Fasting Rules For Annunciation and Palm Sunday

I received the following question which I thought needed to be clarified in a more public forum, due to certain canonical confusions.

Question:

John, I wanted to ask you about Palm Sunday and the Annunciation. In particular the rule for fasting regarding fish during Great Lent. A few years back there was a debate between my father and our parish priest because the Pedalion states that fish can only be eaten on the Annunciation [during Great Lent]. When the Annunciation fell during Holy Week, fish could be eaten on Palm Sunday. Together, we ended up looking at three different Pedalion [editions]: my dads is an edition from the mid-1930's in Greek, Fathers is from around 1990 in English, and another priests from the mid-1800's in Greek.

Each was the same in the rule for fish during Great Lent. Fish is only allowed on the Annunciation. Interestingly enough, in a footnote in the bottom, each edition said that any deviation from that made one a servant of the stomach, "δουλοσ τησ κοιλιασ". After all of the referencing and cross referencing, they said that over the generations they determined that people must have become accustomed to fish on Palm Sunday because on the occasion that the Annunciation fell during Holy Week, fish was eaten on Palm Sunday. The following year, having remembered they ate fish on Palm Sunday the previous year, they did so again then and also on the Annunciation which came earlier that next year, prior to Holy Week. This lead to the "new" practice of fish on both days. Are you able to tell me if you can confirm any of the this?

They did tell me that the Pedalion was compromised at one point by an individual who was trusted to take it to be published some generations ago. The one Father thought this could explain the discrepancy, perhaps the rule was fish on both days prior to this compromise. Coincidentally, the Father with the older Pedalion said that Bishops have been known to give a dispensation, so long as it is not done publicly to not scandalize others who may know differently.

Answer:

I assume the information you noted which is contained in the footnotes of the Pedalion are the ones by St Nikodemos the Hagiorite. Whatever the case is, it is interesting and worth considering the "evolution" hypothesis which you explained as to how Palm Sunday became a day on which fish is eaten, but even St. Nikodemos would have to admit it is speculation. This hypothesis assumes that the practice of the entire Church and the educated clergy were compromised just by a few who confused, what seems to be clear from the canons, an important tradition. However, I'm not even sure if it was an ancient tradition that if the Annunciation fell during Holy Week that fish was eaten on Palm Sunday instead, though in other years they had abstained on Palm Sunday. There is no evidence for this, as far as I know. Ultimately we do not know the origins of eating fish on Palm Sunday, and personally I do not think it has anything to do with the Annunciation.

By custom and tradition fish as well as oil and wine are permitted on the Saturday of Lazarus along with Palm Sunday, though some also abstain on Saturday of Lazarus from fish. For example, in Russia it is customary to eat caviar on the Saturday of Lazarus, though Greeks tend to abstain from fish (they eat Lazarakia instead). St. Theodore the Studite allowed his monks to eat fish on both Saturday of Lazarus and Palm Sunday in the 9th century.

The Saturday of Lazarus and Palm Sunday are counted among the major feasts of the Church, with the latter among the Twelve Great Feasts. The interlude which separates the Great Fast from Holy Week is Paschal in character. The Saturday of Lazarus and Palm Sunday are both joyous festivals. Therefore, the priest wears festive vestments (white, gold, or green), and the Holy Table is also adorned with a bright cover. The Saturday of Lazarus is a prelude to the Resurrection while Palm Sunday is a prelude to the coming Kingdom.

According to Holy Tradition, there are seven Great Feasts of the Lord:

Elevation of the Holy Cross, September 14
Nativity of Christ (Christmas), December 25
Theophany, January 6
Palm Sunday, the Sunday before Pascha
Ascension, forty days after Pascha
Pentecost fifty days after Pascha
Transfiguration, August 6

If any of these days fall on a fast day, then fish is permitted (or the fast could be eliminated altogether), except for the Elevation of the Holy Cross which is a strict fast day. The same is true with the five Great Feasts of the Theotokos, among which is the Annunciation. When a Great Feast of the Theotokos falls on a fasting day, the fast is relaxed to permit fish, wine, and oil (Exception: when Annunciation falls during Holy Week, wine and oil (but not fish) are permitted; when Annunciation falls on Holy Friday or Holy Saturday, wine [but not oil or fish] are permitted).

The Feasts of the Lord are considered "first class" feasts and the Feasts of the Theotokos are considered "second class". This would mean that Palm Sunday is considered a greater feast than the Annunciation, as far as rank is concerned. This being the case, one can see why fish is permitted on Palm Sunday and why an elaborate "evolutionary" explanation is unnecessary.

As for the fact that the canons only allow fish on one day during Great Lent, the Annunciation, this in no way contradicts the practice of allowing fish on Palm Sunday, or even the Saturday of Lazarus for that matter. Palm Sunday is not during Great Lent, but is part of the interlude between Great Lent and Holy Week. Great Lent ends on the Friday before Palm Sunday. Therefore the canon which says that the Annunciation is the only day during Great Lent fish is allowed is not compromised. This confusion, it seems, is also one reason why the "evolutionary" hypothesis came about as well. Let alone the fact that various Orthodox sources confuse this. For example, on the OCA website for March 25 where the Feast of the Annunciation is explained, it says the following misleading information: "It is one of the two days of Great Lent on which the fast is relaxed and fish is permitted (Palm Sunday is the other)." But as we just said, Palm Sunday is not during Great Lent.

Lastly, it is hard to say what, if any, compromises there are in the Pedalion, and a study on this should be made. Some say it was done by the Venetian publishers, while English speakers may accuse the followers of Apostolos Makrakis, who translated The Rudder, of compromising the texts. I doubt this is the case on this issue however.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

The Roman Revolt of 1821

Fr. Pavlos interviews Athanasios Sakarellos on the so-called "Greek" Revolt of 1821. This program is in Romaic (Greek).

Essentially the so-called "Greek" War of Independence was a Roman revolt which had as its aim the restoration of the Roman Empire, especially of its capital in Constantinople. In this sense, it did not fulfill ts mission. On the other hand, it did fulfill the mission of being freed of the Ottoman occupation. With the governing of Greece by foreign powers began the "barbarization" of Modern Greece and its loss of its historic Roman identity. Patriarch Gregory V foresaw this danger and warned the revolutionaries against the revolt.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Kings College To Relaunch Its Center for Hellenic Studies

Boost For Greek Unit at King’s

March 26, 2010
Kathimerini

London’s prestigious King’s College yesterday announced plans to boost its Center for Hellenic Studies by broadening the scope of its activities to include teaching as well as research, revoking an initial decision to “downsize” Greek studies after thousands signed a protest petition.

The original plan, made public last month, was to radically scale down the college’s Department of Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies due to cuts in state funding for education. The plans prompted thousands of students and professors from the field to sign a petition in protest and the issue was raised in the British and European parliaments.

According to the new, revised plan, the college’s Center for Hellenic Studies will incorporate the threatened Department of Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies by the launch of the new academic year.

In a press release issued yesterday, college principal Rick Trainor noted, “The study of the Greek world from prehistory to the present day is a distinctive feature of what we do at King’s and the relaunch of the Center for Hellenic Studies demonstrates our continuing commitment to the subject.”

“I am particularly pleased to be able to make this announcement on Greek Independence Day,” he added.

Professor Emeritus Dame Averil Cameron, the center’s founding director and president of the International Federation of Associations of Classical Studies (FIEC), described the development as “deeply encouraging.” “I know that the news will be warmly received all over the world where Hellenic studies is studied and valued,” she said.

Professor Roderick Beaton, Koraes professor of modern Greek and Byzantine history, language and literature, hailed King’s for devising “a bold and principled way of reaffirming its historic responsibility for a specialist subject-area in which the college has long excelled, now that the UK government, sadly, no longer provides central support for ‘minority’ subjects.”

Read more here.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Passover Proof Lies In Egyptian Hieroglyphs

March 24, 2010
By Danielle Berrin
Jewish Journal

Pharoah’s papyrus scrolls may not seem the most reliable sources for investigating the story of the Israelite’s Exodus, but Egyptologist Galit Dayan has found in them much compelling evidence to support the historicity of the biblical tale.

Two weeks before Passover, on March 17, Dayan presented her research to an audience of more than 200 at Sinai Temple. Dayan, who earned her Ph.D. in Egyptology from Hebrew University in Jerusalem and is the wife of Jacob Dayan, Consul General of Israel in Los Angeles, told the group that linguistic evidence reveals an ancient and deeply involved Jewish presence in Egypt that eventually disappears. To illustrate, she drew remarkable parallels between the language of Egyptian papyrus (hieroglyphs), the haggadah and the Bible, all of which contain references to the Exodus story. In piecing together these manuscripts, Dayan framed an Exodus narrative based on facts of Egyptian history and language to prove her theory that a mass Exodus did occur and that it happened during the reign of Ramses II.

