaic floor next to the main altar in the present church).

The Monastery of the Cross' high, fortress-like walls reflect its precarious position outside the city walls.

By the 14th century, the monastery had become the center of the Georgian community in Jerusalem. By 1685, however, the monastery had been taken over by the Greek Orthodox Patriarchate.

The simple dome is one of the church's most beautiful features. Also worth seeing are the frescoes, which were repainted in the 17th century based on 13th century originals and show an unusual combination of Christian, pagan, and worldly images.

The monastery's refectory and kitchen provide a glimpse into monastic life. A small museum displays the monastery's treasures.

The monastery remains active today, but visitors are permitted to wander freely around the monastery complex.

For more pictures, see here.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Joel Osteen: The New Face of Christianity

Forget Billy Graham and Jimmy Swaggart – the most popular and influential pastor in the US is Joel Osteen. On the surface he is modest and quietly spoken, but his belief in the "prosperity gospel" is changing the way people pray.

Daniel Kalder
The Observer
Sunday 7 March 2010

The praise and worship brought me here," says Natalie, sitting beside me in the fifth row of Houston's Lakewood Church – a vast, converted stadium that seats 16,000. "I was raised Catholic, but I don't feel the spirit there like I do here."

Three enormous video screens advertise church groups such as Griefshare: From Mourning to Joy and the Freedom Series. But just as I'm wondering what the Quest for Authentic Manhood involves, the house worship band kicks out the jams. It's 11am exactly and the day's second service has begun. The stage is dominated by an enormous revolving golden globe, in front of which is a rock orchestra flanked on either side by a multiracial gospel choir. Meanwhile, no fewer than nine lead singers are dancing about the stage, praising the Lord. And as if the stage isn't busy enough, down on the floor a small army of serious-looking men dressed in black suits stands alert, ever watchful, communicating with each other through radio mics. Theoretically they're church ushers, but they look more like secret service men guarding a president. Gently but firmly they guide latecomers to their seats, leaving nothing to chance, as if one wrong step could upset the delicate balance that keeps 16,000 evangelical Christians from erupting into violence and anarchy.

Men on wheeled chairs scoot past these special agents, thrusting cameras into the faces of the congregation, while overhead a camera on a crane swoops past, instantly transmitting the action on stage to the giant video screens above. Looking up, I watch as the walls and ceiling periodically change colour, from blue to purple to orange as if we were at an intergalactic disco. Make no mistake: Lakewood is no ordinary church, it's a megachurch. No, let's go further: it's an ultrachurch, the largest in America, with more than 40,000 attending five services weekly and a further 7 million watching in their living rooms. And let's not forget the tens of millions more joining us in 100 countries around the world.

The main draw is Joel Osteen, "America's pastor". He's at the edge of the stage with his glamorous wife and co-pastor, Victoria. I've watched his televised sermons, seen him on the cover of his bestselling books, and observed interviews on TV with megastars such as Larry King, Sean Hannity and Barbara Walters. Powerful politicians from both parties crave to be seen with him, just as in the past they paid homage to Billy Graham (who has endorsed Osteen). The Republican governor of Texas, Rick Perry, made sure to attend the grand opening of Lakewood in July 2005; Osteen in turn led the prayer during Perry's inauguration two years later. But Osteen doesn't pick political favourites; when Houston elected its first openly gay mayor this year (a Democrat), he said the prayer during her inauguration. The Clintons like to be seen worshipping at Lakewood when they're in town, and John McCain was happy to sing the praises of Osteen while campaigning in 2008. And while Obama is yet to pay a visit, last December he found the time to receive Osteen at the White House. These disparate and often opposed politicians recognise one thing: if anybody is the face of evangelical Christianity in America today, it is Joel Osteen.

And what a face it is! The smile is what I notice most of all. Impeccable, white, ultra-regular, it never vanishes: it's the natural setting for his features, the default look to which his face always returns, as if illuminated from within by radiant joy.

The music stops. Joel and Victoria welcome us. In a soft Texan drawl, Joel declares that we're going to take off the heaviness of the week and put on a garment of praise. No matter what has happened, it's in our power to decide we are going to be happy and make progress every day. We are God's people and we're going to be victorious!

