A Defense of Papoulakos

During his lifetime in the 19th century Papoulakos was a controversial figure and was persecuted and misunderstood by the Church of Greece which he faithfully served. Sadly there are still some clergy today who maintain that Papoulakos is still a controversial figure who should not be as honored as he is. An excellent 13-page defense of Papoulakos was written by Metropolitan Epiphanios of Thera which fully justifies the sanctity of Papoulakos and why he is worthy of honor.

The full text of this epistle in Greek can be read here and here (pdf).

To read more about Papoulakos, see here.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

The "Theotokos" Clinic in Medan, Indonesia

Medan is the capital of the province of North Sumatra in Indonesia. An Orthodox mission is established there for the poor and the needy. It is primarily supported by an Orthodox parish in Australia. As a part of their mission, a clinic is there dedicated to the Theotokos which was opened on February 13, 2010. It has 10 hospital rooms, 19 beds, a pharmacy, and offices for the doctors and workers. There are presently two doctors and four nurses. It costs 10,000€ annually to support the staff and mission. So far over 500 people have come to the clinic for free services, 170 of these were mothers who have had problems with their pregnancy. A major problem in this area is that pregnant women do not receive the necessary tests, which is why a clinic such as this can provide needed help.

The Theotokos Clinic will offer the following programs coinciding with major feasts of the Theotokos:

1. During the month of August the clinic will offer free tests to all pregnant women, estimated to cost about $2500.

2. On the Feast of the Presentation on November 21 infants will receive free tests and vaccines. This is estimated to cost about $2500.

3. On January 1, for the Feast of the Circumcision of Christ, free circumcisions will be offered to the Muslim neighbors who live in Namorambe. The purpose of this is to make known to all the inhabitants the Orthodox mission in the area.

For more about these missionary efforts and how to contribute, see here.

Below are pictures from the clinic with Father Chrysostomos who leads the mission there:










Source

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Saints Chrysanthos and Daria the Martyrs

Sts. Chrysanthus and Daria and those with them (Feast Day - March 19)

Today we celebrate the Holy Martyrs Chrysanthos and Daria and with them the Martyrs Claudius the Tribune with his wife Hilaria and their sons Jason and Maurus, and Diodorus the Presbyter and Marianus the Deacon.

St Chrysanthos came from a pagan family who had moved to Rome from Alexandria. He received a fine education, and among the books he read were those in which pagans discussed Christianity. The young man, however, wanted to read books written by Christians themselves. He finally managed to find a copy of the New Testament, which enlightened his rational soul.

Seeking someone to instruct him in the Holy Scriptures, he found the presbyter Carpophoros hiding from persecution, and received holy Baptism from him. After this, he began to preach the Gospel. Chrysanthos' father tried to turn his son from Christianity, and finally married him to Daria, a priestess of Minerva.

St Chrysanthos managed to convert his wife to Christ, and the young couple mutually agreed to lead celibate lives. After the death of the father, they began to live in separate houses. St Chrysanthos converted several young men to Christ, and many pious women gathered around St Daria.

The people of Rome complained to the eparch Celerinus that Sts Chrysanthos and Daria were preaching celibacy and attracting too many young men and women to monasticism. St Chrysanthos was sent to the tribune Claudius for torture.

The torments, however, did not shake the bravery of the young martyr, since the power of God clearly aided him. Struck by this, the tribune Claudius himself came to believe in Christ and accepted holy Baptism together with his wife Hilaria, their sons Jason and Maurus, and all his household and soldiers. When news of this reached the emperor Numerian (283-284), he commanded them all to be executed. The Martyr Claudius was drowned in the sea, and his sons and soldiers were beheaded. Christians buried the bodies of the holy martyrs in a nearby cave, and St Hilaria constantly went there to pray. Once, they followed her and led her off for torture. The saint asked that they give her a few moments to pray, and as soon as she finished, she gave up her soul to God. A servant buried the saint in the cave beside her sons.

The torturers sent St Daria to a brothel, where she was protected by a lion sent by God. A certain man who tried to defile the saint was knocked to the ground and pinned down by the lion, but the lion did not kill him. The martyr preached to them about Christ and set them to the path of salvation.

They threw St Chrysanthos into a foul-smelling pit, into which all the filth of the city flowed. But a heavenly light shone on him, and the pit was filled with a sweet fragrance.

Then the emperor Numerian ordered Sts Chrysanthos and Daria to be turned over to the executioners. After many cruel tortures, the martyrs were buried alive in the ground.

In a cave near the place of execution [near the Via Salaria Nova, the catacombs in Rome], Christians began to gather to honor the anniversary of the saints' martyrdom. They celebrated Church services and partook of the Holy Mysteries. Learning of this, the pagan authorities sealed the entrance to the cave, and those within received the crown of martyrdom.

Two of these martyrs are known by name: the Presbyter Diodorus and the Deacon Marianus.

Later, when the tomb of Sts. Chrysanthos and Daria was looked for and found, the bones of these martyrs, and even the liturgical silver vessels, which they used for the celebration of the Eucharist, were also discovered. Everything was left as it was found, and a wall was erected so that no one could enter the place. Only through a window-opening in the wall could be seen the tomb of Sts. Chrysanthos and Daria, as well as the bones of the Christians killed in the tomb. This tomb, like so many others, was embellished by Pope Damasus, who had poems in praise of the martyrs engraved on marble and placed there. Gregory of Tours describes this sanctuary in an interesting chapter of his "De gloria martyrum", I, xxxviii (P.L., LXXI, 739). During the invasions of the Goths the sanctuary was desecrated, but later it was restored, as a metrical inscription composed at that time and falsely attributed to Pope Damasus asserts.

In the 9th century, some of the remains of Chrysanthos and Daria were brought to Prum in modern-day Rhineland-Palatinate, but the cult remained largely local. In 1011 Pope Sergius IV gave Fulk Nerra, Count of Anjou, some of the martyrs' relics upon his return from a pilgrimage to Jerusalem. Fulk gave them to the monastery of Belli Locus which he had recently established. The relics of Sts Chrysanthos and Daria are found in the Church of the Holy Apostles in Rome.

HYMN OF PRAISE

By St. Nikolai Velimirovich

Saint Chrysanthos counsels Daria,

O virgin, forsake the lie

And do not venerate the idols as gods;

Neither seek, you, truth from the world.

The truth is in the One God,

The One Triune God

Who created the heavenly armies

Of angels and heavenly powers;

Who created the whole universe,

And of the universe, man, the crown.

The only One, immortal and living,

He, out of the earth, creates wrappings

And the clothing of spiritual wealth.

Our soul is spiritual wealth

Wrapped up in the dust of the body.

The soul should be tenderly nurtured

As a bride to make ready for Christ.

Forsake, O virgin, the bodily,

It leads to suffering and sorrow.

God does not look into the vessel of the flesh

But at the flower which grows in it.

O virgin, clothed in death

Today, tomorrow consumed by death:

Adorn your soul with the flower of virtues,

Sow the flower with faith in the Lord,

Enclose it with hope and love,

Water it with the Life-creating Spirit,

Weed it of the weeds of sins,

Let grow the flower of virtues,

Let grow the flower of piety,

Let grow the flower of charity,

Let grow the flower of repentance,

Let grow the flower of patience,

Let grow the flower of abstinence,

Let grow the flower of obedience.

As a hymn of Paradise, your soul is,

Let it smell like a garden in May.

And may God to dwell therein,

For which He created it.

Daria listened to Chrysanthos,

Her soul to Christ she wedded,

Her body to torture she submitted

With Chrysanthos, her spiritual brother.

And God transplanted them to Paradise,

With them, adorned the garden of Paradise.

Apolytikion

Let us honor the like-minded pair of Martyrs, Chrysanthos scion of purity, and supremely modest Daria. United in holiness of faith, they shone forth as communicants of God the Word. They fought lawfully for Him and now save those who sing: Glory to Him Who has strengthened you; glory to Him Who has crowned you; glory to Him Who through you works healings for all.

Kontakion

O Chrysanthos, in the sweet fragrance of holiness thou didst draw Daria to saving knowledge. Together in contest you routed the serpent, the author of all evil, and were worthily taken up to the heavenly realms.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Saint Pancharius, Beheaded at Nicomedia

Pancharius was born in Villach, Germany [present day Austria]. He was a high-ranking officer at the court of Diocletian and Maximian. At first, he denied Christ but, being counseled by his mother and sister, he returned to the Faith of Christ and died for it in the year 302 A.D.