In each of the Egyptian manuscripts Dayan discussed, the same familiar characters are mentioned: Moses (“an Egyptian name”), Pharoah, the Red Sea/Sea of Reeds (“Yam Suf” in Hebrew), Hebrews, Israelites and the presence of slaves in Egypt.

In one manuscript, known as the Ipuwer papyrus, there is an eerie description of chaos in Egypt: “Plague is throughout the land,” Dayan’s translation reads, “blood is everywhere — the river is blood ... and the hail smote every herd of the field ... the land is without light and there is a thick darkness throughout the land ... the Lord smote all the firstborn in the land of Egypt — from the firstborn of Pharoah that sat on his throne to the firstborn of the captive who was in the prison. ...”

“Ladies and gentlemen,” Dayan said with dramatic effect, “this is an Egyptian papyrus that is describing the same plagues that we have in our haggadah.” She explained her view that the 10 plagues were not random punishments inflicted by the Jewish God upon Egypt, but a “declaration of war” on the entire Egyptian system. Each plague, she said, corresponds to a different Egyptian god and the element of creation over which they held dominion. This means the plagues were not merely grave misfortunes but the most humiliating insults to the Egyptian people.

Dayan, who is a fan of atlases, made use of several maps to support her case. The “Map of the Lakes” depicts the location of several bodies of water in ancient Egypt — including the Yam Suf, or Red Sea — which the Israelites are said to have crossed on their way to Canaan. Although the Egyptians refer to the Yam Suf in a different location from where the Red Sea is located, Dayan said there is a manuscript that depicts “a lake full of suf, or reeds” as having dried out. This was a time, Dayan said excitedly, when “you could cross Yam Suf.”

Academics have narrowed the time period during which the Exodus might have occurred to the reign of three kings, or pharoahs, who are first called such in Egyptian texts. First was King Akhenaten, who reportedly brought monotheism to Egypt (as Dayan believes that groups of Hebrews resided in Egypt since the beginning of Jewish history, it is plausible either that the king passed monotheism onto the Jews or that they could have influenced his theology); next was Ramses II, who moved the Egyptian capital to the delta where many “Habirus” — or Hebrews — resided and also near to where the haggadah says that Israelites “built treasure cities Pitom and Ramses” for Pharoah; and then there is Merneptah Stele, the son of Ramses II who, among his many conquests, conquered “Israel” in the land of Canaan — an indication that the Israelites had already left Egypt and were living in the land.

So far, evidence of the Exodus exists only as pieces of a puzzle. These fragments of history, Dayan admits, appear within different manuscripts written at different times. “People today are still looking for the one piece, the one story — the Egyptian haggadah — that will include all the elements of the story together,” she said.

There are Jews who accept the historicity of the Israelite Exodus from Egypt as an indisputable fact of the Jewish story and for whom its legitimacy cannot be questioned. But within scholarly and scientific circles, whether the Exodus actually occurred is still an issue of serious inquiry and debate. Dayan represents a voice in the middle, sensitive to the Jewish story and also aware of the facts.

“I believe that we helped Egypt succeed and be a great empire,” Dayan said. “When you read the Bible, you can find the footprints of Egyptian culture all over the place. There are so many expressions in the haggadah, in the Bible, that are actually Egyptian expressions. How could we know Egyptian so well? Because we lived there.”

Of course, there are those who disagree. Among them is Sinai’s Rabbi David Wolpe, who led a Q-and-A discussion following Dayan’s lecture. Wolpe famously disputed the historicity of the Exodus in a 2001 sermon.

Did Dayan’s presentation change Wolpe’s mind — even a little?

“Not at all,” Wolpe said during the discussion. “But not because it doesn’t convince me that there’s evidence that makes the story plausible, because I think there is. ... The reason that modern scholars dispute the historicity of the Exodus doesn’t have anything to do with the first two parts of the story [slavery in Egypt, the journey through the desert]; it has to do with the third part [when they arrive in the land].

“If, in fact, hundreds of thousands of Jews left Egypt, then you should be able to see new settlement patterns in Israel — and archaeologists have excavated Israel, and they don’t see a change in the building structure, in the pottery, all the things you think would change if there was a huge immigrant influx,” Wolpe said.

Though the evening ran late and Dayan did not have the opportunity to formally rebut Wolpe’s contentions, Dayan said after the lecture that the reason settlement patterns aren’t visible is because Israelites had not yet conquered their new homeland in Israel — they were nomads, and later papyrus scrolls depicted them as a people without a territory, which would have precluded them from building when they arrived.

To fill in the gaps, Dayan explained, Jews and Israelis would need access to archeological sites in Egypt, which she believes German archeologists are currently excavating. Because the political relationship between Egypt and Israel remains fraught, even archeological endeavors are challenging.

“As an Israeli and a Jew, I can tell you they will do everything they can not to let you dig in Egypt,” Dayan said. “I tried to do it with a French passport, but I didn’t succeed because I was born in Jerusalem. I think the Egyptians today are very afraid that we will find more to support the theory that we lived in the delta.”

“One [archaeologist] even said to me, ‘You know, we don’t want you to one day claim the delta,’ ” she joked.

At the end of the presentation, Wolpe asked Dayan whether any of the other ancient tribes of Egypt still exist, besides the Israelites.

“No,” she answered.

“Whereas, if you have a seder this year,” the rabbi said, turning to the audience, “you will be reenacting something thousands of years old that none of those other cultures who passed through that ancient world can do.”

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Archbishop Hieronymos: "I Get Payed 2300 Euros Per Month"

"I get paid by the state with the amount of 2,300 euros per month. It is not enough for me, but I try to do what my grandmother told me, that in life I should stretch my legs to where I am able", says Archbishop Hieronymos in an interview with the program 'Πρωταγωνιστές'.

Stavros Theodorakis met His Beatitude Hieronymos II and discussed with him everything that has evolved over the past two years in which he is the head of the Greek Church.

Especially on the issue of taxation of the church and church property Hieronymos gives all the answers for the first time.

The cameras of the program followed the Archbishop of Athens for two 24-hour periods, at home, at church, on the streets of Athens and of course in his office.

Among the topics of discussion are: The separation of Church and State, his relations with the Ecumenical Patriarch and the Prime Minister, religious symbols in public places, the citizenship of immigrants, the name of FYROM, the European course of Turkey, the scandal surrounding Vatopaidi Monastery, the mosque in Athens, and his childhood.

This is extremely interesting interview and will be screened on the evening of Palm Sunday March 28, 2010 at 22.50 on MEGA.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Churches Desecrated In Cyprus, Turned Into Pubs

Kykkos Claims Desecrations Ongoing in the North

March 24, 2010
Cyprus Mail

ONE DAY after the unexpected visit by Archbishop Chrysostomos II to Apostolos Andreas, Kykkos Monastery Museum said it had new evidence of the desecration of churches in the north.

During a news conference yesterday Open University of Greece professor Charalambos C. Chotzakoglou presented several examples as part of the Museum’s effort to publicise the issue.

He highlighted the case of the Virgin of Trachoni church in occupied Nicosia, which was looted during the occupation and turned into a dance school.

According to Chotzakoglou, construction crews are currently building a road next to the church and have severely damaged the western entrance and destroyed the courtyard and surrounding areas in the process.

“Today, the whole surrounding area has become a roundabout, the whole area around the church is being used as a road, and all this has been done with funds from the EU, of which we are a member state, and we have not objected,” he said.

Andrew Rasbash, Head of Unit of the European Commission’s Task Force for the Turkish Cypriot Community, said the EC, through the €259 million EU aid programme for the Turkish Cypriot community finances projects in the northern part of Cyprus.

“However we are not financing road construction through this programme in Nicosia,” he said. But Rasbash added that his colleagues were “checking to see if any projects we are financing in other sectors involve work that could possibly have damaged the Virgin of Trachoni church.”


Chotzakoglou said at the Kyrenia cemetery years-old graves of native Kyrenians had been exhumed – smashing tombstones and crucifixes in the process – to bury Britons “who no longer fit in the nearby British cemetery”

“This is an unacceptable insult to the memory of the dead and an intolerable act of the Anglican Church in Cyprus, which in the free areas enjoys the full freedom and benefit of the Church of Cyprus and the Cyprus Republic.”

In another example he said the Roman Catholic Church of San Francesco in Famagusta was now a pub while the the twin churches of the Knights Hospitallers, are nightclubs.