"Lakewood was started by my father, John Osteen, in 1959 in a little feed store," says Joel. We are sitting in a meeting room below the church an hour after the service. He negates most stereotypes of the TV preacher: quiet rather than loud, reserved rather than extrovert, perhaps even a little naive. He looks boyish, delicate, much younger than his 46 years.

"Dad had been Southern Baptist," he continues, "but that was before I was born. He left to start Lakewood, partly because he didn't like all these denominations keeping people apart. We were in that remodelled store until I was nine or 10 years old. It held about 150 people, but we started with 90. I didn't realise it was that small. There was a centre aisle and a pew on one side and a pew on the other. So it had 20 rows or something. I just remember going there as a boy and sitting in the front row, listening to my dad. That's where I grew up."

"The talent is incredible," says Natalie, marvelling at the horde of singers and musicians blasting out electrified praise. The worship leader is Israel Houghton: his story is told in Osteen's third and latest New York Times bestseller, It's Your Time. The child of a drug-addicted white mother and absent black father, Houghton ultimately became a Grammy award-winning singer-songwriter.

It's Your Time is a major plank of a media empire that comprises e-votionals, daily podcasts and much else. Osteen's mother, Dodie, also features in the book: she miraculously recovered from terminal cancer in the early 80s. Jesus, Job and King David make appearances. But Osteen mixes in more mischievous examples of God's favour – he is particularly fond of telling us about the Almighty's many intercessions to save Joel from a speeding ticket. His goal is to help us realise God's wonderful plan for "supernatural increase" in our lives, so we stay faithful no matter how bad the odds seem.

Osteen ran his father's television ministry for 17 years behind the scenes. He understands communication – not only the power of the word but also of sound and vision. A perfectionist, he hires only the best. Singing alongside Houghton is Cindy Cruse-Ratcliffe, scion of a famous Christian music dynasty. Every Sunday Lakewood delivers a flawless, high-energy spectacle, precisely the kind of thing that repulses church traditionalists. Yet although it appears ultra-contemporary, this style of worship is a manifestation of ecstatic praise, which is as old as religion itself, and much older than the hymn books and cathedrals which are no less engineered to engender certain effects in congregations.

Osteen, a college dropout, never planned to be a preacher. For years he rebuffed his father's invitations to preach, until in January 1999 he finally accepted. His father was ill at the time. "I didn't want to," he says, "but I just felt inside that I was supposed to. So I spoke that Sunday for the first time. And… that next Friday is when he died. We didn't think he was going to die. But… you know, when I put that together I knew it wasn't a coincidence that I spoke the last Sunday of his life. And then a couple of days after he died I felt that same feeling – that I was supposed to pastor the church. And so I just started."

Osteen was 35, married, a father. The next week, still grieving, he preached again. He hoped to maintain the 8,000-member megachurch his father had built. Instead Joel's uplifting preaching resonated and Lakewood quadrupled its membership. He had to find a new building, and after fighting multiple lawsuits he leased the Compaq Center in downtown Houston for 30 years at a cost of $12m (while agreeing to fund renovations costing $90m). The congregation moved into its new home in 2005. It was destiny.

"And that's why I encourage people… The phrase I use a lot is: 'God's dream for your life is bigger than your own.' You don't know what He has in store if you'll just keep being your best, keep being faithful."

Twenty minutes into the service and people are still flooding into Lakewood. "It was like this at the 8.30 morning service, too," says Natalie. "Every week it's packed."

The video screens show the view from the back of the arena: it looks like a stadium rock gig. But it's not just the size of the crowd that's stunning; it's also its diversity. Eleven o'clock on Sunday morning is the most segregated hour in America, said Martin Luther King – and even today Christians frequently worship in predominantly black churches, white churches, Korean churches, Hispanic churches, Chinese churches. In Lakewood no single group dominates. I see Texas blondes, hair piled high atop their heads; men in dreadlocks; sloppy dudes in T-shirts; black women in their Sunday best; old coots in double-breasted suits. All of them are dissolving together, lost in praise. Decades of government intervention in the name of equality have never come close to achieving the success of Lakewood.

"There are no walls here; nobody judges you," says Natalie. "I feel incredibly free. Sometimes I think this is what heaven is like."

Lakewood was multiracial from the start. For years, sociologists and visiting pastors have tried to understand the phenomenon, but according to Osteen there was never anything conscious about it: his father was simply "for people".