"That mercy [of God] that resurrects us and against which we sin later on is even greater then that mercy that He bestowed upon us before He gave us being; when we did not exist. Glory O Lord to Your immeasurable mercy!" Thus speaks St. Isaac the Syrian. He wants to say that greater is the mercy that God showed toward us when, through Christ, He saved us from the corruption of sin and death, than when He created us out of nothing. Truly, it is so. Even our earthly parents show greater mercy to the perverted and fallen son when they embrace him again, forgive him all, make him civilized, cleanse him, heal him and again make him their heir, than when they gave him birth.

When the young Pancharius, surrounded by royal honors, denied Christ, his mother wrote him a letter full of pain and sorrow. "Do not be afraid of men," wrote his mother, "but it is essential to fear God's judgment. You should have confessed your faith in Christ before emperors and lords and not to have denied Him. Remember His words: `But whoever denies me before others, I will deny before My heavenly Father'" (St. Matthew 10:33). Being ashamed of himself, the son accepts the advice of his mother, confessed his faith in Christ before the emperor, and died a martyr's death for Christ in order to live with Him eternally. And so the blessed mother of Pancharius brought about a new birth for her son, a spiritual birth more important than the first, physical birth.

- St. Nikolai Velimirovich, Prologue for March 19

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Prayer With The Non-Orthodox?

A Question Pertinent to our Time

By Reader Michael Astley
March 19, 2010

"When the Day of Pentecost had fully come, they were all with one accord in one place.And suddenly there came a sound from heaven, as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled the whole house where they were sitting. Then there appeared on them divided tongues,as of fire, and one sat upon each of them. And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance."

- The Acts of the Apostles, chapter 2:1-4

The ecumenical movement has brought about much good. This cannot be denied. Many people have been exposed to the Orthodox Faith who would otherwise never have encountered the pearl of great price that is the Truth of Christ. Many of them have scorned us, while others have remained indifferent. Yet others have sought to incorporate part of what they have found in Orthodoxy into their own confessions. While we must not hastily rejoice in such blending of traditions, we must remain steadfast in our trust of God’s faithfulness and that the life-giving Trinity will allow this seed to grow and bear fruit. Others have searched the depths of their hearts and allowed themselves to answer the call to become one in Christ’s Body, the Church, for which God be praised.

However, at what price comes this good? As the reader will be aware, the word ecumenism has different shades of meaning and does not solely refer to conversations with our friends of other confessions for the purposes of mutual understanding – itself no bad thing. It also bears connotations that are much more sinister, though subtly so. Ecumenism can also refer to the acceptance of beliefs and practices as Orthodox that are actually contrary to the Orthodox Christian Faith. In being less than careful in our presentation of the Faith to others, do we who have been incorporated into the Body of Christ and who, through the laver of new birth, have received the adoption of sons by God’s grace, run the risk of selling our own birthright for a mess of pottage? Those of our Orthodox brothers and sisters who are heavily involved in the ecumenical movement will tell us that this is not the case but one has to wonder at some of the things that we see. This short article is intended to deal with one element of our Tradition: namely, the matter of prayer, and with whom it can be offered in the Orthodox understanding of Church.

One positive result of the ecumenical movement is that many of our friends who are not Orthodox have developed a better understanding of our practice of sharing the Mysteries only among the Orthodox. More and more, they realize that we cannot, because of what we understand to be a proper Christian ecclesiology, recognise those outside of Orthodoxy as being part of the Church, because of what we understand Christ’s Church to be; and that we see the Mysteries – especially Baptism and the Eucharist – as being intrinsically bound to the life of the Church. However, if we act with love and generosity, they should also realise that we do not, (and indeed would not wish to), deny their sincerity in striving to live according to what God would have us all be, even though we cannot make Eucharist with them because of the separation that exists between us. They realise that our actions are not born of smugness or pride but out of faithfulness to Christ and love for his people, and our beliefs about the nature of the Church. Another positive result of the ecumenical movement is that we who are Orthodox are forced to challenge and uproot any pride that may be lurking in our hearts as we strive to explain this to our families, friends, and acquaintances without causing undue offence. Our understanding of the nature of the Church as a microcosm of the consubstantial and undivided Trinity – not embracing fragmentation, disconcord, and division within itself - is one that is difficult for many to swallow, yet it is one that we believe to be true, and it is imperative that we harbour no sense of superiority when sharing the Faith with others, recognising that it is only by God’s grace that we are a part of this Church.

Unfortunately, this good has often been undone by the idea propagated by the ecumenical movement that, whatever separates us, we can take comfort in the fact that we can at least pray together. This is an example of the false ecumenism that subtly undermines the Christianity that we have received from those before us, by deceptively presenting itself as something positive. To the Orthodox mind, prayer, like the entire mystical life in Christ, is shared among those who are one in Christ through Baptism. Sadly, even some Orthodox people are heard to say things such as, ‘I do not receive communion when I go to a church that isn’t Orthodox but I’m glad that I can pray with them.’ The very fact that sincere Orthodox Christians can say such things and quite honestly not see that this is contradictory to Orthodoxy is itself evidence that the ecumenical movement has had the effect of diluting Orthodoxy in the minds and hearts of at least some Orthodox people, and this is no small matter, for it is not just our own deification that is stunted. What are we presenting to our non-Orthodox and non- Christian friends when we ourselves hold to a version of Orthodox Christianity that is impoverished and incoherent, and unfaithful to the nature of the Church, which is Christ’s Body?

The fact of the matter is that prayer with those who are not Orthodox is no different from sacramental Communion with those who are not Orthodox, or recognition of those outside of Orthodoxy as being one with the Church despite their separation from us in ecclesiastical fact and in matters of faith and worship. These things are all contradictory to Orthodoxy for they all deny the unity of the Church, suggesting that the Trinity is divided. It is precisely these ideas and practices based thereon which fall under the anathema against the heresy of Ecumenism[1], which has been pronounced in our hierarchical services[2] every year on the Sunday of Orthodoxy since its affirmation in 1983. The canons are quite clear on this matter:

"One must not join in prayer with heretics or schismatics."

- Laodicia XXXIII

"Let any Bishop, or Presbyter, or deacon that merely joins in prayer with heretics be suspended, but if he has permitted them to perform any service as Clergymen, let him be deposed."

- Canon XLV of the Holy Apostles

"Concerning the fact that those belonging to the Church must not be allowed to go visiting the cemeteries or the so called martyria of any heretics, for the purpose of prayer or of cure, but, on the contrary, those who do so, if they be among the faithful, shall be excluded from communion for a time until they repent and confess their having made a mistake, when they may be readmitted to communion."

- Laodicia IX

"If any clergyman or layman enter a synagogue of Jews or of heretics to pray, let him be both deposed and excommunicated."

- Canon LXV of the Holy Apostles

These words may sound harsh to our 21st-century ears but our ears ought to be primarily Orthodox and not led by the spirit of the age of ecumenism.

To further complicate matters, it is not unheard of for some Orthodox people to argue that these canons do not apply to joint prayer with non-Orthodox Christians today, as the term heretic cannot properly be applied to them. Yes, it is true that in some – perhaps even most – cases, our friends of other confessions cannot properly be called heretics. A heretic is one who, claiming to be a Christian and understanding the Christian Faith, chooses to adopt and profess a distortion of that Faith as though it were Christianity, thereby setting his own will and reasoning above the Body of Christ. Most people in non-Orthodox churches today are not guilty of this but have simply inherited such distortions. Their forbears may indeed have been heretics but those today are simply professing what they have always known, and have themselves made no conscious decision to depart from the true Faith. It would be wrong of us to attribute to them the sort of pride of which they have not been guilty. Therefore, they are properly referred to as heterodox, which simply means “other believing” or “other worshipping”[3]. They confess beliefs other than those which are Orthodox and they conduct their lives and worship according to those beliefs. Therefore, it can be reasonably argued that the word heretic does not apply to them.