The church of Panagia in Acheritou had its floors illicitly excavated and fragments of medieval pottery destroyed, and the church of Saint Effimianou, whose north wall was partially demolished by illicit antiquities dealer Aydin Dikman was in the process of having its remaining frescoes destroyed, he said.

Archbishop Chrysostomos visited Apostolos Andreas on Monday after Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayip Erdogan gave the go-ahead to conserve and restore the monastery following nearly four decades of neglect. The structure threatens to collapse in on itself if the restoration plans fail to come to fruition.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

The Taxation of Church Property In Greece

The Church Is A Natural Barrier

by Spyros Bazina
Romfea.gr
March 18, 2010

Like most publicly debated issues in our country, so the issue of taxation of church property is at best a superficial subject of debate and at worst a misleading subject of debate. In each case the result is confusion in the State which made terrible mistakes. The result of this confusion is the support of many poor and honest people (but obviously not close to the Church) of the taxation of church property.

A similar result of confusion is the resignation of some Metropolitans of their salary to the State. The salary of the clergy is not a gift of the State nor the private property of the clergy to have every clergyman give at will. The State gives salary to the clergy of the vast property that the Church gave the State and compared to the revenue of the churches that the Church attaches to the State.

If a Metropolitan or any other cleric wants to waive his salary, he has the obligation to repay the salary to the Church, not the State. Of course, it also creates the impression that they have another method by which to make a living and that any surplus from this salary was not spent on the tasks for the Church, which is not good for either the same or the Church.

If a Metropolitan or any other cleric wants to help the State with gifts or to accept unconstitutional, illegal and unfair taxation, let him do it from any private property he has, and not from the property of the Church. The hierarchy and clergy are of course entitled to manage the assets of the Church, but only for the benefit of the Church. And the Church is not entitled to assign assets to anyone. Otherwise it is committing dereliction of duty under the laws of the State relating to the NPDD and the canons of the Church. If those who made donations to the Church wanted to give it to the State, they could have given it to them on their own and do not need the Church for this purpose.

We have to say it simply and clearly. The taxation of church property will affect those who benefit from the enormous works of charity: the orphans, the widows, the elderly, the sick, the homeless, the starving prisoners, and ordinary people who have little under the sun. Thus, the taxation of church property is not a measure of social justice. This is abuse of church property by members of the Church, the clergy, lay people, and an act which certainly falls within the limits of criminal law and certainly not tax law.

Quite to the contrary, the taxation of church property is an unpopular measure of social injustice. It more or less manages away social resources from the poor and landless to pay them less. The taxation of church property is another taxing of the poor, the wage-earner of low-income and large families. At first glance, it appears to be correct to say that any tax should be levied on the surplus, not the current deficit of the Church.

In an era of such need of the people, the Church has no means to have excess. All means must be spent in the ministry of the people. And furthermore, there is no surplus to give to enable the State to pay less, who themselves have more than those who depend on the charity of the Church.

The taxation of gifts to the Church is the apotheosis of the absurd. Those that help, either from their surplus or from what little they have, the Church in its work, is because they see it as valuable, and are required to enhance a wasteful, corrupt and inefficient State, which now says it came to its senses.

Whatever money spent by the State for schools, camps, hospitals, nursing homes, and orphanages can not reach the quality offered by the faithful volunteers of the Church. But it is highly doubtful that such a State will be interested to pursue such a social project with the resources being taken away from the Church.

However, the taxation of church property represents something else. Philanthropy originated with the birth of the Church. It didn't exist in the ancient world. It is another thing to say that all the ancient beliefs are present today as a reheated soup of last year, with some spices of philanthropy solely intended to lure naive, tired or wicked lads to draw them away from the Church (which has profited us with the freedom and dignity of the human person, which the Church preserves as the pupil of one's eye). And the Church has grown with persecutions, but has stabilized by the tax exemptions the Roman emperors gave the Church.

The taxation of the Church is a reversal of the policy of the last two millennia, and the beginning of a persecution for the Church. This a result of globalization leading to a concentration of wealth in a few hands so that few people can buy the freedom of many.

The Church is a natural barrier to this development and it should put aside the mischief and denigration of the rulers with the removal of its property and many other things we live through these days, not by random chance.

The Church, that is, the hierarchy, the clergy, monks and the faithful people, acknowledges this and are not afraid. If the Hierarchy bends, God forbid, the Church will show forth leaders from the ranks of the clergy, the monks and the laity.

Translated by John Sanidopoulos

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

The Philanthropy of the Church of Greece

The Presence of So Many Peoples Sacrifice Is a Ray of Hope, and a Source of Joy

by Monk Moses the Athonite
March 2010

There are still noble benefactors, philanthropic sponsors, modest givers of charity, and eager volunteers. Individualism, enrichment and fun times have not ruled everyone. We must refer to the positive in our society, so as to not be disappointed. Let us be optimistic and still have hope.

The Church of Greece, despite the criticism which it endures from various people, maintains numerous charities and is well organized for charitable services in parishes and cities. Daily it provides the needy throughout Greece with over 35,000 food dishes, among whom are the immigrants who have not received the necessary state care. The current property ownership of the church is to provide for its rich charity work.

The church now operates and maintains:

- 20 nurseries and kindergartens
- 84 homes for the elderly
- 13 hospitals for the chronically ill
- 30 different institutions
- 8 institutions for people with disabilities
- 54 camping areas
- 33 youth institutions
- 10 hospital clinics
- 6 hostels
- 36 orphanages/boarding schools
- 195 soup kitchens
- 44 schools of iconography
- 136 schools teaching Byzantine and European music
- 47 different schools
- 35 blood banks
- 1 home for the blind
- 13 school dormitories
- 7 mental health institutions

In 2009 the church gave an allowance for every third child in Thrace of 120,000 euros. Overall, the Church of Greece last year made sales for various charities the significant amount of 100,000,000 euros.

All this money was given by the faithful, the church-goers, philanthropists, famous and anonymous, rich and poor. Some from their surplus and some from the little they have. Everyone should be commended, especially the latter.

Christ blesses the widow in the Gospel for giving two worthless mites, because she gave it from her heart and from the little that she had. Christ loves the secret giver, as He makes clear in the Holy Gospel. Secrecy is essential to charity. Also, in no way should one offend, expose or shame in a superior manner the kindness of less fortunate givers.

In the scarcity of sincere love in our times, fortunately there are preserved people who spoil their leisure, their laziness, their carelessness, to offer a sweet smile to children and the elderly in several difficult positions.

The presence of so many peoples sacrifice is a ray of hope, and a source of joy and optimism.

Translated by John Sanidopoulos
Source

See also the Encyclical of the Church of Greece Regarding the World Economic Crisis

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Church of Greece To Challenge the New Tax

Greek Churches to be Taxed in Govt’s Response to Economic Crisis

March 24, 2010
By Hilary White
LifeSiteNews

The Greek government has announced it will start taxing churches as part of its efforts to get out of its financial crisis. A new draft bill to be tabled in parliament next week imposes a 20 per cent tax on the Orthodox church's real estate income, reportedly worth over 10 million Euros (US $14.8 million) a year, the Wall Street Journal reports.

The Orthodox Archbishop of Athens Ieronymos said on Sunday that taxing the churches is unconstitutional and “unprincipled.” He told the Athens weekly, Real News, that the Church of Greece would challenge the tax in the Greek and European courts.

He proposed instead a calculation based on revenues and expenditures, rather than real estate income, with the Church paying 20 percent tax on the remainder of their net income.

“The state is telling us that 'we don't know what your (Church) revenues are; yet, I want 20 percent of what you receive'. This is unconstitutional,” he said. The archbishop dismissed media accounts of the Church’s wealth. “Come and show us where this money is,” Ieronymos said.

Greece is in the midst of a massive economic crisis that analysts have warned could have far-reaching effects throughout the Eurozone. EU leaders have accused the country of encouraging a financial culture characterized by insoluble public and private debt, tax-avoidance and systemic corruption. Greek government debt was estimated at €216 billion in January.

The European Union has imposed a set of criteria that must be met by the government, and on March 5 parliament passed the Economy Protection Bill, that imposed strict austerity measures, which is expected to save €4.8 billion.

The German government is under heavy pressure from the EU to open its purse and produce a bail-out for Greece to save the Euro from collapse. Leaders hope that the German government will cave at the EU summit later this week. Germany, which can borrow at the lowest interest rates in the E.U. and has the Union's largest economy, has resisted the pressure, but Chancellor Angela Merkel said on March 5th that Germany would “stand by Greece.” The argument has threatened to weaken the EU’s financial hegemony.