"I wondered when I took over – I'm white and young – will I continue to draw Hispanic, black? Was that just something unique to my father? But I'm amazed even when we go in other cities, it'll be black, white, Hispanic…"

Osteen pauses: "I think now the spirit of the congregation itself is welcoming. It's not only very diverse racially but also socioeconomically. There's some very poor people and some very wealthy people, but I think… One thing about my parents and what we try to do as well… we try to… it's not about… We try to never even think about the race and… I don't know."

Articulate and assured when preaching, Osteen offstage is tentative and freely admits to areas where he lacks expertise. This humility has landed him in trouble: during a 2005 interview with Larry King he prevaricated over whether a non-Christian could enter heaven. It was classic Osteen: polite, nice, nonjudgmental. Cue outrage among fellow evangelicals. The next time Osteen appeared on Larry King he was certain faith in Christ was essential.

Even so, he is still open about his weaknesses: "Billy Graham, his gift was to go out and win people to Christ. It's different being a pastor. I'm trying to teach people – how do you live the abundant life? That's my gift. Some people are good at taking the scripture line by line and talking about how it was written, but that's not my gift… I believe you've got to repent of your sins; you've got to have a relationship with Christ. So I believe all the fundamental things, I just don't focus on that."

The worship ends. Osteen takes centre stage. He invokes God's power, urging the congregation to release negative emotions: "Let go of offence. Let go of fear. Let go of revenge. Don't live angry, let go now!" Some respond with an "Amen!" or "Hallelujah!" Osteen himself eschews traditional "gospel" stylings.

Now he explains the importance not only of thinking positive thoughts, but also speaking them aloud – for the Bible says that spoken words have power. We must dare to ask God to fulfil our dreams! For He loves us, and His dream for each of us is bigger than we can imagine. Get ready for supernatural increase because… "You're going to be anointed, redeemed, blessed, prosperous, disciplined… You've got a great week coming!"

Osteen is often labelled a preacher of the "prosperity gospel", a movement that dates back more than half a century. It is resolutely worldly, focused on receiving blessings and gifts from God now as well as in the afterlife. According to a Time magazine poll in 2006, 17% of Christians declare themselves adherents, while a total of 61% believe God wants His children to prosper.

But many evangelicals despise the doctrine. Rick Warren, the California megapastor who gave the invocation at Obama's inauguration, told Time magazine: "This idea that God wants everybody to be wealthy? There is a word for that: baloney. It's creating a false idol. You don't measure your self-worth by your net worth. I can show you millions of faithful followers of Christ who live in poverty. Why isn't everyone in the church a millionaire?"

Many have attacked Osteen personally, pointing to the scarcity of references to Jesus in his books, the absence of a cross on stage, his lack of theological training, his refusal to talk about sin. Michael Horton, a professor of theology, more or less called him a heretic on national TV. Others say he's not a preacher at all, but a secular self-help showman, selling platitudes and false hope.

And then in a whole other league there's the distinguished journalist Barbara Ehrenreich, who included Osteen in her spirited evisceration of America's Oprahfied culture of positive thinking in her recent book Smile or Die. Throwing him in with other prosperity preachers, assorted health gurus, faith healers and new age "philosophers", Ehrenreich accused Osteen not only of peddling falsehoods and pseudo-spiritual claptrap, but of contributing to a culture of mass self-delusion that left Americans unable to contemplate negative outcomes and thus led to the great banking collapse of 2008. According to Ehrenreich, the nation's CEOs just could not believe in a world where their desires did not translate into results, while Americans in general just can't believe in the terrible things that are obviously coming down the pipe: they have been conditioned to believe that everything is going to be just grrrreat!

Osteen is sanguine about criticism, accepting it as a result of his high profile. He doesn't talk about sin because "people have been beaten down enough" and "it's better to encourage than condemn". Nor does he get involved in moral or political controversies. He did not attend Bible college, but points out that he did spend 17 years editing his father's sermons for broadcast. And you don't have to be a Lakewood true believer to think that Ehrenreich is over-egging the pudding with her wilder claims; the banking crisis was a global phenomenon, not just restricted to readers of Osteen's Your Best Life Now. The label of prosperity preacher does sting, however. "It's just the way I grew up. We believed God is good and He wants to bless you and He wants you to be healthy – but when I think of a prosperity preacher, that to me is somebody who's on TV asking for money every second. I don't talk about money."