However, none of that is of any relevance to the matter at hand. These canons are not condemnatory – they do not accuse our heterodox friends of being wicked heretics – for that is not their purpose. No, the purpose of these canons is to clarify that the Orthodox may not pray with those who are separated from us because of the Christian understanding of communal prayer. Whether or not those who are separated are personally responsible for that separation is not relevant here. The point is that the separation is real and that we do not pray with those who are not of one heart and one mind with us, who do not share in our Baptism and our Faith, and our sonship as children of the same heavenly Father. To do so would be to give the false impression that the Church sanctions these separations, and that the incorrect beliefs and manner of living that exist in these traditions are in keeping with the life in Christ, which would be dishonest and extremely unfair to our non-Orthodox friends, not to mention a betrayal of the blood of the Martyrs who have suffered and died for the Faith.

Therefore, when the Orthodox heart, having seen past the initial discomfort caused by the strong wording of the canons, examines why these canons are in place and the meaning behind them, it cannot help but realise that, far from being simply a consolatory action engaged in by those who cannot share in anything more due to their divisions, communal prayer is in fact an action of the Church – an action of those who are of one Faith and are united in a sacramental bond of fellowship brought about by their oneness in Christ, with a common Father, through their common Baptism. It is a sign and outworking of communion in Christ.

This is certainly what we find in Scripture. The opening quotation of this article tells us of the disciples at Whitsun, who had gathered “with one accord”. In the book of Daniel, when Ananias, Azarias, and Misael were cast into the fire at the command of King Nebuchadnezzar, and sang their hymn of praise to God, they were said to sing “as if with one mouth”[4]. St Paul, in his epistle to the church at Rome, has this to say:

"Now may the God of patience and comfort grant you to be like-minded toward one another, according to Christ Jesus, that you may with one mind and one mouth glorify the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ."

- St Paul to the Romans 6:5-6

He exhorts the faithful of the church at Philippi to “stand fast in one spirit, with one mind striving together for the faith of the Gospel”[5]. Time and time again, we see throughout the Scriptures that it is simply assumed that prayer and worship are offered by those of one mind, one heart, one faith, and not by those who are divided and fragmented by schism and heresy.

This Scriptural understanding of prayer and worship permeates the Tradition of the Orthodox Church from the beginning to the present.

Tertullian, writing in the late second or early third century AD, introduces his treatise, On Prayer, with a chapter explaining Christian prayer, and that the Lord's Prayer is the new prayer of the New Covenant, taught by Christ Himself, and that all forms of prayer before this are fulfilled in the Lord's Prayer, which is the prayer of those who are made God's children through their faith and sonship in Him. He calls it a summary of the Gospel. All of the prayer of the Christian faithful stems from the Lord's Prayer.

He goes on to say:

"It begins with bearing witness to God and with the reward of faith when we say: 'Father, You Who are in the heavens.'

"For we are praying to God and confessing the faith of which this mode of address is an indication. It is written: 'To those who believe in Him, He gave power to be called children of God' (John 1:12). For that matter the Lord most frequently proclaimed to us that God is Father, indeed, He also demanded that we should call nobody 'father' on earth, except Him Whom we have in heaven (Matthew 23:9). Therefore, when we pray in this way, we are being obedient to that direction; happy are they who acknowledge the Father! It is on these grounds that Israel is reproached, because the Spirit calls heaven and earth to bear witness as He says: 'I have begotten sons and they have not acknowledged me' (Is 1:2).

"However, when we say 'Father' we are also naming God in a form of address which demonstrates both devotion and power. Moreover, the Son is invoked in the Father, for He says: 'I and the Father are one' (John 10:30). Nor is the mother, the Church, neglected, since the mother is found within the Father and the Son, for the name of Father and Son find their meaning in her. Therefore, under one term and with one name we honour God along with those who are his, both recalling God's commandment and scorning those who have forgotten the Father."

- Tertullian, "On Prayer" chapter II

He clearly associates oneness in the Father with oneness in the Church. St Cyprian makes this even more explicit in his treatise, On the Lord’s Prayer, which was intended as instruction to catechumens, and in which he links the sonship and the ability to truly call upon God as Father directly to the renewal, regeneration, and adoption of Baptism, (chapter IX), and gives this as the reason for the practice of the newly-baptised saying the Lord's Prayer immediately after rising from the water, (which practice, unfortunately, seems to have fallen into disuse in our present-day baptismal liturgies).

In chapter ten, he writes:

"Dearest brothers, we should turn our minds and understand not only that we call Him "Father, Who is in heaven," but that we add to this and say: "Our Father," that is of those who believe, of those who have begun to be children of God, sanctified through Him and restored by a birth of spiritual grace..."

He dedicates three chapters to this point, emphasising that those who have "abandoned Him", (speaking specifically at this point about those of the Jewish confession), cease to have Him as their Father. In chapter 11, he exhorts his catechumens not to fall away, and that none would have dared use this name (Father) in prayer unless God Himself had authorised us to do so.

Immediately prior to this point, and laying the foundation for it, he emphasizes in chapter eight unity in the God of peace and concord as pre-requisite for common prayer. He says that prayer is not individual, and that if we pray by ourselves, we pray only for ourselves. He stresses that we pray to Our Father, and not to My Father, and that we ask for our daily bread, and so forth. Picking up on the point made earlier about prayer being offered by those of one faith, and offering more scriptural support for this, St Cyprian writes:

"The three youths shut up in the furnace of fire observed this law of prayer by joining together in harmony of prayer and agreement of spirit. The reliability of divine Scriptures declares this; and while it teaches the manner in which they prayed, it gives an example which we should imitate in our prayers, inasmuch as we are able to be like them. It says: 'Then those three sang as from one mouth and blessed the Lord' (Daniel 3:51). They were speaking as from one mouth and, though Christ had yet to teach them to pray, their speech as they prayed was availing and efficacious because a peaceable and simple and spiritual prayer was pleasing to God.

"We find that the apostles, together with the disciples, prayed in this manner after the Lord's ascension. It says: 'All were persevering with one mind in their prayer with the women and with Mary who was the mother of Jesus, and his brothers' (Acts1:14). They persevered in prayer, being of one mind in their prayer, as their constancy and unanimity together showed that God, 'Who causes persons to dwell in a house with one mind' (Psalm 67:7), does not admit anyone to the divine and eternal home apart from those whose prayer is of one mind."

Not only is this understanding an ancient one but it is also one that has never been rejected by the Church. Throughout the centuries, the Church has demonstrated this understanding of prayer in the way she worships God, both in terms of explicit statements and actions in the Liturgy and in more subtle arrangements of the structure of the Liturgy.

Bearing in mind the teaching of Tertullian and St Cyprian that the Lord's Prayer is the basis of Christian common prayer, and that such prayer is offered by those who are in union with each other in common faith and as those who have received the adoption as sons of a common Father, it would certainly explain the location of the Lord's Prayer in the Orthodox Eucharistic rites of both east and west. It falls between the Anaphora, (the heart of the corporate worship of God by his people at which, traditionally, those present would be those baptised into oneness with Christ and each other), and the Communion, (demonstrating and feeding that unity and communion with each other and God). Indeed, in the Liturgy of St John Chrysostom, the Anaphora itself ends with the words, "...and grant unto us that with one mouth and one heart we may glorify and hymn thy most-honourable and majestic Name..."[6].

Also, Tertullian's linking of Christian prayer to Baptism and St Cyprian's elucidation of it for the sake of the catechumens both seem to fit in with the Church’s liturgical practice surrounding catechumens. While the deacon is leading the litany for the catechumens, the priest says the following prayer:

"O Lord our God, Who dwellest on high and lookest down on things that are lowly, Who unto the human race hast sent forth salvation, thine Only-Begotten Son and God, our Lord Jesus Christ: look upon thy servants, the catechumens, who have bowed their necks before Thee, and vouchsafe unto them at a seasonable time the laver of regeneration, the remission of sins, and the garment of incorruption; unite them to thy Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church, and number them among thy chosen flock, that they also with us may glorify thy most honourable and majestic Name: of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, now and ever, and unto the ages of ages. Amen."[7]

In this prayer, the priest asks that the catechumens may be made one with the faithful in order that they may glorify God along with the faithful. It expresses a direct link between oneness in Christ through Baptism and common faith on the one hand, and the common offering of prayer and worship to God on the other. Immediately after this, the catechumens are dismissed from the gathering, for the faithful are about to make Eucharist. The deacon says:

"As many as are catechumens, depart; catechumens, depart; as many as are catechumens, depart; let none of the catechumens remain."[8]

This is even more explicit in the Liturgy of St James:

"Let none of the catechumens, let none of the uninitiated, let none of those who are not able to join with us in prayer remain."[9]

If followed strictly, with no other factors taken into account, this would seem to require that all those who are not baptised into the Orthodox Church should leave at this point for they cannot offer the Eucharist with the Church of which they are not part, for to join in Christian prayer with the Church is to claim God as Father, and “He cannot have God for his Father who has not the Church for his Mother.”[10] However, such a legalistic reading of the canons is not the Orthodox way. General practice today is that, visitors, who may be unaccustomed to the theology of the Orthodox Church and may be confused or offended by the dismissal, are customarily permitted to stay and observe. Catechumens, however, have already committed themselves to embrace the Orthodox Faith and should act in accordance with this. Therefore, as they are still not united with us in Baptism, there is no excuse for them to remain after this point except where strong pastoral reasons exist in particular cases. In our times, (and as further evidence of the negative influence of the ecumenical movement on the Church), there are some places where the catechumens are routinely encouraged to stay and participate fully, with the exception of not receiving Communion. It is difficult to determine what effect this has on the catechumens’ understanding of the nature of the communion that is the Church and their place in relation to it but it does seem more prudent to maintain the traditional practice.