The Greek financial crisis is part of a larger economic melt-down that is being called the European Sovereign Debt Crisis. Other countries caught in the crisis are Spain, Ireland, and Portugal. Fears over the crisis have led to a weakening of the Euro and a widespread global stock selloff in February.

Economists are arguing over whether the Euro can survive the crisis. Desmond Lachman, a senior fellow at the conservative American Enterprise Institute, said at a conference hosted by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington that the Greek government should revert to the Drachma. The Euro, he said, is a “disastrous experiment” born of political ideology rather than sound economic theory. Continued membership in the Euro, he said, would result in the Greek government having recourse only to tax increases and cuts to public spending to overcome its massive debt problem.

Meanwhile, unemployment has risen sharply in Greece during the crisis, and nationwide strikes have been launched in opposition to the austerity measures. Prime Minister George Papandreou told a European Parliament Committee earlier this month that the EU’s refusal to provide a cash bailout will force the country into the arms of the International Monetary Fund for a financial rescue.

After a meeting in Brussels last week, Papandreou said, “What Greece is asking for is to be able to borrow on the same conditions as other countries, so that Greek peoples' sacrifices will not be wasted due to high interest rates.”

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Sermon for the Fifth Friday of Great Lent

CATECHESIS 70: That We Should Endure Every Torment In Imitation of Christ and the Saints.

by St. Theodore the Studite

Given on the Friday of the 5th Week of Great Lent.

Brethren and Fathers, the previous instruction[1] no doubt pained you which indicated the trials that are being meditated against us. "But because of what I have said to you," says the Lord, "grief has filled your hearts; but I speak the truth to you" [John 16:6-7]. And again the Apostle: "It is not troublesome for me to speak, while for you it is a safeguard" [Phil. 3:1]. May we be safeguarded, then, with every spiritual safeguard, and if what is being said passes into act, we will meet it, with God's help, nobly; but if not, it will not be without advantage for us as our good God accepts such preparation and without toils and blows crowns those who thus choose.

Already Lent draws to its end and the time introduces the fair crown, that is the remembrance of the life-giving sufferings of the Saviour, in which we find the greatest consolation. For if our Lord and God was arrested for our sins, is it a great matter if we unprofitable servants should also be arrested for his sake? And if he was bound and led away and put in prison, is it so strange should we suffer the same treatment as the Master? Rather it would be exceedingly grievous not to encounter such things. But if we must be scourged, let us bear the scourges; and if we must be beaten, let us bear the beatings; and if we have to be spat on, let us bear the spittings; and finally if we must be put to death, let us bear that revered death. And good it is if anyone were to be found worthy to become a partaker in Christ's sufferings. This is blessedness, this is immortality.

Do we not hear what the Apostle says? "From now on, let no one make trouble for me; for I carry the marks of the Lord Jesus branded on my body" [Gal. 6:17]. As though he were saying: Let no one despise me, for I bear the adornments of Christ the universal King in my flesh. Such also was Saint Ignatios who was called God-bearer by his bearing in himself the Lord's sufferings. Such was St Eustratios who cried out in the midst of torments and said, ‘Now I know that Christ lives in me’. O blessed voices and thrice-blessed souls! Whose memorials then do we celebrate? Whose nativities do we feast? To whom do we erect sacred churches, whose relics do we venerate? Is it not those of the Martyrs? Those of the Confessors? Those of the Ascetics? And if here they have been found worthy of so great glory, how much and how great the splendour they would enjoy in the age to come? Ineffable and unimaginable the reckoning! This is the fair business, this the blessed exchange: by small struggles and toils to purchase goods that are eternal and without end.

Let us too then imitate them, brethren; let us mingle our blood with the holy blood, for this is possible; for its nature is not dissimilar nor has He changed who says: "See, see that I am and I have not changed" [Cf. Dt. 32:39 and Mal. 3:6]. He loves all equally, He died on behalf of all, He sets before all inexhaustible delight, He is passionate for the salvation of all, and this to Him is riches, for He says "He is richly generous to all who call upon Him" [Rom. 10:12]. Therefore let us call upon Him in what befalls us and "He will give power and might" [Ps. 67:36] to our souls. Let us embrace Him and "He will bring our enemies to naught" [Ps. 107:14] both seen and invisible. Let us await Him and He will crown us for the day of resurrection of the dead, for the day of His appearing; for which may we too be found worthy to attain without condemnation and to stand uncondemned at his judgement seat, giving a good defence, in Christ 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.

1. Unless the renegade Alexander was more dangerous than St Theodore says, this does not seem to have been Catechesis 69. Moreover according to some MSS there was one for Thursday of this week, number 33 of the Large Catechesis. The latter speaks of no such threats.

Source

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

On Discussing Matters Pertaining to Faith

If you cannot discourse about faith, do not try to. If a man is firm in faith he will never be confused in discussions and disputes with heretics or unbelievers, because he has in him Jesus, the Lord of peace and quiet. After a peaceful discussion, such a man can lovingly bring many heretics and unbelievers to the knowledge of Jesus Christ our Savior. As for you, since discoursing on some subjects is beyond you, keep to the royal road, that is to the faith of the 318 holy fathers (and for us now, to the faith established by the seven ecumenical councils), into which you were baptized. It contains everything stated exactly for perfect understanding. But most of all have attention in yourself, meditating on your sins and on how you will be received by God.

- St. Barasanuphios the Great

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Orthodox Saints of Ukraine

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

The Annunciation of the Virgin Mary

By Metropolitan Hierotheos (Vlachos) of Nafpaktos

The feast of the Annunciation of the Virgin Mary is a feast of the Lord and of the Mother of God (Theotokos). It is a feast of the Lord because Christ who was conceived in the womb of the Theotokos. It is a feast of the Theotokos because it refers to the person who aided in the conception and Incarnation of the Word of God, that is, the All Holy Virgin Mary.

Mary (the Theotokos) has great value and an important position in the Church, precisely because she was the person whom all generations awaited, and she gave human nature to the Word of God. Thus the person of the Theotokos is associated closely with the Person of Christ. Furthermore, the value of the Virgin Mary is not only due to her virtues, but also mainly to the fruit of her womb. For this reason, Theotokology is very closely associated with Christology. When we speak of Christ we cannot ignore her who gave Him flesh. And when we speak of the Virgin Mary, we simultaneously refer to Christ, because from Him she draws Grace and value. This shows clearly in the service of the Salutations, in which the Theotokos is hymned, but always in combination with the fact that she is the mother of Christ: "Rejoice, for you are the throne of the king. Rejoice for you bear Him Who bears all things".

This connection of Christology and Theotokology shows in the lives of the Saints as well. A characteristic mark of the Saints, who are the real members of the Body of Christ, is that they love the Virgin Mary. It is impossible for there to be a Saint who does not love her.

The Annunciation of the Theotokos is the beginning of all feasts of the Lord. In the dismissal hymn of the feast we chant: "Today is the beginning of our salvation and the revelation of the mystery from the ages..." The content of the feast refers to the Archangel Gabriel’s (the angel associated with all events having to do with the Incarnation of Christ) visit to the Virgin Mary (with God's command) informing her that the time of the Incarnation of the Word of God had arrived, and that she would become His mother (see Luke 1:26-56).

The word "annunciation" is comprised of two words, good and message, and denotes the good notification, the good announcement. This refers to the information that was given through the Archangel that the Word of God would be incarnated for man's salvation. Essentially this is the fulfilment of God's promise, given after the fall of Adam and Eve (see Gen. 3:15), which is called the proto-evangelion (i.e., the first gospel). For this reason the information of the Incarnation of the Word of God is the greatest notification in history.

According to St. Maximos the Confessor, the gospel of God is the intercession of God and the comforting of men through His incarnate Son. Simultaneously it is the reconciliation of men with the Father, Who gives the unborn theosis as a reward to those who obey Christ. Theosis is called unborn because it is not born but rather is revealed to those who are worthy. Consequently, the theosis that is offered through the incarnate Christ is not a birth, but a revelation of the enhypostatic illumination to those who are worthy of this revelation.

The good announcement, the gospel, the Annunciation, is a correction of the events, which occurred at the beginning of man's creation, in the sensorial Paradise of Eden. There, from a woman the Fall and its results began; here, from a woman all good things began. Thus, the Virgin Mary is the new Eve. There was the sensorial Paradise; here, the Church. There, Adam; here, Christ. There, Eve; here Maria. There, the snake; here, Gabriel. There, the whispering of the dragon-snake to Eve; here the greeting of the angel to Mary (Joseph Vryenios). In this manner the transgression of Adam and Eve was corrected.