The first time I watched Osteen on TV I kept waiting for the appeal for cash. It never came. I was confused. This was a decision Joel made at the inception of his father's television ministry in 1983. He wanted to give people as few reasons to turn off as possible, and nothing alienated an audience more than a begging preacher. (Another principle was to keep the message broad, so non-believers would keep watching.)

The strategy works. The church brought in $80m last year. Osteen is personally wealthy: after his first book sold 5m copies, rumours swirled that he received an eight-figure advance for his second. Even tithing 10% still leaves him with an immense chunk of change. Osteen cites Abraham as an example of a wealthy man supported and loved by the Deity. And then there's Malachi: "Bring all the tithes into the storehouse… and try me now in this, if I will not for you open the windows of heaven and pour out for you such blessing that there will not be room enough to receive it."

But Osteen insists that his idea of prosperity is broad: "It's not just money. God wants you to have good relationships, to have healthy children, to have peace in your mind; you know, have friends – that's prosperity. If people know you are sincere, then they will respond to you."

Osteen's only brush with scandal came in December 2005 when Sharon Jones, a flight attendant, accused his wife, Victoria, of assault on a flight from Houston to Vail, Colorado. Jones alleged that Victoria was so enraged by some liquid that had been spilt on her first-class seat that she grabbed her by the shoulders, rammed her against a toilet door and then elbowed her in the chest – as you do – and all this while passengers were still boarding. As a result of the traumatic incident, Jones claimed that she not only lost her faith but also developed a terrible case of piles. Clearly she deserved at least $400,000 in damages.

For nearly three years the lawsuit hung over the Osteens, and when it finally went to trial in August 2008 the national media gleefully descended upon Houston, hoping for some fun with a classic TV evangelist scandal. It was certainly dramatic. Words such as "devil" and "cult" and "racist" were thrown at the Osteens by their accuser. Alas for Jones, a key eyewitness retracted her support of Jones's story in court and with nobody else backing her version of events, the jury tossed the case out after three hours, declaring it "a waste of time". The Osteens were exonerated, although Victoria Osteen did pay a $3,000 fine to the federal aviation authority for "interfering with a crew member". She stressed, however, that she was guilty of no wrongdoing and was only doing so to put the experience behind her.

Osteen is now alone on stage, the golden globe revolving behind him. He is so quiet, so gentle, so modest; his speech stripped down and lacking in rhetorical flourishes – and yet although he is addressing millions, it feels as if he is talking directly to you. This is the miraculous moment. Osteen knows what's going on inside your soul, he sees your frustrations, your loneliness, your hopes, fears; and he knows what you must do.

The theme is: bloom where you're planted. The tone is darker than in the books. Sometimes we don't seem to be fulfilling our dreams; sometimes we suffer for no apparent reason. But look at Joseph, who was tossed in a pit and enslaved. He didn't lose faith and God made him viceroy of Egypt. But victory can be a long time coming – and more often than not God wants to change us, not our situation. Even if you can't see any benefits to your situation, know that God is using you to work in someone else's life. Do your best where you can, when you can. Be a flower among the weeds. God has a plan.

Sixteen thousand souls are sitting in perfect silence. For 25 minutes there is perfect concentration in the stadium. I've never experienced anything like it.

Osteen's great aunt Johnnie Daniels was a good Christian woman. Her door was always open. She provided money, food and shelter to those in need. As a reward for her kindness, she was beaten to death in her home by a crack addict with a claw hammer. She was 86.

"Surely," I say, "when a thing like this happens it's difficult to keep 'living your best life now'?"

But Osteen – unflustered, calm, polite – disagrees. "I don't want to sound like I'm super spiritual or anything but… I don't… I haven't… from the time that I was little I've had a good sense of trust and confidence that God was in control. Even with my great aunt. I believe part of faith is trusting… Maybe this would be a better example. We had a good friend and their 16-year-old boy left one night and he wasn't supposed to take the car. He hit a tree and killed himself. They're still not over it. And you know, they're good people. It's hard to explain, but… I believe that God can keep you… that you won't leave this earth until you're supposed to go. That's kind of my thing now. Now I know it would be hard if someone was taken away tomorrow, but I just think that's the way you have to look at it. You know, God's in control and we don't understand everything. I don't have to understand why my mother got healed and a lot of people, they're in the hospital and they're not going to make it. But I look at them and say this: 'God's got you in the palm of His hand. You won't leave one second before your time. If God wants you to be here, then you're going to be here.' So I try to see it like that."