Now, where does all of this leave us who are in the west, in lands which have lost most of their Orthodox heritage of a thousand years ago, or indeed lands which may never have been Orthodox? We are once again in a missionary situation and our practice must reflect this. The canons of the Church are not hard and fast rules that must be strictly followed in every circumstance but rather exist for the maintenance of the good order of the Church, for the salvation of souls. They are not secular laws, designed to cover every single eventuality and they must be applied more strictly or more leniently according to the particular needs of those to whom the Church is ministering. We see this time and time again in the manner in which we fast, in the manner in which people are received into the Church, and in many other aspects of Church life – such a loving mother the Church is that we are met where we are and nurtured according to what God would have us be.

This does not mean that the canons are cast to the wind but that we must consider how we apply them. In a culture in which the Orthodox presence is minuscule, is it beneficial to require visitors and enquirers to always leave with the catechumens? These are not proud people who have consciously rejected the Orthodox Faith. Rather, these are good people who may be experiencing their first taste of Orthodoxy and may not understand the reasons for this. Of course, it is not intended as a means of hurting people but, confronted with what is to them an unfamiliar practice, without the sensitive explanation of the doctrine behind it, non-Orthodox people may indeed wrongly perceive it as a rejection of them. Is this the best way to bring souls to Christ? Is this reflective of the love that Christ showed? Surely, we should welcome them. On the other hand, in this culture where the Truth is little known, and where other Christian confessions are prevalent, is it prudent for us to behave as though those who subscribe to these other confessions are indeed one with the life of the Church? Are we not misleading them? I have certainly known people who have experienced this in some Orthodox churches, thinking it to be generous and loving, only to have their hearts broken when they have realised that they cannot receive Communion in Orthodox churches, and the reasons why this is. They have felt hurt and deceived by those very Orthodox people who at first seemed to be so warm to them and, in some cases, they have never returned. I am in no position to answer these questions and do not envy our priests who must weigh up all of these things, but they are matters that we must consider in our missionary situation, and we must support our priests as they seek to best meet the needs of those people who are taking their first tentative steps towards the Fountain of Immortality, bearing always in mind the words of Blessed Seraphim of Platina:

"...the royal path of true Orthodoxy today is a mean that lies between the extremes of ecumenism and reformism on the one side, and a 'zeal not according to knowledge' (Rom. 10:2) on the other. True Orthodoxy does not go 'in step with the times' on the one hand, nor does it make strictness or correctness or canonicity, (good in themselves), an excuse for pharisaic self-satisfaction, exclusivism, and distrust, on the other. This true Orthodox moderation is not to be confused with mere luke-warmness or indifference, or with any kind of compromise between political extremes. The spirit of 'reform' is so much in the air today that anyone whose views are moulded by the 'spirit of the times' will regard true Orthodox moderation as dose to fanaticism, but anyone who looks at the question more deeply and applies the patristic standard will find the royal path to be far from any kind of extremism."

- From “The Royal Path”, Sept/Oct issue of “The Orthodox Word”.

I trust in Christ’s promise that the gates of hell shall never prevail against the Church[11] but I do pray that those within the Church are not waylaid by the innocent appearance of the ecumenical movement which, while it does much good, can also do much damage through its subtle encouragement of the abandonment of element after element of our Holy Tradition.

All of what precedes is solely my own reading of the Scriptures, the fathers, the canons, and the Church’s worship, in light of my limited experience of the Tradition of the Church, and carries no authority beyond that. However, it is presented here in the hope of conveying to those who read it – Orthodox and non-Orthodox alike – some understanding of the Orthodox practice of not joining in prayer with those who are not Orthodox and the dangers of either extreme of conservatism or liberalism. Any errors are my own and I ask the reader’s forgiveness and prayers. This effort is intended to give those who are not Orthodox some insight into the doctrine that underpins the actions of their Orthodox friends who may be hesitant to accept their invitations to join them at church services and may alleviate any feelings of upset caused by this. It may also go some way to explaining the recent re-structuring of the worship format at gatherings of the World Council of Churches in light of the objections of Orthodox participants[12], which caused confusion to many people who, despite all sincerity of effort, could not understand the concerns. For Orthodox people, it is hoped that this may give some food for thought, and perhaps may form part of the basis for decisions about how to respond to invitations to attend others’ churches, how much or how little to participate, if at all, and how to maintain one’s Orthodox integrity and see to one’s own deification while not causing undue offence to family, friends, and acquaintances. The guidance of the spiritual father should always be sought, especially where sensitive events, such as weddings and funerals, are involved. Finally, may we always act out of love for Christ and each other, for the sake of our salvation and deification, and for the salvation of the world.

"O Thou Who hast bestowed upon us these common and concordant prayers, and Who hast promised that when two or three are agreed in thy name Thou wouldst grant their requests: do Thou Thyself now fulfil the requests of thy servants to their profit, granting us in this present age the knowledge of thy Truth, and in that to come, life everlasting."

- from the Liturgy of St Basil

Notes

[1] ‘Those who attack the Church of Christ by teaching that Christ's Church is divided into so-called “branches” which differ in doctrine and way of life, or that the Church does not exist visibly, but will be formed in the future when all "branches" or sects or denominations, and even religions will be united into one body; and who do not distinguish the priesthood and mysteries of the Church from those of the heretics, but say that the baptism and eucharist of heretics is effectual for salvation; therefore, to those who knowingly have communion with these aforementioned heretics or who advocate, disseminate, or defend their new heresy of Ecumenism under the pretext of brotherly love or the supposed unification of separated Christians, Anathema!’ – The anathema against ecumenism, added to the anathemas pronounced on the Sunday of Orthodoxy by the Synod of Bishops of the Russian church Abroad.

[2] That is to say, in parishes, monasteries, and missions of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia.

[3] Hetero = “other”, Doxia = “practice of worship/faith”

[4] Daniel 3:51

[5] Philippians 1:27

[6] The Jordanville Prayer Book, Holy Trinity Monastery. Jordanville, New York.

[7] See 6.

[8] See 6.

[9] The Order of the Divine Liturgy of the Holy and Glorious Apostle James, the Brother of God, and the First Hierarch of the Church of Jerusalem, The Monastery of St Mark of Ephesus, New Jersey.

[10] St Cyprian of Carthage On the Unity of the Catholic Church

[11] Matthew 16:18

[12] Until relatively recently, worship at gatherings of the World Council of Churches was structured according to the flawed understanding that joint prayer would be acceptable to all present, so there were joint services of blended traditions. Recent objections to this from Orthodox representatives, (not to mention the complete withdrawal of two local Orthodox churches), has led to a restructuring, allowing the current arrangement to continue alongside an additional provision for different member churches to conduct worship according to their own traditions, with others invited to be present. This seems to have gone some way to easing the burden on those Orthodox representatives who could not in conscience fully participate under the previous structure which, while perhaps well-intentioned, was by its nature exclusive of some members.

Source

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Turkey Threatens To Expel 100,000 Armenians

17 March 2010
BBC News

Turkey's prime minister has threatened to deport 100,000 Armenian migrants, amid renewed tensions over Turkish mass killings of Armenians in World War I.

Recent resolutions in the US and Sweden have called the killings "genocide".

Recep Tayyip Erdogan told the BBC that of 170,000 Armenians living in Turkey "70,000 are Turkish citizens".

"We are turning a blind eye to the remaining 100,000... Tomorrow, I may tell these 100,000 to go back to their country, if it becomes necessary."