The Archangel Gabriel called the Virgin Mary "full of grace." He told her: "Rejoice, O thou who art full of grace. The Lord is with thee. Blessed art thou among women" (Luke 1:28-29). The Virgin Mary is called "full of grace" and is characterised as "blessed" since God is with her.

According to Saint Gregory Palamas and other Holy Fathers, the Virgin Mary had already been filled with grace, and was not just filled with grace on the day of the Annunciation. Having remained in the Holy of Holies of the Temple, she reached the Holy of Holies of the spiritual life, theosis. If the courtyard of the Temple was destined for the proselytes and the main Temple for the priests, then the Holy of Holies was destined for the high priest. There the Virgin Mary entered, a sign that she had reached theosis. It is known that in the Christian age, the narthex was destined for the catechumens and the impure, the main church for the illumined, the members of the Church, and the holy of holies (altar) for those who had reached theosis.

Thus, the Virgin Mary had reached theosis even before she received the visitation of the Archangel. Toward this goal, she used a special method of knowing God and communing with God, as Saint Gregory Palamas interprets in a wonderful and divinely inspired manner. This refers to stillness, the hesychastic way. The Virgin Mary realised that no one can reach God with reasoning, with the senses, with imagination or human glory, but rather only through the intellect. Thus she deadened all the powers of the soul that came from the senses, and through noetic prayer she activated the intellect. In this manner she reached illumination and theosis. And for this reason she was granted to become the Mother of Christ, to give her flesh to Christ. She didn't have simply virtues, but the god-making Grace of God.

The Virgin Mary had the fullness of God's Grace, in comparison to (other) people. Of course, Christ, as the Word of God, has the whole fullness of Graces, but the Virgin Mary received the fullness of Grace from the fullness of Graces of her Son. For this reason, in relation to Christ she is lower, since - Christ had the Grace by nature, whereas the Virgin Mary had it through participation. In relation to people, however, she is higher.

The Virgin Mary had the fullness of Grace, from the fullness of Graces of her Son, prior to the conception, during the conception and after the conception. Prior to the conception the fullness of Grace was perfect, during the conception it was more perfect, and after the conception it was very perfect (St. Nikodemos the Haghiorite). In this manner the Virgin Mary was a virgin in body and a virgin in soul. And this physical virginity of hers is higher and more perfect than the virginity of the souls of the Saints, which is achieved through the energy of the All-holy Spirit.

No human is born delivered of the original sin. The fall of Adam and of Eve and the consequences of this fall were inherited by the whole human race. It was natural that the Virgin Mary would not be delivered from the original sin. The word of the Apostle Paul is clear: "all have sinned and are deprived of the glory of God" (Rom 3:23). In this apostolic passage it shows that sin is considered to be a deprivation of the glory of God, and furthermore that no one is delivered from it. Thus, the Virgin Mary was born with the original sin. When, though, was she delivered from it? The answer to this question must be freed from scholastic viewpoints.

To begin with we must say that the original sin was the deprivation of the glory of God, the estrangement from God, the loss of communion with God. This also had physical consequences, however, because in the bodies of Adam and of Eve corruption and death entered. When in the Orthodox Tradition there is talk of inheriting the original sin, this does not mean the inheriting of the guilt of the original sin, but mainly its consequences, which are corruption and death. Just as when the root of a plant dies, the branches and the leaves become ill, so it happened with the fall of Adam. The whole human race became ill. The corruption and death which man inherits is the favourable climate for the cultivation of passions and in this manner the intellect of man is darkened.

Precisely for this reason the adoption by Christ through His Incarnation of this mortal and suffering body, without sin, aided in correcting the consequences of Adam's sin. Theosis existed in the Old Testament as well, just as the illumination of the intellect also did, but death had not been abolished; for this reason the god-seeing Prophets all went to Hades. With Christ's Incarnation and His Resurrection, human nature was deified and thus the possibility was given to each person to be deified. Because with holy Baptism we become members of the deified and resurrected Body of Christ, for this reason we say that through holy Baptism man is delivered from the original sin.

When we apply these things to the case of the Virgin Mary we can understand her relationship with the original sin and her being freed from it. The Virgin Mary was born with the original sin; she had all the consequences of corruption and death in her body. With her entrance into the holy of holies, she reached theosis. This theosis though was not enough to deliver her from its consequences, which are corruption and death, precisely because the divine nature had not yet united with the human nature in the hypostasis of the Word. Thus, at the moment when, through the power of the Holy Spirit, the divine nature was united with human nature in the womb of the Virgin Mary, the Virgin Mary first tasted her freedom from the so-called original sin and its consequences. Furthermore, at that moment that which Adam and Eve failed to do with their free personal struggle, occurred. For this reason, the Virgin Mary at the moment of the Annunciation reached a greater state than that in which Adam and Eve were prior to the fall. She was granted to taste the end of the goal of creation, as we will see in other analyses.

For this reason for the Virgin Mary Pentecost did not have to happen, it was not necessary for her to be baptised. That which the Apostles experienced on the day of Pentecost, when they became members of Christ's Body through the Holy Spirit, and that which happened to all of us during the mystery of Baptism, occurred for the Virgin Mary on the day of Annunciation. Then she was delivered from the original sin, not in the sense that she was delivered from the guilt, but that she obtained the theosis in her soul and body, due to her union with Christ.

In these frameworks Saint John of Damascus' saying that on the day of the Annunciation the Virgin Mary received the Holy Spirit, which cleansed her and gave her power receptive of the Word's divinity, simultaneously a birth-giving power, should be interpreted. That is the Virgin Mary received from the Holy Spirit a cleansing grace, but also a grace receptive and able to give birth to the Word of God as a man.

The response of the Virgin Mary to the information of the archangel that she would be granted to give birth to Christ was expressive: "Behold the handmaiden of the Lord. Let it be to me according to thy word" (Luke 1:38). Here the obedience of the Virgin Mary to the saying of the archangel shows, but also her obedience to God, for an event that was odd and strange for human logic. Thus her logic is submitted to God's will.

Some maintain that during that moment all the righteous people of the Old Testament, but also all of humanity awaited with anxiousness to hear the Virgin Mary's response, fearing that she might refuse and not obey God's will. They maintain that because every time when man is in such a dilemma, precisely because he has freedom, he can say the yes or no, as furthermore occurred in the case of Adam and Eve, the same thing could occur with the Virgin Mary. However it was not possible for the Virgin Mary to refuse, not because she didn't have freedom, but because she had real freedom.

Saint John Damascus makes a distinction between a natural and an opinionated will. One has an opinionated will when he is distinguished by the ignorance of a thing, by the doubt and in the end the incapability of selection. This refers to a wavering as to what to do. One has a natural will when he is lead in a natural manner, without wavering, without ignorance, to the realisation of the truth.

So it seems, that the natural will is associated with "wanting", whereas the opinionated will with the "how to want", and furthermore when it is done with doubts and wavering. Consequently the natural will comprises the perfection of nature, whereas the opinionated will comprises the imperfection of nature, since it presupposes a person who does not have knowledge of the truth, is not certain about what he must decide.

So even though Christ had two wills, due to the two natures, the human and divine nature, nevertheless he had a natural will, from the viewpoint we are studying here and of course, He did not have an opinionated will. As God He always knew the will of God the Father and there was no doubt and no wavering in Him. The Saints experience this by grace also, especially by the Virgin Mary. Because the Virgin Mary had reached theosis, for this reason it was impossible for her to reject God's will and not yield to the incarnation. She had perfect freedom, and for this her freedom always acted naturally and not unnaturally. We because we have not reached theosis have an imperfect freedom, the so-called opinionated will, for this reason we waver as to what to do. Her question "how shall this be to me, because I know no man" (Luke 1:34), shows humility, the weakness of the human nature, but also the strangeness of the matter, because there were miraculous conceptions in the Old Testament, however not seedless ones.

On the day of Annunciation we have a direct conception of Christ with the power and energy of the All-holy Spirit. In one theotokion we chant: "At Gabriel announcing to you the rejoice O virgin, with the voice the Master all was incarnated". This means that several hours and days for the conception to occur did not intervene, but it occurred precisely at that moment.

The archangel Gabriel told Joseph, the betrothed of the Most Holy Theotokos. "Do not fear to take Mariam your wife. For that which is born in her is of the Holy Spirit" (Math. 1:20). The Virgin Mary gave birth to Christ as a human, but the conception was of the Holy Spirit.