After the service I tour the complex. I see the Wall of Champions, the study rooms for new believers, the baby rooms, the media centre selling DVDs, CDs, Bible studies and the collected works of Joel and Victoria.

Osteen is signing books. Indefatigable, he will spend an hour posing for photographs, listening to problems, giving advice and blessings. The main hall is filling up for this afternoon's Spanish-language service, led by another Grammy winner, Marcos Witt – 8,000 will attend.

There are more than 300 full- and part-time staff at Lakewood, and approximately 5,000 volunteers. It is a vast, thrumming God-machine. But that metaphor only goes so far, for without the man at its centre – gifted, elusive, open, childlike; the anti-preacher who is the most successful preacher of them all – there would be nothing. Joel Osteen is the brilliant, unquantifiable, animating essence. And after meeting him, while there is much I still don't understand, I do recall Jesus' words to his disciples in Matthew's gospel: Behold, I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves: be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves.

[For critiques of Joel Osteen's version of the gospel, see here, here, here, and here.]

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Interview With Papa-Foti Lavriotis

Papa-Foti, we know someone who witnessed the following: Many years ago, you together with a spiritual child of yours liturgized at dawn at the picturesque chapel of Panagia Galatousas, inside the castle of our city. And when you finished the Divine Liturgy you took the Holy Communion and went to one of the houses of ill-repute which were once in that area, and you Communed a prostitute ready to die. Indeed, later she did die. Is this true? Were you not afraid what people would say if they saw you?

This has happened many times. A lady near the Church of Saint Symeon told me about certain circumstances and I would go to these souls. They would receive me. I would speak to them about repentance, the salvation of the soul, the other life, etc. I never spoke badly to them, but with love I would tell them to repent and God would provide for them and restore them to His heart. Many souls repented.... You asked if I ever was afraid. What should I fear? I fear no one. We should only fear God when we sin. I didn't care what people would think. I was working for Christ.

Father Photios, the Pope recently came to Greece. What do you have to say about this to us?

Shame on the Synod for receiving the Pope! Whoever invited him are accountable. Those who resisted did very good! The Pope together with the Jews are the greatest enemy of the world, because they are antichrists. The Pope wants to rule everywhere. This is why he came to our country. Everywhere he created and creates problems and scandals. What did he do for Asia Minor in 1922 or Serbia in 1999? The papacy has created great suffering for Greece. Its aim is to destroy Orthodoxy, but Orthodoxy is the Truth and Life and it does not fear "the gates of Hades" because Her chief and protector is Christ. It was unacceptable what happened, after so many centuries for the Pope to come to Greece! What else will we see? The Pope is the devil, except that he has hope in repentance. God and all the Saints await the hour and minute he will repent! But when? Nearly a thousand years have passed and we don't see a bit of authentic repentance, a bit of real change. I lived with the the papists in the Holy Land, when I served. They are very stubborn and blind. They understand that we Orthodox have the truth - since it was from us that they received the Holy Light every Holy Saturday; they saw the miracle - but their ego doesn't allow them to receive it. Egoism blinds people. And the Pope of Rome is the embodiment of demonic egoism!

You lived many years on Mount Athos. Did you meet holy people, saints?

Mount Athos is the Garden of the Panagia, holy and sacred ground. A land of asceticism. I lived there twenty entire years - there I was ordained a deacon and priest - so it is natural that I would come to know saintly men, holy people. The educated, who abandoned everything for monasticism. I remember a Fr. Paul Pavlidis, a doctor. He had two degrees and was from Pontus. And another. Kambanas was his name. He was a doctor from Aegina. Also, a Papa-George from Constantinople, very educated. And another, Papa-Avvakoum, who was a monastic at [Great] Lavra. I had the opportunity to serve and live near these people. They were simple people, well-known, but who considered themselves garbage, a nothing. And if they did anything miraculous, and we the younger ones were in wonder and admired them, they would say: "We didn't do anything. We made supplication to God, and He invisibly made it happen."

Source

Tweet

Share on Tumblr