Thousands of Armenians, many of them women, work illegally in Turkey. Most do low-skilled jobs such as cleaning.

Faltering diplomacy

Mr Erdogan was speaking in an interview with the BBC's Turkish Service, in which he was asked about the recent votes by lawmakers in the US and Sweden.

The resolutions, recognising the mass killings of Armenians by Ottoman Turks as "genocide", were passed narrowly, and in both cases Turkey reacted angrily.

Mr Erdogan said the resolutions "harm the Armenian people as well... and things become deadlocked".

Armenian Prime Minister Tigran Sarkisian was quoted as telling parliament on Wednesday that Mr Erdogan's comments only reminded Armenians of the mass killings.

"These kinds of political statements do not help to improve relations between our two states," he said.

"When the Turkish prime minister allows himself to make such statements it immediately for us brings up memories of the events of 1915."

Diplomatic moves to normalise relations between Turkey and Armenia have faltered recently.

Hundreds of thousands of Armenians died in 1915, when they were deported en masse from eastern Anatolia by the Ottoman Empire. They were killed by troops or died from starvation and disease.

Armenia says up to 1.5 million Armenians were killed, but Turkey says the figure is no more than one-third of that and that many Turks died as well.

Turkey accepts that atrocities were committed but argues they were part of the war and that there was no systematic attempt to destroy the Christian Armenian people.

Armenia wants Turkey to recognise the killings as an act of genocide, but successive Turkish governments have refused to do so.

Armenians have campaigned for the killings to be recognised internationally as genocide - and more than 20 countries have done so.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

The Horrific Martyrdom of Hieromartyr Theodore of Vrsha

Our father among the saints Hieromartyr Teodor or Theodore (Nestorović) of Vršac or Vrsha (Свети свештеномученик Теодор (Несторовић) Вршачки) was a Serbian Orthodox bishop of Vršac in the sixteenth century. His feast day is May 16/29.

During the Austro-Turkish War (1593-1606), many Serbians suffered under the Turkish Islamic warriors. The Serbs in Banat decided to protect their families from these Turkish troops and asked their bishop, Teodor, to lead them. He joined the rebellion against the Turks in 1593. The Serbs liberated some towns but in the end were defeated. Bishop Teodor, along with a large group of people, left for Transylvania. The Turks then promised that they would stop killing innocent people if Teodor were to return. When he did, he was seized in 1595 and then killed in a terrible fashion: his skin was ripped off.

Kontakion in Tone 8
Let God be praised in the fields and meadows, on the green mountain tops and in the valleys below, on the rushing rivers and in dark caves, since every place has been watered by the innocent and holy blood of many Serbian Martyrs: worthy stewards, brave soldiers, young boys and children and chaste virgins; let God be praised and let everyone keep silent, for the Lord of all rules the world.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Reproach for the Sake of Christ Greater Than Riches

"By faith Moses considered reproach for the sake of Christ of greater value than the treasures of Egypt, because he was looking ahead to his reward" (Hebrews 11:24-26).

Moses did not want to remain in the palace of the pharaoh nor to be called the adopted son of pharaoh. Desiring more, "He chose to be ill-treated along with the people of God rather than enjoy the fleeting pleasure of sin" (Hebrews 11:25). How different was Moses from his descendants [The Jews], who out of pharonic reasons, condemned the King of Glory to death! All of them would have liked to live one more year in the decaying court of the pharaoh rather than to travel with God for forty years in the wilderness. Moses left all honors, all riches and all vanities, which only the wealth of Egypt could provide. At the command of God, Moses started out through the hungry and thirsty wilderness with faith that beyond there lay the Promised Land. All of this also means to hold the "reproach for the sake of Christ" above all the wealth of Egypt.

The "reproach for the sake of Christ" is that which the men of this world with a powerful stench of the earth, are ashamed in Christ. That is Christ's poverty on earth, His fasting, His vigil, His prayer, His wandering without a roof over His head, His condemnation, His humiliation, and His shameful death. This "reproach for the sake of Christ" was valued by the apostles, and after them, by countless saints, who thought this to be of greater wealth than all the riches in the entire world. Following these indignities, the Lord resurrected and opened the gates of heaven and revealed the Promised Land of Paradise, into which He led mankind along the path of His reproach or the wilderness of His suffering.

O Lord, glorified and resurrected, help us that we may hold unwaveringly every drop of Your sweat and Your blood as a treasure greater than all worldly riches.

- St. Nikolai Velimirovich, Prologue

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Church of Greece Facing New Tax Impostitions

Greek Orthodox Bishop Denounces New Taxes on Church as Hostile

Mar 17, 2010
Reuters

By Renee Maltezou

ATHENS – A senior cleric has accused Greece’s socialist government of being hostile to the Orthodox Church for imposing taxes on it as part of a drive to tame a budget crisis that has shaken global markets.

Greece, where about 90 percent of the 11 million-strong population are Christian Orthodox, will tax bequests and revenues from church property as it seeks to tackle a 300 billion euro ($409.9 billion) debt pile.

In a country where a bishop sits on the board of the biggest bank and the top cleric swears in the government, many on the streets of Athens felt the church should do its bit given the sacrifices they are making.

“It was about time the Church paid. It’s fair,” said Christina Alexiadou, 55, an accountant and frequent church-goer. “It can’t be that only ordinary people pay for everything.”

The Church of Greece, one of the country’s biggest owners of prime real estate, has until now been largely exempt from taxes even though the state pays priests’ salaries.

The government, which had announced earlier this month that the church would have to contribute to its budget drive, said late on Monday that church income from real estate holdings would be taxed at 20 percent.

Cash bequests will face a levy of 10 percent and property bequests a 5 percent charge.

“The 20 percent hits us right between the eyes,” Bishop Anthimos of Thessaloniki told public television on Tuesday. “This is a hostile stand, I don’t intend to hide it.”

Details of the measures come just two weeks before Easter, the Orthodox Church’s biggest festival of the year.

Polls show the majority of Greeks are ready to accept draconian austerity measures that include tax rises, pension freezes and lower pay for public sector workers.

“The church is wealthy and can help the country out of the crisis,” 36-year old bus driver Alexandros Kagris said. “Isn’t this what the church is for, to help people?”

GREEK SALVATION

According to an internal report published by Greek daily Kathimerini last year the Church’s total income reached 20 million euros in 2008, including 12.7 million from renting out church property. Its profit for the year was 7 million euros.

A spokesman for the church, which owns a 150 million euro stake in National Bank of Greece, declined to comment on its income or the new tax bill which is expected to go to parliament on Monday and enter force as soon as it is adopted.

It is not the first time church and state have clashed. In 2000 they fell out over EU rules requiring that religion be dropped from ID cards.

Theodore Couloumbis, deputy head of the ELIAMEP think-tank, said he did not expect the church as an institution to speak out against the taxes, however.

“The fact that we are going through a major crisis will make it easier for the Church to accept this measure, otherwise it will be thought of as not contributing to the salvation of Greece’s economy,” said Couloumbis.

The church’s ruling body issued a statement blessing politicians but making no reference to the new taxes.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

The Future of the GOA Rests On 32 Celibate Clergy

According to the National Herald, the future leadership of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America rests on 32 qualified celibate priests out of the approximately 600 reported priests of the GOA. These numbers were issued out of the Ecumenical Patriarchate on 16 September 2009.

Out of the 32 celibate priests, 5 of them were previously married and have now risen to the rank of Archimandrite. However, 1 of these 5 is over 80 years old, and 2 are over 70.

The Archdiocese currently has 12 hierarchs not counting Archbishop Demetrios. 9 serve their respected Metropolis while 3 serve as titular Bishops. Of these there are 2 who are over 80 (Archbishop Demetrios and Iakovos of Chicago), 2 are over 70 (Maximus of Pittsburgh and Isaiah of Denver), and 3 are over 60 (Alexios of Atlanta, Methodios of Boston, and Gerasimos of San Francisco). Nicholas of Detroit is over 55 and Evangelos of New Jersey is near 50.

For more details, see here.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Catholic Priests Speaking Out Against Celibacy

Priests With Love Lives Speak Out Against Celibacy

Angela Charlton and Victor L. Simpson
Associate Press
March 17, 2010

Paris, France - Leon Laclau shared his life, and often, his bed, with Marga over 20 years - all while serving as a Catholic priest in a town in the French Pyrenees.