Basil the Great interpreting this phrase, and mainly the "is born of the Holy Spirit", says that every thing which comes from something else, id denoted by three words. The one is "by creation", just as the whole of creation was created by God with His energy. The other one is "by birth", as the Son was born before all ages of the Father. The third is "naturally", just as energy comes out of every nature, that is brilliance from the sun, and more generally the action from the one doing the action. As regards the conception of Christ in the Holy Spirit the true expression is that Christ was conceived with the energy of the Holy Spirit "by creation", and not by birth or naturally.

Saint John of Damascus teaches that the Son and Word of God conjoined for Himself, with the pure and most clean bloods of the Theotokos, flesh which is alive with a logical and noetic soul, not by seed, but created by the Holy Spirit.

Of course, when we speak of the conception of Christ in the Theotokos' womb with the power and creative energy of the Holy Spirit, we should not isolate the Holy Spirit from the Holy Trinity. It is known from patristic teaching that the energy of the Trinitarian God is common. The creation of the world and the recreation of man and of the world occurred and occurs with the common energy of the Trinitarian God. Consequently, not only did the Holy Spirit create the master's body of Christ, but also the Father Himself and the Son, that is the whole Holy Trinity did. The formulation of this truth is that the Father favoured the incarnation of His Son, the Son and the Word of God Himself worked His incarnation and the Holy Spirit effected it.

The conception of Christ in the womb of the Theotokos occurred with silence and secrecy and not with noise and disturbance. No one, neither of the angels nor of men was able to understand at that moment these great things which were performed. The Great Prophet David prophesied this event saying: "May he be like rain that falls on a fleece, like showers that water the earth!" (Psalm 71:6). Just as rain that falls on a fleece of wool does not cause noise or any corruption, the same thing occurred also during the annunciation and the conception. Christ with His conception did not cause noise or any corruption in the virginity of the Virgin Mary. For this reason the Virgin Mary was and remained a Virgin before the birth, during the birth and after the birth. These are the three stars, which the iconographer forms always on the forehead and the two shoulders of the Virgin Mary.

The union of the divine with the human nature in the hypostasis of the Word, in the womb of the Theotokos, comprises the direct theosis of the human nature. That is, from the first moment when the divine united with the human nature there is the theosis of the human nature. The saying of Saint John Damascene is characteristic: "at the moment of flesh, at that moment the flesh of God the Word". This means that a duration of time did not intervene after the conception for the human nature* to be deified, but this happened immediately at the time of the conception.

A consequence of this event is that the Virgin Mary must be called Theotokos, since she gave birth truly to God, Whom she bore for nine months in her womb, and not a man who had the Grace of God. For this reason the Virgin Mary is called Theotokos, precisely because she conceived Christ in the Holy Spirit.

This must be stressed because in times of old a great theological conversation occurred as to if the Virgin Mary ought to be called Theotokos and not Christotokos. The Christological dogma has a consequence in the theotokological discussion. The Virgin Mary is a Theotokos, precisely because she conceived Christ in the Holy Spirit.

This must be stressed, because in times of old a large theological discussion occurred as to whether the Virgin Mary should be called Theotokos, due to the existence of heretical teachings. In addition, the final validation of the teaching that the Virgin Mary gave birth to God, and that immediately with the adoption of the human nature there exists its theosis, occurred in the 3rd Ecumenical Synod. The heretic Nestorios, using philosophical terms and human pondering, supported that the Virgin Mary was a human and for this reason it was impossible for her to give birth to God. The babe who was in her was not God, but a human. God simply "passed through" or "passed along with" through the Theotokos. Of course, there was a problem in his theology about the relationship between the two natures of Christ. Nestorios believed that the flesh of Christ was imply united with the nature of the Godhead. The Word was not God, but was united with man and dwelt inside him. With such presuppositions he named the Virgin Mary Christotokos and not Theotokos.

However Christ is a God-man, perfect God and perfect man, and every nature acted "with the other communion" in the hypostasis of the Word. We will see this topic when we will speak of the birth of Christ. Here though it must be underlined that human nature was deified immediately with its union with the divine nature in the hypostasis of the Word, in the womb of the Theotokos. For this reason the Virgin Mary is and is called Theotokos, since she gave birth to God humanly.

The direct theosis of human nature by the divine nature of the Word does not mean that the qualities of human nature are abolished. This shows that the conception and carrying in the womb, but also the birth of Christ occurred by nature and supernaturally. Supernaturally, because it occurred creatively by the All-holy Spirit and not by seed. Naturally, because the carrying in the womb occurred in the manner in which the infant is carried in the womb.

There is however one point which must be underlined. In every infant there are a few stages, until the time for birth comes. To begin with there is the conception, subsequently after a period of time the depiction of the members of his body, afterwards little by little they are developed, and according to the level of his development movement follows. Finally, when it is completed, he comes out of the womb of his mother.

Whereas in the divine infant we do have an increase little by little, nevertheless a period of time did not intervene between the conception and the depiction of the members. Basil the Great literally says: "immediately what was conceived was perfect in the flesh, not the shape formulated little by little". We must see this from the viewpoint that the members of His body were depicted immediately, he was created a perfect man, but nevertheless he was not found in the formulation of the nine months. He was developing little by little, although His body had been comprised from the beginning.

The conception of Christ occurred by the All Holy Spirit in the womb of the Theotokos creatively and not by seed, because Christ had to undertake the pure nature that Adam had before the transgression. Of course, Christ adopted a possible and mortal flesh, as it became after Adam's transgression, to defeat corruption and death, but it was however utterly pure and spotless, as it was prior to the transgression. Thus, Christ's flesh from a viewpoint of purity was as Adam's body was prior to the transgression, while from a viewpoint of mortality and corruption it was the body of Adam after the transgression.

Consequently the conception occurred through the Holy Spirit, because the manner in which man is born today (through the seed) is after the transgression. According to Saint Gregory Palamas, the movement of the flesh towards birth is not completely delivered from sin, because, whereas God has placed the intellect to rule over man, it acts "unsubmittedly" in the duration of the movement of the flesh. Thus, the pure nature of Christ has a relationship with the creative and not the conception by seed.

Precisely this event is very closely associated with the fact that the conception, carrying in the womb and birth of Christ by the Virgin Mary was effortless, painless and without pleasure. So Christ, was conceived, carried in the womb as a babe and was born without pleasure, without toil and without pain. He was conceived seedless for two basic reasons. Firstly, to undertake the pure human nature, and secondly, to be born without corruption and painlessly.

The Virgin Mary as she conceived Christ without pleasure, in the same way held Him for nine months in her womb without toil and without weight. She did not feel weight, despite the fact that the divine infant was developing naturally and had the weight of a developing embryo. Thus the prophecy of the Prophet Isaiah was fulfilled: "Behold the Lord is sitting upon a hollow cloud" (Is. 19:1). With the term "hollow cloud" is meant the human flesh, which was so very light that it did not cause any weight and toil to the Virgin Mary during the time of the nine month carrying in the womb.

The seedless and 'pleasureless' conception of the Virgin Mary and the effortless carrying in the womb is closely associated with the incorrupt and painless birth of Christ. According to Saint Gregory Nyssa there is a close relationship between pleasure and pain, since every pleasure has pain connected with it. Adam felt pleasure and pain followed to the whole human race. Thus also now through freedom from pleasure joy comes to the human race. The birth of Christ did not corrupt the virginity of the Theotokos, precisely as the conception did not occur with pleasure, and the carrying in the womb did not occur with weight and toil. There where the All-holy Spirit acts "the order of nature is overcome".

The duration of the carrying in the womb of the Virgin Mary is a foreshadowing of the ceaseless communion that the Saints will have in the Kingdom of God.

It is known and a given fact that the mother who has a babe in the womb has a close and organic relationship with him. Contemporary scholars have proven that the infant is very much influenced not only by the physical state of his mother, but also from her psychological make up. And because the divine infant was conceived of the Holy Spirit, but grew up in the natural manner, that is He had a communion with the Virgin Mary's body, for this reason there exists a close relationship between Christ and the Theotokos. Naturally, we must see this from the viewpoint that the Virgin Mary gives her blood to Christ, but also Christ gives His Grace and blessing to her. So Christ being carried in the womb did not cease simultaneously being at God's throne united with His Father and the Holy Spirit.

The human nature was united with the divine nature without alteration, unconfusedly, indivisibly, inseparably, immediately from the moment of conception. This means that first the Virgin Mary tasted the goods of the divine incarnation, theosis. That which the Disciples of Christ tasted during Pentecost, and we during Baptism, at the time of the mystery of the divine Eucharist, when we commune of the Body and Blood of Christ, and that which the Saints will live in the Kingdom of the Heavens., the Virgin Mary lived from the first moment of the conception and carrying in the womb.

Consequently Christ for nine whole months, day and night, nourished with His sanctified blood the Virgin Mary. This is a foreshadowing of the ceaseless divine Communion and of the ceaseless relationship and communion of the Saints with Christ which will occur mainly in the next life. For this reason the Virgin Mary is a foreshadowing of the future age. From this viewpoint she is Paradise.

Saint Nikodemos the Haghiorite, speaking of the Annunciation of the Theotokos proceeds to a personal and existential approach of this event. Because, it does not suffice for us to celebrate only externally the events of the divine incarnation, but we should approach them existentially and spiritually. For this reason he gathered many passages of Saints in which mainly there is speech about this existential approach.

The saying of the Prophet Isaiah is characteristic "we were with child, we writhed, we have given birth. We have brought forth a spirit of salvation upon the earth" (Is. 26: 18). According to the interpretation of the holy Fathers the seed is the word of God and the intellect is the womb and the heart of man. Through faith the word of God is sewn in the heart of man and makes it pregnant with the fear of God. This is the fear that man not remain far from God. Through this fear the struggle for cleansing the heart and the obtaining of virtues begins, which resembles a pain, childbearing pains. In this manner the spirit of salvation is born, which is theosis and sanctification.

The forming of Christ in us happens with spiritual pains. The Apostle Paul says: "My little children, with whom I am again in travail until Christ be formed in you!" Gal. 4:19). Travails are the ascetical struggle, and formation is theosis and sanctification.

According to the holy Fathers (Saint Gregory Nyssa, Saint Maximos the Confessor, Saint Symeon the New Theologian, Saint Niketas Stethatos etc.) that which happened physically in the Virgin Mary, this happens spiritually to each one whose soul is virginal, that is, is cleansed of the passions. Christ, who was born once in the flesh, wants to be born, always in the spirit, by those who wish, and thus He becomes a babe, forming Himself in them through the virtues.

The spiritual conception and birth becomes understood from the fact that the flow of blood stops, that is the desires to commit sin cease, passions are not active in man, man hates sin and constantly wants to do God's will. This conception and birth is obtained with the implementation of the divine commandments, mainly with the return of the intellect in the heart and with the ceaseless monologistic prayer. Then man becomes a temple of the All-holy Spirit.

The Annunciation of the Theotokos is an annunciation of the human race, the information that the Son and Word of God incarnated. This universal feast must aid in a personal feast, in a personal annunciation. We must accept the preludes of our salvation, which is the greatest notification in our life.

Source

Apolytikion in the Fourth Tone
Today marks the crowning of our salvation and the revelation of the mystery before all ages. For the Son of God becomes the son of the Virgin, and Gabriel proclaims the grace. Wherefore, we also cry out with him, "Hail, O full of grace, the Lord is with you."

Kontakion in the Plagal of the Fourth Tone
To you, Theotokos, invincible Defender, having been delivered from peril, I, your city, dedicate the victory festival as a thank offering. In your irresistible might, keep me safe from all trials, that I may call out to you: "Hail, unwedded bride!"

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

A Greek or a Roman Revolution?

We have become accustomed each year on the 25th of March, when we celebrate the anniversary of our national rebirth, to address ourselves to events which are related to the freedom of our nation or, more specifically, to the creation of today’s Hellenic State.

From a pre-fabricated chauvinism prepared by the great powers, we learned to speak of the epic-making of our forefathers of 1821, which tie them in a direct line with antiquity!

In reality we have celebrated this liberation of ours for many years without examining very well what we celebrate. There is something paradoxical here. Do we celebrate our liberation? But which liberation? That of the ancient Hellenes? That is, of our forefathers of the 4th century B.C.? And after that? What became of us during the ensuing years? Where were we? Are we a nation with an ancient and modern history only? What were we doing the years in between?

Here we find ourselves confronted with a falsification of history. When Constantinople, the empress of all cities, fell into the hands of the Ottoman Turks, it was not antiquity that was conquered, but the capital of Romanism, to wit, the capital city of the Roman Empire. And the area we live in is a piece of this empire.

We accepted a strange historical compromise. Did we accept that the City was not our capital? - the Imperial City of Romanism which resulted from the marriage of Hellenic and Roman antiquity? Even today the Ecumenical Patriarch still bears the title Archbishop of New Rome, i.e. Constantinople. In Turkish the Ecumenical Patriarchate is called “Rum Patrikhanesi”, which means Patriarchate of the Romans. This is because the Turkish sources say, and correctly, that when the Turks conquered the City they conquered the heart of Romanism.

We never learned these truths. Our school books teach histories with inaccuracies, written by foreigners like Arnold Toynbee and adopted by some “enlightened intellectuals”, or rather Greeklings. It seems that the great powers wanted to hide this counterfeiting of history from the Romans, and for this reason they led Regas of Velestino to his death in 1798. A glance at the Manifesto and the Charter of Regas demonstrates clearly what we mean by freedom of our nation from the Ottoman Turkish yoke. When Regas wrote Roumeli, the Turkish word for “Land of the Romans”, he meant the whole of the Balkans, because they belonged to the Roman Empire.

Professor John Romanides of the University of Thessaloniki recently published a book entitled Romanism, Romania, Roumeli in which he uncovers these truths which seem stranger to many because they learned a false history in school.

Born of Cappadocian parents, and a Roman to the core, Prof. Romanides was raised and educated in the USA. He became a professor there, and it was there he first encountered falsification of our Roman history. He searched for explanations and expediencies, he studied source and reached certain conclusions, and eventually revealed in this book the historical fraud which began around the 9th century AD and is still being perpetrated today.

Searching through texts he found that two great men, Argyres Ephtaliotis and our own Mesolongite Costes Palamas, had already denounced this forgery as early as 1901. In discussing this with the author I found the materiel very interesting and concluded that these truths should be brought to the attention of the public. I put the question to the Board of Directors of the Costes Palamas Society, who gladly undertook to organize a lecture in Mesolongi, in the heartland of Western Roumeli; where our distinguished speaker would bring to light the opinions for our national poet.

So with great joy I find myself in the exceptionally honored position of presenting to you the speaker who with special pleasure accepted the invitation to present his work, “Costes Palamas and Romanism,” first to us here in Mesolongi, thus paying a debt of honor to the Romans of the Romans of the Great Exodus and at the same time celebrating the 150 anniversary of some of the struggles of Romanism, struggles and yearnings which as it appears have not yet been extinguished.*

- Basil A. Lampropoulos, Reporter for the Akropolis, Athens


* The above introduction was written to be used as an introduction to this lecture during a “newspaper assignment in Constantinople New Rome (Istanbul), March 5, 1976. The printed lecture came out in Greece on March 21, 1976, the day the lecture was delivered in the ceremonial chamber of the Mesolongi City Hall, and was presented to the audience with the signature of the author and the seal of the Society of Costes Palamas - The Publisher.

Read the entire lecture of Fr. John Romanides: Romanism and Costes Palamas

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Restoration of Autocephaly of Georgian Orthodoxy

The Georgian Orthodox Church is marking the day of restoration of Autocephaly today.

The Georgian Church obtained Autocephaly from the Antioch in 457 and the Russian empire abolished it in 1811. Since then the Russian synod was ruling the Georgian Christian Church by its exarches. The Georgian Church returned to its Autocephalous status on 25 March 1917 and its independence was recognized by every Orthodox Church in the world, however, only verbally. Due to the activities of Ilia II, Georgia`s Catholicos Patriarch, Autocephaly was officially announced and recognized by all Orthodox churches.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Movie: "Papaflessas"

This is a very good film about the Greek Revolution, in honor of Greek Independance Day today.

hellasorthodoxy on livestream.com. Broadcast Live Free

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Homily on the Feast of the Annunciation

CATECHESIS 64: On the Incarnate Dispensation of our Lord Jesus Christ, and That We Should Celebrate Spiritually.

by St. Theodore the Studite

It was spoken on the day of the Annunciation.