His clerical leadership eventually expelled him, prompting protests from his flock and inspiring other priests and their partners around France to speak out about long-hidden love lives, and to press the Church to abandon its insistence on celibacy.

They say the chastity rule has fed the persistent, profound decline in the numbers of European and American priests. More influential voices are joining them as scandals involving sexual abuse and pedophilia spread across parishes around Europe.

The Vatican rejects any link between celibacy and sex abuse and shows no sign it intends to loosen its rules. Instead, church leaders are likely to continue a don't ask-don't tell policy of ignoring priestly relationships, as long as they cause no harm.

"Love, my love for Marga, never held me back from having faith. On the contrary, it encouraged me," Laclau told The Associated Press by telephone from his home in Asson, in the mountains near the pilgrimage site at Lourdes. "I lived my love life with Marga, and I kept my passion for the church."

The two met when Laclau led the funeral service for Marga's first husband in 1985. When their relationship blossomed, he said, "at first, we tried to hide it."

Slowly their friends learned, and Laclau's church colleagues, who met them "with a silence, not of disapproval, but of non-interference," he said.

The church's quiet tolerance melted when Marga came to live with Leon in 2001. Laclau's superior, Father Benat Oyhenart, asked him to "purify the relationship" - in essence to choose between his vocation and his love.

Laclau chose Marga. In 2007, he was forced out of the priesthood.

Oyhenart sent a statement to the congregation explaining what he had done. "What about the young groom who says, 'How can I commit to the sacrament of marriage, for the rest of my life, before a priest who himself does not respect the commitment he made for the rest of his life?'"

Oyhenart received angry, fearful letters from churchgoers. One he cited read: "If you replace him, I will keep my children at home, out of fear that his replacement is a pedophile."

Such fears have mounted as revelations about sexual abuse of children have convulsed Catholic leadership from the United States to Ireland to Australia and in recent weeks, Germany, the Netherlands, Austria and Switzerland.

Now, one of the pope's closest advisers, Austrian Cardinal Christophy Schoenborn, has called for an honest examination of issues like celibacy and education for priests to root out the origins of sex abuse.

His office quickly stressed that Schoenborn wasn't calling celibacy into question, just as Pope Benedict XVI was reaffirming its importance as an "expression of the gift of oneself to God and others."

Theologians and psychologists warn against equating celibacy with pedophilia, at least directly.

But Schoenborn and others have been receptive to arguments that a celibate priesthood is increasingly problematic for the church, primarily because it limits potential candidates for ordination.

Another problem: People who are pedophiles to begin with are drawn to the church because it is an easy way to find victims and be in a position of authority where few question their actions, priest and family counselor Stephane Joulain noted in an essay in Sunday's Le Monde. He also said priests who have never had sexual experiences are often drawn to adolescents because their own sexual growth halted at adolescence.

Laclau, after his experience, says that "an end to celibacy is not the only answer" to the church's woes. He blames "young, reactionary priests ... who show a growing traditionalism" for alienating ordinary believers who might otherwise have been drawn to the priesthood.

While the worldwide number of priests is slowly rising to 408,000 - with major growth in Africa and Asia - the number in Europe is continuing to decline, according to Vatican statistics.

The decline is particularly jarring in the United States, where they have dropped from 58,909 in 1975 to 40,666 in 2009, according to the Center for Applied Research in the Apostolate, Georgetown University.

France is down to about 24,000 priests nationwide from 42,000 in 1975, and numbers of churchgoers have plummeted. A study by Lyon's auxiliary bishop found that more than half of the 161 priests who left their jobs between 1996 and 2005 did so to join romantic unions with women or other men, according to Catholic newspaper La Croix.

"The church is losing a lot of ground, it's turning in on itself," Laclau said. Ending celibacy, while not the only solution, could help make the church "more humane," he said.

Two days after leaving the church, he received a letter from a former parishioner describing being sexually abused as a child by another priest, a kind of cry for help.

"It repulsed me. It stains religious life, this kind of perversion," he said.

Evidence over the past decade has shown church leadership has covered up, ignored or simply underestimated the problem of pedophilia.

Before becoming pope, then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger told Catholic News Service in December 2002, that "less than 1 percent of priests are guilty of acts of this type." The most extensive study of the abuse crisis in the American church, commissioned by the U.S. bishops in 2004, found that about 4 percent of all American clerics who served during the time studied were accused of abuse.

The percentage in society at large is unknown because studies are inconclusive.

The report stressed that neither celibacy nor homosexuality causes abuse, but argued that an understanding of the problem of clerical sex abuse isn't possible without reference to both, since the vast majority of U.S. abuse cases were of a homosexual nature.

In Italy, papal biographer Marco Politi, in his book "La Confessione" - "The Confession" - presents the testimony of a priest struggling to balance his homosexuality with his commitment to a church that considers homosexual acts a sin.

The priest, who is never identified, discloses that a network of homosexual priests is active in the Italian church. It is described as an informal "self-help group" that lives in the "catacombs" of the church - the underground.

For Laclau, the solution is more sexual honesty among the clergy.

"I thought I was one of the very few (priests) to have a love life. I slowly discovered how numerous we are," he said.

Groups around Europe have sprung up to bring together people like him, from the Belgium-based Married Priests association to a group called Plein Jour, or Light of Day, which includes some 150 Frenchwomen who live with priests.

Many have borne the priests' children. Many maintain a low public profile, but seek solace in sharing their stories with other women who have lived the same "suffering, silence, sacrifice," said the group's director, Dominique Venturini.

Venturini, now 85, spent 45 years romantically and sexually involved with a priest based in Provence. "Only when he retired could he come and live with me. But unfortunately, by then, it was too late to have children, a dream I always had."

She speaks bluntly against celibacy. "When you bury human nature, it figures out how to express itself in another, perverted way."

Under church law, the pope can change the celibacy requirement by fiat, although some in the church have suggested that various reforms be discussed in a wider forum such as a new Vatican council.

However, the Rev. Thomas Reese, an American expert on the Vatican, said he doubts there would be a majority vote at such a forum to lift celibacy. "In addition, too many dioceses in the southern hemisphere have resolved the issue by simply ignoring ongoing relationships between priests and women," in said in an email exchange with The Associated Press.

The Catholic church's Eastern rite, which follows Orthodox Christian traditions but is loyal to the pope, allows married priests in contrast to the Roman church.

The Rev. Igor Yatsiv, spokesman for Ukraine's Greek Catholic church, said he knew of no cases of clergy sex abuse.

"I am not sure that's just because of no mandatory celibacy here. I'm married myself and have three children, but I don't think it's this that keeps me from sin. I just don't know another way" of living, he said.

Leon and Marga Laclau, after he left the church and after more than 20 years together, finally married. He continues to attend Mass, "not regularly, but I go. It is always a joy to participate."

"I still have faith," he says. "But you must maintain it. It's a bit like love."

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

St. Cyril of Jerusalem: The Lord's Prayer

Then, after these things, we say that Prayer which the Saviour delivered to His own disciples, with a pure conscience entitling God our Father, and saying, Our Father, which art in heaven. O most surpassing loving-kindness of God! On them who revolted from Him and were in the very extreme of misery has He bestowed such a complete forgiveness of evil deeds, and so great participation of grace, as that they should even call Him Father. Our Father, which art in heaven; and they also are a heaven who bear the image of the heavenly (1 Cor. 15:49), in whom is God, dwelling and walking in them (2 Cor. 6:16).

Hallowed be Your Name. The Name of God is in its nature holy, whether we say so or not; but since it is sometimes profaned among sinners, according to the words, "Through you My Name is continually blasphemed among the Gentiles", we pray that in us God's Name may be hallowed; not that it comes to be holy from not being holy, but because it becomes holy in us, when we are made holy, and do things worthy of holiness.

Your kingdom come. A pure soul can say with boldness, Your kingdom come; for he who has heard Paul saying, "Let not therefore sin reign in your mortal body" (Rom. 6:12), and has cleansed himself in deed, and thought, and word, will say to God, Your kingdom come.

Your will be done as in heaven so on earth. God's divine and blessed Angels do the will of God, as David said in the Psalm, "Bless the Lord, all you Angels of His, mighty in strength, that do His pleasure". So then in effect you mean this by your prayer, as in the Angels Your will is done, so likewise be it done on earth in me, O Lord.

Give us this day our substantial bread. This common bread is not substantial bread, but this Holy Bread is substantial, that is, appointed for the substance of the soul. For this Bread goes not into the belly and is cast out into the draught (Matt. 15:17), but is distributed into your whole system for the benefit of body and soul. But by this day, he means, each day, as also Paul said, "While it is called today" (Heb. 3:15).

And forgive us our debts as we also forgive our debtors. For we have many sins. For we offend both in word and in thought, and very many things we do worthy of condemnation; and if we say that we have no sin, we lie, as John says. And we make a covenant with God, entreating Him to forgive us our sins, as we also forgive our neighbours their debts. Considering then what we receive and in return for what, let us not put off nor delay to forgive one another. The offenses committed against us are slight and trivial, and easily settled; but those which we have committed against God are great, and need such mercy as His only is. Take heed therefore, lest for the slight and trivial sins against you, you shut out for yourself forgiveness from God for your very grievous sins.

And lead us not into temptation, O Lord. Is this then what the Lord teaches us to pray, that we may not be tempted at all? How then is it said elsewhere, "a man untempted, is a man unproved"; and again, "My brethren, count it all joy when you fall into various temptations" (James 1:2)? But does perchance the entering into temptation mean the being overwhelmed by the temptation? For temptation is, as it were, like a winter torrent difficult to cross. Those therefore who are not overwhelmed in temptations, pass through, showing themselves excellent swimmers, and not being swept away by them at all; while those who are not such, enter into them and are overwhelmed. As for example, Judas having entered into the temptation of the love of money, swam not through it, but was overwhelmed and was strangled both in body and spirit. Peter entered into the temptation of the denial; but having entered, he was not overwhelmed by it, but manfully swam through it, and was delivered from the temptation. Listen again, in another place, to a company of unscathed saints, giving thanks for deliverance from temptation, You, O God hast proved us; You have tried us by fire like as silver is tried. You brought us into the net; You layed afflictions upon our loins. You have caused men to ride over our heads; we went through fire and water; and you brought us out into a place of rest. You see them speaking boldly in regard to their having passed through and not been pierced. But You brought us out into a place of rest; now their coming into a place of rest is their being delivered from temptation.

But deliver us from the evil one. If lead us not into temptation implied not being tempted at all, He would not have said, But deliver us from the evil one. Now the evil one is our adversary the devil, from whom we pray to be delivered.

Then after completing the prayer you say Amen; by this Amen, which means "So be it", you are setting your seal to the petitions of the divinely-taught prayer.

From his 23rd Catechetical Lecture

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

A Haunting In Thessaloniki

The Creature in My Lucid Dreams

Elena M. - Thessaloniki, Greece - 1993

These events happened when I was a student, living with my parents and younger sister in an apartment building, built in 1980, of which we were the first owners. Thessaloniki is a very old town, it took its name from Alexander the Great's sister who was named 'Thessaloniki' by her father, Philip the Great after his victory against the Thessalians (some other Greeks in the central plains of the peninsula). There are neolithic remains a couple of miles from where my parents' place is. The city has been attacked by Romans, raided by crusaders, rebuilt by Byzantines, occupied by Bulgarians, Turks, Germans, you name it. There also used to be a significant Jewish community there before the war, but almost all of them were taken to concentration camps. So there's lots of history, wars, and many many violent deaths in that town. So naturally I have heard many stories of 'encounters,' and quite a few of my more imaginative friends have claimed to have experienced stuff, and/or to be psychic. I never had the slightest indication of anything paranormal, so I always thought of such talk as tall tales, and I'd make fun of them, "You should give up drugs, man, they're not for you," that sort of thing. I still do that. What I mean to say is that I'm still not entirely convinced that what happened was not entirely in my head. Any ideas would be welcome.

Anyway, at the time when this weird stuff started I was mostly partying a lot, attending classes whenever, and partying some more. So I'd usually be back home at 3 or 4 in the morning. The apartment is shaped like an H, the two vertical lines being the front and back facade. My room was at the front. I was sleeping on a couch -- didn't like beds -- along the left side of the room. The door was behind me, the wall to the right was covered with book shelves, below those were my stereo and records, opposite was a large sliding double glass door leading to a small balcony. The first time it happened, I had just fallen asleep and had what appeared to be a very lucid dream. I had the sensation that I was awake. I was lying in bed and could see the room around me as it appeared normally, dark, except for the bluish light coming through the balcony door. I also knew that there was something looking at me from the other side of the room to my right, where the shelves and the stereo were. This part was completely in the shadows, so I could only see the small red light of the sound equipment. I tried to stand up and turn on the light but my legs and arms felt heavy, like rubber and they wouldn't obey me. I was sliding on the couch arm, and the floor, and the armchair, in a vain effort to reach the switch... And then I woke up, and the room looked exactly as before, only in more sharp detail? I literally flew to the light switch and kept it on until my parents woke up hours later and I could see sunlight and hear people around the house. I dismissed the whole thing as a bad dream and forgot about it. Until next night.

Same story but worse: the moment I fell asleep I woke up again and had more blurred version of my room, the thing -- whatever it was -- was there again, on the other side of the room, looking at me. This time I knew I was dreaming so I didn't try to stand up and go for the light switch. Instead, I tried to wake up. And at first it seemed that it worked, but no, the thing was still there, everything still looked this unreal bluish color... I couldn't wake up, so I panicked and started calling for help. I finally managed to wake up for real and stayed up again with the lights on until sunrise. I was not looking forward to another night of that sort so I stayed at a friend's house the following evening. I slept like a log. No disturbances, no odd stuff happening, nada. But I still was convinced that this was a coincidence, something heavy that I ate perhaps -- although we were not really into eating at such late hours. So the fourth night I went back home to sleep. And yes, surely enough, the same thing happened all over again. It was a very strange state, the one I was in when that "dream" came. Although my movement seemed very sluggish, and everything was bathed in that eerie grey-blue light, for the rest I felt as if I were completely awake. This time my curiosity got the best of me and I did not flip out trying frantically to wake up or to reach the light switch, I just stayed where I was waiting to see what would happen. I felt the thing that was watching me come very slowly close, to the end of the couch, and get hold of my ankles. It did not feel exactly like hands with fingers were closing around my ankles, no, but something in the shadows was dragging my body slowly out of the couch, taking the covers with me as I was sliding, feet first, toward the balcony door. My plan was to let whatever was pulling me out the couch think I was still asleep, then the moment I reached the balcony door to jump on the creature and scare it away (well, all that bravery was in a dream). The moment I jumped it, I woke up. I was still lying on my couch but in the opposite direction, like, my feet were on my pillow. For that to happen I would have to stand up and lie down the other direction, since that couch was a fairly narrow one. But, as far as I know, I have never sleepwalked in my life. The following days I slept at a friend's houses whenever I could, because every time I slept at home the thing would be there. I had no idea what to do about it or what it was so I asked these friends of mine, three guys who were roommates and were into New Age stuff and I Ching and selling jewelry from their frequent trips to India (recharging their spiritual batteries, humm). I thought, at least all that could be useful for a change. And they really jumped on the occasion to help me. One of them, we call him "Captain" because he used to be in the marines, was particularly eager to help, pronounced it immediately as a haunting and offered to come and whatsamacallit? exorcise the place? Yeah. That. Of course this was out of the question, showing up at my parents' house with some hippy chanting and burning joss sticks in my room (okay, he was not a hippy, but still).

So the three of them went into discussion on what could be done if an on-the-spot "treatment" was out of the question. The Captain insisted that before it was sent away, I had to seize the opportunity to study the thing. No way, I wanted it gone and banished. The other two were asking me if I had any old stuff in my room, like vintage jewelry and such. Well, the only thing that was old and acquired before the weird stuff started happening was actually a Chinese teapot, a very pretty one, which I had bought quite cheap in an antiques store in France and brought it home from there. But, what the hell? A haunted teapot?! It sounded ridiculous. However, the said teapot was on the shelf right above the stereo, where I first felt the thing looking at me from. Meanwhile, I tried sleeping at home with the lights on, but that turned out to be a bad idea because I got to see what the thing looked like. Not pretty. As soon as I "woke up" in my dream, the room was no longer in that grey-bluish light, but fully lit by the bedside lamp as it was in reality. The thing, a kind of shriveled up old lady or guy -- not easy to tell gender -- no more than three feet tall, and wrapped up like a bundle in black rags fell from the ceiling on the couch's back next to my head, I rolled over to avoid it jumping on my face and it grabbed my pillow and started hitting me with it on the head! We were hitting each other and I woke up again for real by falling off the couch. At that point I really had enough so I asked my friends for straight advice how to get rid of it pronto. While Captain was obviously enjoying himself a lot experimenting with all that -- he wasn't the one losing his sleep and peace -- he told me to try making the sign of the cross or a pentagram when the thing appears to see how it will react to these holy signs. If nothing else, the conscious effort would wake me up. So I did the sign of the cross when I felt it moving toward the couch (the lights were off again this time) and a huge bang, like an explosion was heard and I woke up. Captain said that it didn't like it. So next step he gave me a long chant to read while I burned incense (I was desperate at that point to get rid of it by whatever means...) at the four corners of the room. The chant/prayer was addressed to the four archangels. Just in case, I also moved the teapot to a closed display case in the salon, as far away as I could from my room. And that was it. Well, the one or the other, it doesn't matter, what matters is that the thing never showed up again, the strange lucid dreams stopped, and I was immensely happy about it.

Source

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

The Physical Signs of Demonic Possession

[Saint Gregory Palamas, displaying here a remarkable knowledge of the medical science of his day, explains with some detail in his commentary of Mark 9:17-18 the physical signs of demonic possession. This is taken from his Homily on the Fourth Sunday of Lent. - J.S.]

"Master, I have brought unto thee my son, which hath a dumb spirit; and wheresoever he taketh him, he teareth him: and he foameth, and gnasheth with his teeth, and pineth away" (Mark 9:17-18).

Why was he foaming at the mouth, gnashing his teeth and withering away? Of all the possessed man's body, his brain suffers first and foremost, since the demon uses the spirit of the soul within the brain as a vehicle, and from there, as from a citadel, exercises power over the whole body. When the brain is afflicted, it emits a frothy, phlegm-like discharge to the nerves and muscles of the body, blocking up the outlets of the soul's spirit. As a result, shock, convulsions and involuntary movements affect all the parts of the body capable of independent movement, especially the jaws, as they are nearest to the part originally afflicted. A lot of moisture is brought down into the mouth due to the size of its pores and its proximity to the brain. Since, because of the unruly movements of the body's organs, it is impossible to breathe out in one long breath, and the breath is mixed up with the accumulation of moisture, those afflicted foam at the mouth. So the demon was foaming at the mouth and gnashing his teeth, clashing them together horribly and grinding them in a frenzy. The boy was withering away because of the demon's extreme violence. The heat of the sun's rays cause causes mist to form, but if this heat intensifies, it makes the mist disappear and disperses it completely. Similarly, the demon's violence causes moisture to come from the internal organs, but if this violence intensifies, the body's natural juices soon evaporate and the possessed person withers away.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Q & A: Holy Communion and Confession

From a discussion with the students of the Moscow Theological Academy at the Lavra of Saint Serge with the Metropolitan of Nafpaktos and Saint Vlassios, Hierotheos Vlachos.

Question: How many times a year must one receive Holy Communion? Is the Sacrament of Confession necessarily tied to Holy Communion?

Answer: Holy Communion is not absolutely linked to Confession. In the ancient Church, people had the Grace of God in them; they were in a state of enlightenment of the nous* and they of course prayed and received Holy Communion frequently. When someone committed a sin, it meant that they had forfeited the Grace of God, in which case, they would remain outside the Temple, together with the catechumens. This is because one cannot have the Grace of God and yet deny Christ. When one sins, and especially in the flesh - and I am not referring to the carnal relations within a marriage in Christ - it shows that they are preferring carnal pleasure more than Christ and as such, are denying Christ in practice. This reduces them to the ranks of the repentants, and they will need to re-attain the state of enlightenment of the nous, following a specific procedure.

In Basil the Great and other Fathers, we notice that there were four ranks of Christians. Firstly, there were the "forgiveness-seekers", who sat outside the Holy Temple and asked for forgiveness from the Christians that went into the Temple. Secondly, there were the "beseechers", who remained in the Temple only up to the recitings of the Divine Liturgy and would depart along with the catechumens. Thirdly there were the "aligned", who remained in place until the end of the Divine Liturgy, but without receiving Holy Communion. And fourthly, there were the partakers of Holy Communion. In other words, when someone committed a sin, they would have to go through a period of repentance and repentance meant that the person had to reach the enlightenment of the nous through catharsis - he would have to alter his nous, and from a darkened state make it light again. The Bishop would then read a blessing and that person could afterwards receive Holy Communion.

That is why I mentioned that Confession is not absolutely tied to Holy Communion. If someone sins and he needs to confess, then he must confess. If there are certain sins - the so-called "excusable" ones - they are forgiven with the Service of Communion and with the prayer "...and forgive us our trespasses...." which is included in the "Lord's Prayer".

As to how many times a year one can receive Holy Communion - well, that is determined by one's Spiritual Father. That is, we go to our Spiritual Father and we open up our heart completely; we tell him all of the problems that we have, we report on the condition we are in, and he will give us the appropriate instructions. The same thing takes place here, as it does with doctors. We visit the doctor, we inform him of our ailment and the doctor will make the appropriate diagnosis and prescribe suitable medication and treatment. For example, he might tell us to abstain from certain foods because our organism can't tolerate them, and that we will be free to consume those foods only after we are cured.

It is in this context that we should also look upon Holy Communion, because to some, Holy Communion can be Light, while to others it can be fire.

The Holy Fathers say that when we place two objects - that is, mud and wax - under the sun, then the sun's rays will harden the mud and melt the wax. Although the sun's energies are the same, however, the substance of the objects is different, which is why the results are different. In the same way, God and Holy Communion become [are experienced as] Light to some, and to others, fire.

In the churches of Monasteries they depict the scene of the Second Coming. At the top of the icon is the Throne, and from the Throne emanates the Light which illuminates the saints, while from the Throne flows the river of fire that consumes the sinners. Saint Isaac the Syrian says that "hell" is God's "whip of love" - a love that mankind cannot comprehend, because their hearts are unclean and incurable. God loves both the righteous AND the sinner, but not everyone can experience God in the same manner.

Basil the Great wrote that the Light has two energies: the illuminating and the caustic, and as such, it illuminates and it burns. Whoever has eyes will avoid its caustic energy and will enjoy the illuminating energy of the Light. Those who have no eyes to see, will accept the caustic characteristic of the light. That is what will happen during the Second Coming: the righteous will perceive God's light and sinners will perceive His fire.

The exact same thing takes place during the Divine Liturgy. Some receive Holy Communion and are illuminated, while others receive Holy Communion and are condemned. The Apostle Paul says in his Epistle to Corinthians: "For this, there are among you many who are weak and sick, and a great many are reposed" (1 Cor.11:30). That is why the work of a priest is not to distribute tickets so that people might enter Paradise; he must heal people, so that when they encounter God, God will become Light and not fire to them.

We must clarify at this point the question of how frequently a healthy person and a sick person can receive Holy Communion; for example, a paralytic person. It appears that a healthy person has many more sins and a paralytic does not have as many. But that is not correct. It does not mean that a healthy person sins and a paralytic doesn't. Sins are committed with one's thoughts and one's desires as well as with the body. One can be healthy and spend all day glorifying God and live an angelic life, and the other - a sick person - can live with faithlessness and indignation. What is important, is for one to glorify God - whether in health or in sickness.

*Nous = The human nous in Eastern Orthodox Christianity is the "eye of the heart or soul" or the "mind of the heart". The soul of man is created by God in His image; man's soul is intelligent and noetic. St Thalassios wrote that God created beings "with a capacity to receive the Spirit and to attain knowledge of Himself; He has brought into existence the senses and sensory perception to serve such beings". Eastern Orthodox Christians hold that God did this by creating mankind with intelligence and noetic faculties. Angels have intelligence and nous, whereas men have reason - both logos and dianoia - nous and sensory perception. This follows the idea that man is a microcosm and an expression of the whole creation or macrocosmos. The human nous was darkened after the Fall of Man (which was the result of the rebellion of reason against the nous), but after the purification (healing or correction) of the nous (achieved through ascetic practices like hesychasm), the human nous (the "eye of the heart") will see God's uncreated Light (and feel God's uncreated love and beauty, at which point the nous will start the unceasing prayer of the heart) and become illuminated, allowing the person to become an orthodox theologian.

Source

Tweet

Share on Tumblr