Brethren and fathers, the Annunciation is here and it is the first of the Feasts of the Lord, and we should not simply celebrate as most do, but with understanding and with reverence for the mystery. What is the mystery? That the Son of God becomes son of man, using the holy Virgin as the means, dwelling in her and from her fashioning for Himself a temple and becoming perfect man. Why so? "That he might ransom those under the law," as it is written, "and that we might receive sonship" [Gal. 4:5]; that we may no longer be slaves, but free; no longer subject to the passions, but free of passions; no longer friends of the world, but friends of God; no longer walking according to the flesh, but according to the spirit. "Those who walk according to the flesh, think the things of the flesh; those who walk according to the spirit, the things of the spirit; for the thought of the flesh is death; but the thought of the spirit, life and peace. And so the thought of the flesh is hostile to God, for it is not subject to the law of God. Indeed it cannot be. Those who are in the flesh cannot please God" [Rom. 8:5-8]. In brief this is the power of the mystery, and this is why we should celebrate spiritually and behave spiritually, with holiness and justice, with love, with gentleness, with peace, "with forbearance, with goodness, with the Holy Spirit" [2 Cor. 6:6], so that as far as we ourselves are concerned we do not render the dispensation of our Lord Jesus Christ empty and ineffectual.

Not only that, but we should both pray and grieve for the world. Why so? Because the Son of God came to save the world, and the world rejects Him. Tribes and languages reject Him; the barbarian nations reject Him, those who have had his holy name invoked upon them reject Him, some through abandoning the faith, others through their evil lives. What should He have done and did not do? Being God He became man, "He humbled Himself, becoming obedient unto death, the death of the cross" [Phil. 2,8.]; he gave us His body to eat and His blood to drink; He allowed us to call him Father, Brother, Head, Teacher, Bridegroom, Fellow-heir and all the other titles which there is no time to mention now. And still He is rejected, and still He bears it. "For," He says, "I have not come to judge the world, but to save the world" [John 12:47].

What then is there to say, brethren? That the genuine disciples are grieved by the rejections of their fellow-disciples, thus showing love both for the teacher and for the disciples. So too, genuine servants suffer in the same way from the desertions of their fellow-servants. This is why the great Apostle orders that "we should offer supplications, prayers, entreaties, thanksgivings on behalf of all mankind, for kings and for all in high positions" [1 Tim. 2:1-2]; and elsewhere he says this on the subject, "I speak the truth in Christ, I do not lie, my conscience bears witness with me in the Holy Spirit, that I have a great grief and unceasing anguish in my heart; for I have prayed that I might be anathema to Christ for the sake of my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh" [Rom. 9:1-3]. You see the power of love? You see the height of friendship? Moses shows it too when he says to God, "If you will forgive them their sin, forgive; if not, wipe me out of the book which you have written" [Exodus 32:32]. So we too, as genuine and not counterfeit disciples, should not only look to what concerns ourselves, but we should grieve and pray for our brothers and for the whole world; for by so doing what is pleasing to the Lord we shall become inheritors of eternal life, in Christ Jesus our Lord, to whom be the glory and the might with the Father and the Holy Spirit, now and for ever, and to the ages of ages. Amen.

Source

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Neptic and Social Theology

by Metropolitan Hierotheos Vlachos

We divide theology into neptic and social, and we regard some Fathers as belonging to the first and others as belonging to the second category. But in the teaching of the Holy Fathers this division is not seen. To be sure, outwardly, from the way in which each one has worked, a division can be seen between the neptics and socials, because some Fathers had a particular flock and did their work there, and others were in the desert, praying constantly. Even from this aspect, however, there cannot be a perfect division, because even the Fathers who worked pastorally lived neptically, and the hermits worked in a missionary way, in the sense that they were magnets for many men who approached them to learn ""words" of salvation. Thus the hermits indirectly did pastoral work.

Beyond this, the teaching of the saints is not divided into social and neptic. When the Fathers speak of social topics, they look at them within the true theology of the Church, which is ascetic. And when they speak of neptic topics, they do it in order for people to be able to be purified and then to attain real communion with God and men. Besides, we know very well that in the Church the theologians do shepherding and the pastors do their work theologically.

We are accustomed to seeing the Three Hierarchs - Basil the Great, Gregory the Theologian and Chrysostom - as social Fathers. But this does not correspond with reality, because the Three Hierarchs in their writings also explain the whole neptic teaching of the Church.

The fact that there is a close link between nepsis and communion, between neptic and social Fathers, and that the Holy Fathers shepherd their flocks theologically is seen from the homilies written by St. Gregory Palamas to his flock in Thessaloniki. Anyone who reads these homilies will discover that shepherding is theology and theology is truly a fruit of the knowledge of God, but also a path for man to reach deification.

From The Mind of the Orthodox Church, Ch. 6

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Religion and the Science of Virtue

Virtue and religion are, from a historical point of view, intimately bound up. We discard religious insights at our peril.

Mark Vernon
Guardian.co.uk
24 March 2010

There is an intimate link between religion and morality. It's not fashionable to say so: many argue that talk of a link – and talk is all it is – should be stopped. After all, individuals can clearly be good without God, and religious individuals hardly stand much scrutiny as paragons of virtue. However, there's something more subtle to tease out here, and support for a connection is coming not from preachers or prelates, but science.

The source is neuroscience and evolutionary psychology. As these new sciences explore the nature of morality, they tell a story that goes something like this. Many animals, perhaps most, don't live in isolation; they co-operate. Even bacteria work together for the sake of the group. There is good reason to think that this co-operation gives rise to behaviour that can be called altruistic: it's good for others but not necessarily for the individual. The story develops further when it's observed that higher animals, like chimps or dogs, don't just behave in ways that might be called altruistic, but have social emotions too. They feel shame; they empathize; they take pleasure in pleasing others.

The implication for the human animal is that our morality is based upon an evolved set of predispositions. When we take pride, feel guilty, act honestly, show trust, we too are following social emotions that make us feel good. No doubt, this is the origin of the powerful intuition that the good life is a happy life.

Cognition has a role to play here, as there are often quite complex trade-offs to assess when different values conflict. But as the economist Herb Gintis puts it, morality is not categorical; reasoning tends to come after the event. Rather, "morality is just things we like", he says. Moreover, because ethics is based upon feelings, we are often far from consistent in our moral behaviour. The oft-cited trolley problem shows as much, as do experiments which suggest that when we perform a virtuous act, that'll often excuse the subsequent indulgence of a vice too.

Now, sometimes this story of the origins of human morality becomes confused. It can carry philosophical errors. One is the genetic fallacy – the notion that to know the origins of something is also to know of its worth. That can't be right because whilst there are plenty of examples of cooperation in nature, which we assess as morally positive and nature "rewards" with pleasure, there are also plenty of examples of competition in nature; that competition can be violent, morally dubious, though still rewarded with pleasure. So, rational considerations must ultimately decide what counts as good.

However, there is a deeper challenge to ethics that stems from the science. For if you follow the philosopher Immanuel Kant, then it's not just that feelings should not determine morality, but further that if it feels good then it can't be moral. An evolutionary account of ethics undermines that categorical approach.

But the new science does not undermine an older conception of morality, namely virtue ethics. In fact, virtue ethics not only saves appearances, it shows how our capacity for moral reflection and self-examination plays a critical role.

Virtue ethics is not primarily interested in whether some isolated action is good or bad in itself, but in what kind of person someone is becoming – of which their actions are but a product. It seeks to understand the conditions that nurture good character, skills and habits. As Aristotle knew, pleasure plays a key role in this: it is one mechanism that rewards good behaviour. However, virtue ethics does not stop at what feels good.

Rather, it aims at what is good, regardless of the evolutionary rewards. Whilst always conscious of our animal nature, Aristotle believed we can surpass that nature – never completely, but often substantially. It takes a lifetime of effort, training and practice to do so. But as we have the capacity to discover the evolutionary story of morality, so we also have the capacity to transcend the constraints of that story, to a degree. Understanding is the beginning of change. Alongside the question of pleasure, Aristotle discusses the moral virtues that so interest the scientists too. But he also adds others, like prudence and restraint – the virtues that require self-reflection. These are known as the cardinal virtues, those upon which any distinctively human morality hinges. In summary: the ethical life for the human animal is a question of what he called practical and rational intelligence, and is learned by engaging in life.

So what's religion got to do with it? Link the evolutionary story with the insights of virtue ethics, and it's clear that living a good life requires training – the cultivation of those virtuous habits, the gradual erosion of personal inconsistencies. Moreover, it's a journey powerfully influenced by the stories we tell ourselves about what makes for the good we pursue – the stories that speak to our humanity and inspire us to keep at it. It's why moral heroes and morality tales are so important. They address our reason and feelings; they shape the moral emotions.

It is those heroes and tales that religions provide in abundance; they are otherwise called saints and parables. Is there a secular source of them nearly so copious as religious traditions? They're often complex and ambivalent, mirroring our own struggles to live well. But when we try to separate morality from religion, and assert that faith should have no part to play in the discourse, we should at least be aware of what the new science and virtue ethics tells us: we could be discarding a resource of immense value for our moral lives.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr