How To Treat Our Sinful Brothers and Sisters

by St. Nikolai Velimirovich

Malicious joy is a sordid garment which our spirit sometimes dons with great satisfaction. The very moment that you rejoice in the sinful fall of your brother you have also fallen to the joy of the devil who, with one hook, snared two fish.

Brotherhood, according to the flesh, is a great bond but brotherhood, according to the spirit, is even greater. When you are grieved by the sin of a brother according to the flesh, why then would not the sin of a brother according to the spirit grieve you? When you conceal the sin of a brother according to the flesh why do you, with malevolent joy proclaim the sin of your brother according to the spirit?

Who are your brothers according to the spirit? All Christians - all those who communicate with you from the one and the same Chalice, the one and the same life. O, how great were the saints in their brotherly love! O, how far away from them was malevolent joy!

The following is said about St. Bessarion: on one occasion all the monks were gathered in church for prayer. The abbot approached a monk who had committed a sin and ordered him to leave the church. The monk started to leave and Bessarion followed him saying: "And I, also, am the same kind of sinner!"

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

The Pope Visits the Archdiocese of Cyprus - 5 Bishops Don't Show Up

Archbishop Chrysostomos II and members of the Holy Synod welcomed "with love and respect" Pope Benedict XVI and those with him yesterday at the Archdiocese of Cyprus.

The Archbishop spoke of the significance of the Church of Cyprus as an apostolic See that received its autocephaly at the Third Ecumenical Synod in 431 AD. He also pointed out his hopes for further dialogue between the churches in the future.

The Pope responded by thanking the Archbishop for his hospitality and the recent ecumenical gathering between Orthodox and Catholics in Cyprus. He also called Cyprus a "piece of the Holy Land". He encouraged a relationship between Catholics and Orthodox in Cyprus to preserve its Christian past.

Following the meeting the Pope was escorted to the Byzantine Museum. The curator of the museum appealed to the Pope to help in the return of stolen treasures, of approximately 300 items, which for the past 13 years are still in Monoco. Because some of these treasures also belong to the Maronites of Cyprus, he requested the Pope contact the Archbishop of Monoco to help with this situation. The Pope showed much interest in this topic.


That evening a dinner was held at the Archdioce with the Pope and those with him by Archbishop Chrysostomos and the Holy Synod. Gifts were exchanged afterwards. The Pope gave the Archbishop a mosaic of Saint Kyriaki along with a portion of the Column of the Apostle Paul, while the Archbishop gave the Pope a silver disk which depicted the founders of the Church of Cyprus, the apostles Paul and Barnabas.

Metropolitans Athanasios of Lemissol, Paul of Kyrenia, and Barnabas of Trymithountos, as well as Bishops Nicholas of Amathountos and Epiphanios of Lydra did not attend any of the events of the day.

Before his departure the Pope celebrated Mass at Nicosia's Eleftheria Stadium. Across the road from the stadium 20 people gathered holding up signs which said "Papism is not a brotherly religion, but heresy". Besides this, no other dramatic happenings occurred throughout the visit, and the Pope left Cyprus today in peace

Source

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

The Saints of Mount Athos

by Monk Moses the Athonite

The Holy Mountain during its history of more than a thousand years has always been a busy workshop of wisdom and virtue which has produced monks distinguished for their learning and sanctity.

From the mid 18th century down to our own times has been a period when the Holy Mountain has greatly flourished. Akakios Kafsokalyvitis († 1730), the extremely severe cave-dwelling ascetic, the imitator of St Maximus Kafsokalivitis; Ierotheos of Iveron († 1745), a wise teacher; Anthimos Kourouklis († 1782), the joyful missionary to the islands of the Aegean and the Ionian; Paisius Velichkovsky († 1794), the founder of the 'ascetic-literary' school; Sophronios Agiannanitis; Makarios Notaras († 1805), the bishop-ascetic; Georgios of Tsernika in Romania († 1806); Nicodemus the Athonite († 1809), a writer noted for his wisdom; Athanasios of Paros († 1813), a teacher of distinction; Sophronios Vratsis of Bulgaria († 1813); Arsenios of Paros († 1877), a renowned ascetic; Antipas of Moldavia († 1822); Siluan of Russia the Athonite († 1938), well-known from his fine biography; and Savvas of Kalymnos († 1948), the worker of miracles, form an important nucleus of enlightenment, education, and service to God and man. To these names we must add the glorious latter-day Athonite martyrs, who in the 18th and 19th century number as many as 60, of whom we could mention: Pachomios of the New Skete († 1730), Constantine the Russian († 1742), Damaskinos of Thessaly († 1771), Cosmas of Aetolia († 1779), that renowned teacher and founder of churches and schools, Loukas of Stavroniketa († 1802), Gerasimos of Koutloumousiou († 1812), Efthymios of the Skete of Iveron († 1814), Gideon of Karakallou († 1818), Agathangelos of Esphigmenou († 1819), Gregory V, Patriarch of Constantinople († 1821), Pavlos of Konstamonitou († 1824), and the renowned Athanasios of Lemnos († 1846).

The foundation of the Athonite Academy (1749) was an important point in this modern Athonite renaissance. The distinguished teachers who served there included Neophytos Kafsokalyvitis, its first principal, who was succeeded by Archimandrite Agapios of the Holy Sepulchre, slaughtered by the Turks outside Thessaloniki, Evgenios Voulgaris, that gifted techer, Nikolaos Zertzoulis of Metsovo, Panagiotis Palamas, and Athanasios of Paros, among others. Among those who served as the Academy's trustees and patrons were Gregory V, Nicodemus the Athonite, and Makarios Notaras. Among the Academy's students were the martyrs Cosmas of Aetolia, Constantine of Hydra, and Athanasios Koukaliotis; there were also leaders in the intellectual world such as Iosipos Moisiadax, Sergios Makraios, and Rigas Pheraios, who died for his country. It is an undoubted fact that for the Greek nation then enslaved to the Turks the Athonite Academy lit one more lantern of hope for its survival. The printing-press set up at the Great Lavra by Cosmas of Epidaurus (1755) and the school at the Vatopaidi Monastery also contributed to the awakening of the nation, but unfortunately these were short-lived.

The same period coincided with the lives and work of important men of letters such as Papa-Ionas Kafsokalyvitis, Dionysios Siatisteas, Neophytos Skourteos, Vartholomaios of Koutloumousiou, Pachomios of Tirnovo, Dionysios of Fourna († 1745), the icon-painter and author of the famous book on the art of painting, who lived at Karyes, Kaisarios Dapontes († 1784), a much-travelled writer and poet who was a monk of Xeropotamou, Dorotheos (Evelpidis) of Vatopedi, and Nikiphoros of Iveron.

In the mid 18th century a grave theological debate developed all over the Holy Mountain in connection with the issues of the holding of memorial services for the departed, frequency of Holy Communion, and other matters relating to the exact observance of Orthodox tradition. The starting-point for this prolonged controversy was the building of the kyriakon at the Skete of St Anne (1754). The question arose as to whether the commemoration of the founders and benefactors should be held on Saturday or Sunday, and with what frequency the monks should receive Holy Communion. The debate divided the monks, and those who insisted that the memorial services should be held on Saturdays were mockingly dubbed 'kollyvades'. It seems, however, that, behind their apparent obstinacy, they had a profound knowledge of church tradition and fought hard for its authenticity and for its purification from adulteration. Thus the name of 'kollyvas' became a title of honour and the movement was responsible for a profitable and beneficial regeneration and renewal. Indeed, this devout movement was led by three saints: Makarios Notaras, Nicodemus the Athonite, and Athanasios of Paros, and they numbered among their supporters and sympathizers distinguished scholars such as Neophytos Kafsokalyvitis, Christophoros Artinos, Agapios of Cyprus, Iakovos the Peloponnesian, Pavlos the hermit, Theodoritos of Esphigmenou, and a number of others. Some of them chose voluntary exile and took refuge in mainland Greece or the islands, where they founded scores of monasteries, of which a fair number survive today. Thus we see Makarios Notaras on Chios, Niphon on Skiathos, Dionysios of Skiathos on Skyros, Ierotheos on Hydra, with numerous disciples and friends of that Athonite tradition which has nourished monks and saints. The monasteries which they founded were noted for their vigour and service. The Ecumenical Patriarchate by decisions of the Holy Synod finally put an end to the 'kollyvades' issue, by ruling that memorial services could be held as circumstances demanded and that Holy Communion, with the proper preparation, could be received frequently, and that the life of the substance, and not the aridity of the form, was to be adhered to.

Sts Nicodemus the Athonite, Makarios Notaras, and Athanasios of Paros are the typical representatives of the renaissance on the Holy Mountain, and of the spirit which prevailed. They were the authors of widely circulating books which had their effect on the souls of the enslaved Greeks, and their works continue to be re-issued even today. The seal was set on the Athonite theological spirit of the time by the publication of the 'Philokalia of the Ascetic Fathers' (1785), a publication which was a landmark in theological literature.

In a difficult period such as that of Turkish rule, the Holy Mountain kept its lamp perpetually burning, and was able, moreover, to hand on the flame to the peoples of the Balkans and the North. Thus the exchange of visits and the sojourn of many on the Holy Mountain of Athos gave rise to an important spiritual and cultural movement. The quiet of Mount Athos acted as a school of superior philosophy in which not only asceticism and vigilance, but also study in its rich libraries, the translation of rare texts, concern for art, and the transmission of a spirit of service and self-sacrifice were cultivated. The work of the starets Paisius Velichkovski, the reformer of monasticism in Romania and Russia, after his departure from Athos, was particularly inspired. Similar work was carried out by his disciple the Blessed Georgios of Tsernika († 1806) in the monasteries of Moldavia, where hundreds of monks were his spiritual children, by the Blessed Sophronios Vratsis († 1813) in Bucharest, while the Blessed Antypas († 1882) from Moldavia went to Jassy and finally reached the Monastery of Varlaam in Finland. The Russian Saint Silouan the Athonite († 1938) continues to teach through his much-translated biography by Archimandrite Sophronius († 1993) even after his blessed death. Yet again the illuminating influence of the universality of the Holy Mountain is apparent.

The Athonite monastic community has never kept the fragrance of the blossoming of its virtues all for itself. In spite of the harshness of enslavement to the Turks, penury, the difficulties in travelling and the many perils, the Athonite monk in his humble cap went everywhere in the Greek world, to bring the sober preaching of salvation, of redemption, of consolation, of support, and of hope - fiery missionaries like Cosmas of Aetolia, who crowned his long preaching mission with martyrdom, the Blessed Anthimos Kourouklis, who travelled the islands and built churches and monasteries, the Blessed Makarios Notaras, who on the islands of the Aegean created real centres of refreshment and aspiration, while similar work was carried out by his companion Blessed Athanasios of Paros, Arsenios of Paros, and Savvas of Kalymnos, to name but a few. The Ecumenical Patriarch Gregory V the Martyr and the company of glorious latter-day Athonite martyrs still teach more strikingly today after their martyr's end and strengthen the hearts of the people.

In our own century the Holy Mountain has continued its hidden service to mankind which makes known the lofty spirituality and life of Orthodoxy and its benign influence beyond its boundaries by continuing to produce ascetics and figures of great spiritual and theological stature. In a world which thirsts and seeks in anguish for authenticity, discipline and truth, it gives its testimony of the experience of the Orthodox spiritual life and the salvation of the soul. The many young pilgrims today may not always be fired with enthusiasm, but they are set thinking by this way of life of asceticism, abstinence, simplicity, and quiet of the monks. Thus often a pilgrimage to the Holy Mountain is a turning-point in their lives. The humility and sanctity of Mount Athos play a role of spiritually alerting the Church and the people.

This spiritual portrait of Athos has to show in our own times many figures who vie with those of earlier eras, whose spirit they transmit, while at the same time providing a starting-point for the carrying on of their work in the future. Among those Abbots known for their great love for the Holy Mountain, for their monasteries, for their spiritual children, for the Theotokos and for God, lovers of virtue and hard work, were the now departed Archimandrites Symeon of Gregoriou († 1905), Neophytos of Simonopetra († 1907) - who were re-founders of their monasteries -, Kodratos of Karakallou († 1940), Athanasios of Gregoriou († 1953), Ieronymos of Simonopetra († 1957), Philaretos of Konstamonitou († 1963), who wore themselves out in the service of their monasteries and their monks, Seraphim of Agiou Pavlou († 1960), Vissarion of Gregoriou († 1974), Gabriel of Dionysiou († 1983), who successfully worked together to promote the common interests of the Holy Mountain, Haralambis of Simonopetra († 1970), and Ephraim of Xeropotamou († 1983).

Apart from these distinguished figures, the following, now at rest, were excellent and discreet spiritual counsellors and confessors in our own century: Savvas († 1908) and Gregorios of Little St Anne, Ignatios Koutounakiotis († 1927), Chariton Kafsokalyvitis, Kaisarios, and Mikhail the Blind († 1952) of the Skete of St Anne, Neophytos, Gabriel († 1967), Efstathios ( 1981) and Elpidios († 1983) the Cypriots, and Spyridon († 1990) of the New Skete, Gregorios of Dionysiou, Maximos of Karakallou, Nikodemos of Crete of the Koutloumousi Skete, among others.

Of widely acknowledged sanctity were the departed Elders Hatzighiorghis († 1886), renowned for the severity of his fasting, Daniel the Romanian, the cavedweller, of Kerasia, Avimelech of Crete and Gerasimos († 1991), the hymnographer of Little St Anne, Kallinikos († 1930), the ascetic and Hesychast and Daniel of Smyrna († 1929) of Katounakia, Gerasimos Menagias († 1957), the wise hermit, Avvakoum († 1978) the Barefoot, of the Lavra, Isaak († 1932), the best of coenobites, and Lazaros († 1974) of Dionysiou, Joseph the Cave-Dweller († 1959), the great ascetic, and Theophylaktos († 1986), the lover of the saints, of the New Skete, Gerontios († 1958) of St Panteleimon, Athanasios of Iveron († 1973), known for his humility and devotion to the Theotokos, Evlogios († 1948), the great faster, and Enoch († 1978), the delightful Romanian, at Karyes, Papa-Tychon († 1968), the great Russian ascetic of Kapsala, Porphyrios († 1992), an elder of Kafsokalyvia with pre-vision and insight, who for years carried the blessings of Athos into Attica, and Paisios († 1944) the Athonite, who gave rest to many who approached him with reverence. Many have written many worthy accounts of all of these.

The last two to be mentioned above were widely known for the grace which was given them. Elder Porphyrios was one of the most important figures of our times: he had the authority of authenticity, he had the experience of the Holy Spirit, he was truly humble, his simplicity was thoroughgoing; in him childlikeness was interwoven with holiness. He was a discerner of souls, a teacher and a guide to many, who, greatly moved, will tell of their meetings with him. Elder Paisios was also an experienced, patient and persistent physician of souls and a guide to a host of people with great needs. His joyful discourse, his example, his counsels reached people, and infected them with his peace, the joy of blessing, the refreshment of the spirit.

Amongst the men of letters of our time whom the Holy Mountain has produced are the priest-monk Theodoritos of the Lavra, Gerasimos of Esphigmenou (Smyrnakis), famed for his fine book on the Holy Mountain, the deacon-monk Cosmas of Agiou Pavlou (Vlachos), similarly, the priest-monk Christophoros of Docheiariou (Ktenas), the author of a host of works on the Holy Mountain, the Lavra Elders Paneleimon, Chrysostomos, Alexandros (Evmorphopoulos), Spyridon (Kambanaos), a doctor, Pavlos (Pavlidis), also a doctor, Alexandros (Lazaridis), Evlogios (Kourilas), subsequently Metropolitan of Korytsa, Ioakeim of Iveron, Theophilos, Nikandros, Iakovos and Arkadios of Vatopaidi, and the Xeropotamou Elders Pavlos, Chrysanthos and Evdokimos, Athanasios of Pantocrator, Zosimas of Esphigmenou, Neilos (Mitropoulos) of Simonopetra, Savvas of Philotheou, Varlaam of Gregoriou, Theodosios of Agiou Pavlou, and Ioakeim (Spetsieris) of New Skete.

The work of the saints, the abbots, the spiritual fathers, and the scholars of the Holy Mountain, of yesterday and today, radiates outwards and has a beneficial effect upon the world - because Athos, over and above its priceless material treasures, is the guardian of treasures of living virtue, which is of greater importance; it can provide a way of life to cope with the harshness of everyday life, its monotony and loneliness. Thus the Holy Mountain has been justly called by Prof. A. Stavropoulos "a school of spiritual fatherhood and counselling", through offering hospitality to many and through those monks who are able to go out into the world for confessions, conversation, and mission. The audience for their advice includes bishops, priests, monks, nuns, university and school teachers, and 'the least of the brethren'. As has been rightly said by J. Lacarriere "in the person of these few men who remain isolated in their kalyva or cave one can see the guardians, the trustees, the 'athletes' of a wisdom and a science of man which we hasten to admire when it comes from India or Tibet, but which we ignore when it is practised next door to us".

The words of Elder Paisios about Hatzi-Georgis, the subject of his biography, apply equally to himself and to many others of those whom we have spoken of and describe their noble fight for the well-being of the world. "He advises each one appropriately, with discretion, and comforts their souls and aids them with his prayers of the heart. His face is radiant with the holy life that he lives and brings divine grace to anguished souls. His reputation has spread everywhere and people hasten from every quarter to derive spiritual benefit. From morning till night he deals with the pain of the anguished and warms their hearts with his spiritual love, which is like the spring sunshine".

Elder Avimelech of Little St Anne used to say when asked what he was doing, "We are keeping alert". The blind Elder Leontios of Katounakia used to reflect that "now I see everything better, I experience everything better; God has given me more powerful light than that which I had when I had my health". Elder Mikhail of Kafsokalyvia with a perpetual smile on his lips used to converse with the saints. The Konstamonitou bibliophile Elder Modestos would say: "If we do not feel that all our brethren are ours and that we are theirs, the Holy Spirit will never dwell in our hearts. Our behaviour towards them should not be regulated by their spiritual quality". Elder Philaretos of Karoulia, a most strict ascetic, used to say: "My brethren, everybody strives for his salvation, except me, a sinner". A Koutloumousiou elder who suffered ill health for years on end would say that "it is the divine will and it is profitable that the body should be ill so that the soul should be saved". Another wise elder of our own times would often stress that "natural quiet helps towards inner peace. But if it doesn't exist, you must stick patiently to whatever you find before you, and God will give you the greater gifts. And look to see why you do not have peace". He also said, "you should be sad so that you may be glad", and "it's better to have difficulties than to think that you are doing fine; by means of difficulties you become more mature, more beautiful ...." In one of his books, Elder Mitrophanis of Hilandari says of the service which monks perform that it is "the heartfeltness of prayer, love which goes as far as sacrifice, forgiving humility, and the enthusiastic love of mankind".

It is a marvellous thing for holiness to be accompanied by skill with words. When on the Holy Mountain today there continue to be such figures, it is an unexpected blessing for the world.

Source

Pray here the Canon to All the Saints of the Holy Mountain of Athos

For the history behind the Feast of All Saints of Mount Athos, see here and here.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

On The Feast of All Saints of Russia

by Saint John of Shanghai & San Francisco

The feast of All Saints of Russia is not a feast of just righteous ones, but of saints. God is filled with holiness; "Holy is the Lord our God." But man is created in the "image and likeness" of God, and the Lord at creation blew into him the power to partake of the Divine essence and thereby come closer to God, and the closer a man is to God, the holier he is. Saints are those who have partaken of the Divine essence and made it their own; to God, they become "His own." The saints enjoy blessedness, for God is blessed. From them there is light for men. Through them the power of God is revealed. Saints retain all that is characteristic of the human condition; they know everything that is ours. They are near to God, but they are also near to us; they walked and dwelt among us. The people of Holy Russia venerated them, kissed their icons and holy relics, wanted to be as close as possible to the saints, touched holiness, and the Russian land was filled with it. Holy Prince Vladimir demonstrated the regenerating power of the Divine essence upon himself. Previously wild and passionate, he was completely reborn, so that he became a new person, radiating light and joy, and was called "beautiful sun." Do not think that contact with holiness is the fate of only the Russian nation. No! All peoples can live in the spirit that Holy Russia lived and lives in, and then they are close and comprehensible to each other. St. Anthony of the Kiev Caves and St. Anthony the Roman were men of different countries, but together they built the Russian Church, and they are equally near and dear to her. Until recent times we did not have martyrs, but there was a multitude of saints. They influenced the direction that the Russian people took; the people loved them and tried to follow them, and this determined the way of life. All of life was illuminated, until spiritual apostasy began, which led to a fall. But Holy Russia is alive. When the persecution began, strugglers were revealed, confessors, and now we have martyrs. The spirit of Holy Russia lives. Holy Russia is part of the Ecumenical (i.e., the entire) Church. Celebrating the saints, we desire to be together with them and to acquire the power of God through their holiness. They know us, our nature, our characteristics and spirits, and they know our souls, too-what is necessary for us. We are close to them as children are close to parents. The Apostle Peter prayed for his disciples. St. Demetrius of Thessalonica rushes to help the Greeks because this is his own nation. Sts. Boris and Gleb help their relatives (e.g., Alexander Nevsky), and their own Russian people.

Source

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Synaxis of the Saints of North America

On the second Sunday after Pentecost, each local Orthodox Church commemorates all the saints, known and unknown, who have shone forth in its territory. Accordingly, the Orthodox Church in America remembers the saints of North America on this day.

Saints of all times, and in every country are seen as the fulfillment of God's promise to redeem fallen humanity. Their example encourages us to "lay aside every weight, and the sin which so easily besets us" and to "run with patience the race that is set before us" (Hebrews 12:1). The saints of North America also teach us how we should live, and what we must expect to endure as Christians

Although it is a relatively young church, the Orthodox Church in America has produced saints in nearly all of the six major categories of saints: Apostles (and Equals of the Apostles); Martyrs (and Confessors); Prophets; Hierarchs; Monastic Saints; and the Righteous. Prophets, of course, lived in Old Testament times and predicted the coming of Christ.

The first Divine Liturgy in what is now American territory (northern latitude 58 degrees, 14 minutes, western longitude 141 degrees) was celebrated on July 20, 1741, the Feast of the Prophet Elias, aboard the ship Peter under the command of Vitus Bering. Hieromonk Hilarion Trusov and the priest Ignatius Kozirevsky served together on that occasion. Several years later, the Russian merchant Gregory I. Shelikov visited Valaam monastery, suggesting to the abbot that it would be desirable to send missionaries to Russian America.

On September 24, 1794, after a journey of 7,327 miles (the longest missionary journey in Orthodox history) and 293 days, a group of monks from Valaam arrived on Kodiak Island in Alaska. The mission was headed by Archimandrite Joasaph, and included Hieromonks Juvenal, Macarius, and Athanasius, the Hierodeacons Nectarius and Stephen, and the monks Herman and Joasaph. St Herman of Alaska (December 13, August 9), the last surviving member of the mission, fell asleep in the Lord in 1837.

Throughout the Church's history, the seeds of faith have always been watered by the blood of the martyrs. The Protomartyr Juvenal was killed near Lake Iliamna by natives in 1799, thus becoming the first Orthodox Christian to shed his blood for Christ in the New World. In 1816, St Peter the Aleut was put to death by Spanish missionaries in California when he refused to convert to Roman Catholicism.

Missionary efforts continued in the nineteenth century, with outreach to the native peoples of Alaska. Two of the most prominent laborers in Christ's Vineyard were St Innocent Veniaminov (March 31 and October 6) and St Jacob Netsvetov (July 26), who translated Orthodox services and books into the native languages. Father Jacob Netsvetev died in Sitka in 1864 after a life of devoted service to the Church. Father John Veniaminov, after his wife's death, received monastic tonsure with the name Innocent. He died in 1879 as the Metropolitan of Moscow.

As the nineteenth century was drawing to a close, an event of enormous significance for the North American Church took place. On March 25, 1891, Bishop Vladimir went to Minneapolis to receive St Alexis Toth (May 7) and 361 of his parishioners into the Orthodox Church. This was the beginning of the return of many Uniates to Orthodoxy.

St Tikhon (Belavin), the future Patriarch of Moscow (April 7, October 9), came to America as bishop of the diocese of the Aleutians and Alaska in September 1898. As the only Orthodox bishop on the continent, St Tikhon traveled extensively throughout North America in order to minister to his widely scattered and diverse flock. He realized that the local church here could not be a permanent extension of the Russian Church. Therefore, he focused his efforts on giving the American Church a diocesan and parish structure which would help it mature and grow.

St Tikhon returned to Russia in 1907, and was elected as Patriarch of Moscow ten years later. He died in 1925, and for many years his exact burial place remained unknown. St Tikhon's grave was discovered on February 22, 1992 in the smaller cathedral of Our Lady of the Don in the Don Monastery when a fire made renovation of the church necessary.

St Raphael of Brooklyn (February 27) was the first Orthodox bishop to be consecrated in North America. Archimandrite Raphael Hawaweeny was consecrated by Bishop Tikhon and Bishop Innocent (Pustynsky) at St Nicholas Cathedral in New York on March 13, 1904. As Bishop of Brooklyn, St Raphael was a trusted and capable assistant to St Tikhon in his archpastoral ministry. St Raphael reposed on February 27, 1915.

The first All American Council took place March 5-7, 1907 at Mayfield, PA, and the main topic was "How to expand the mission." Guidelines and directions for missionary activity, and statutes for the administrative structure of parishes were also set forth.

In the twentieth century, in the aftermath of the Russian Revolution, countless men, women, and children received the crown of martyrdom rather than renounce Christ. Sts John Kochurov (October 31) and Alexander Hotovitzky (December 4 and August 7) both served the Church in North America before going back to Russia. St John became the first clergyman to be martyred in Russia on October 31, 1917 in St Petersburg. St Alexander Hotovitzky, who served in America until 1914, was killed in 1937.

In addition to the saints listed above, we also honor those saints who are known only to God, and have not been recognized officially by the Church. As we contemplate the lives of these saints, let us remember that we are also called by God to a life of holiness.

Apolytikion in Tone Eight
As the bountiful harvest of Your sowing of salvation, the lands of North America offer to You, O Lord, all the saints who have shone in them. By their prayers keep the Church and our land in abiding peace, through the Theotokos, O most Merciful One.

Kontakion in Tone Eight
Today the choir of Saints who were pleasing to God in the lands of North America now stands before us in the Church and invisibly prays to God for us. With them the angels glorify Him, and all the saints of the Church of Christ keep festival with them; and together they all pray for us to the Pre-Eternal God.

Source

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Russian Cathedral To Rise Next To Eiffel Tower

Onion Domes To Rise In Paris

The Sunday Times
June 6, 2010
Matthew Campbell

RUSSIA has pulled off a spectacular coup by winning permission from President Nicolas Sarkozy to build an Orthodox cathedral next to the Eiffel Tower.

According to sources, the Russian government has paid about £60m for a site where it will build a gilded cathedral with “onion” domes like St Basil’s in Red Square, Moscow.

The building will dramatically alter the fabled Paris skyline. France’s agreement came only after intensive lobbying by Russian officials, including President Dmitry Medvedev, who told Sarkozy how important the cathedral was to him, and Vladimir Putin, the prime minister.

It would be the first Russian Orthodox cathedral built in France since the days of the Romanovs.

Moscow went to extraordinary lengths when the site, headquarters of the French weather service, went on sale last year. It employed a French lobbying firm to get across the message: the Kremlin would consider a sale to anyone else an “unfriendly act”.

The building is expected to be in place by 2013.

It will no doubt highlight divisions in the orthodox flock. Many in France are descendants of white Russians who fled communism after the death of the last tsar and who are opposed to the patriarchy in Moscow because of its links to the Soviet-era KGB.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Elder Paisios on Freedom

It is not freedom when we say to people that everything is permitted. That is slavery. To improve one must have difficulties. Let's take an example. We have a little tree. We take care of it. We place a stake and tie it with a rope. Naturally we don't tie it with wire because that way we would injure it. With their method they would not constrain the tree; and it doesn't develope properly otherwise. And look at the child. We limit his freedom from the beginning. When he is first conceived the poor thing is limited in his mother's womb and remains there nine whole months. Later he is born and immediately they swaddle him in a blanket, they tie him up, as soon as he begins to grow they set a railing, etc. All of this is necessary for him to grow. It appears to take away freedom, but without these protective measures the child will die in the first moment.

Freedom is good when the person can use it appropriately. Otherwise it is a disaster.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

The Benefits of Fasting On Wednesdays and Fridays

"On Wednesdays and Fridays, especially during the four fasts, eat once a day, and the angel of the Lord will remain with you."

- St. Seraphim of Sarov

"Do not ever violate the fast on Wednesday and Friday. This fast is commanded by the Church and is well explained. If you have ever in your life violated this fast, pray to God that He forgives you and sin no more. The holy and pious men do not consider themselves dispensed from this fast either during a journey, much less even in sickness. St. Pachomius met some men carrying a corpse and he saw two angels in the funeral procession. He prayed to God to reveal to him the mystery of the presence of the angels at the burial of this man. What good did this man do that the holy angels of God accompanied him in procession to the grave? According to God's Providence, both angels approached Pachomius and, in this manner, explained to him: 'One of the angels is the angel of Wednesday and the other is the angel of Friday. Seeing how this man always, even until death, fasted on Wednesdays and Fridays so we are honorably accompanying his body. As he, until death, kept the fast, so we are glorifying him.'"

- St. Nikolai Velimirovich

See more here.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

The Perniciously Persistent Myths of Hypatia and the Great Library

Jun 4, 2010
David B. Hart
First Things

As I write this, the first two of what I expect will be three theatrically morose sighs have just issued from my lips; they’re all quite inaudible to you, I know, but they would wrack your heart with pity if you could hear them.

The occasion of my misery is the release of Alejandro Amenábar’s film Agora, which purports to be a historical account of the murder of the female philosopher Hypatia by a Christian mob in the early fifth century, of the destruction of the Great Library of Alexandria, and (more generally) of an alleged conflict that raged in the ancient world between Greek science and Christian faith. I have not actually seen the movie, and have no intention of doing so (I would say you couldn’t pay me to watch it, but that’s not, strictly speaking, true). All I know about it is what I have read in an article by Larry Rohter in the New York Times. But that is enough to put my teeth on edge.

Not that I entirely blame Mr. Amenábar. The story he repeats is one that has been bruited about for a few centuries now, often by seemingly respectable historians. Its premise is that the Christians of late antiquity were a brutish horde of superstitious louts, who despised science and philosophy, and frequently acted to suppress both, and who also had a particularly low opinion of women.

Thus, supposedly, one tragic day in a.d. 391, the Christians of Alexandria destroyed the city’s Great Library, burning its scrolls, annihilating the accumulated learning of centuries, and effectively inaugurating the “Dark Ages.” Thus also, in a.d. 415, a group of Christians murdered Hypatia (young and beautiful, of course, as well as brilliant), not only because of her wicked dedication to profane intellectual culture, but also because of the frowardness with which she had forgotten her proper place as a woman.

This is almost all utter nonsense, but I have to suppose that Amenábar believes it to be true.

This does not, of course, exculpate him of his own silly contributions to the story. Apparently, there is a scene in the film in which Hypatia is forced to wear a veil, of a sort vaguely reminiscent of a burqa, which makes about as much sense in a film about late antique Alexandria as a scene set in a singles bar specializing in Hawaiian drinks.

And then, it seems, there is a scene in which Hypatia ventures the heliocentric hypothesis, which—to anyone familiar with the neoplatonism to which she was devoted or the Aristotelian-Ptolemeian cosmological system in which she was trained—is worse than ludicrous. But, again, these little “artistic” touches are only minor additions to a picture that is already so grotesquely distorted that they hardly matter.

The tale of a Christian destruction of the Great Library—so often told, so perniciously persistent—is a tale about something that never happened. By this, I do not mean that there is some divergence of learned opinion on the issue, or that the original sources leave us in some doubt as to the nature of the event. I mean that nothing of the sort ever occurred.

Rohter almost gets the matter right when he remarks that “Roman-era chronicles, as well as later works, suggest that at least part of the library was destroyed when Julius Caesar invaded Egypt in 48 b.c., and that Christians were responsible only for the damage done in Hypatia’s time to a secondary ‘daughter library,’ which may also have been attacked by Muslim conquerors in the seventh century a.d.” But, in fact, there is not a single shred of evidence—ancient, medieval, or modern—that Christians were responsible for either collection’s destruction, and no one before the late eighteenth century ever suggested they were.

The Great Library of Alexandria is one of the more fascinating mysteries of late antique civilization. It enters history already as something largely legendary. Even Strabo, who died around a.d. 23, knew of it only as a tale from the past. We know that it had been built as an adjunct to the Great Museum in the Brucheium (the royal quarter of Alexandria) in the first half of the third century b.c. Its size, however, is impossible to establish.

The estimate in ancient texts varies wildly, between 40,000 scrolls—for the ancient world, an astounding but still plausible number—and 700,000—which is almost certainly impossibly high. And, as of yet, archaeologists have failed to find the remains of any building sufficiently large to have sheltered a collection on either scale.

Whatever the case, as Rohter says, various ancient sources report that the library was destroyed, either in whole or in part, during Julius Caesar’s Alexandrian campaign against Pompey in 48 or 47 b.c. If any part of it remained in the Brucheium, it would probably have perished when the museum was destroyed in a.d. 272, during Aurelian’s wars of imperial reunification. It was certainly no longer in existence in 391.

Rohter is right that there was perhaps a “daughter” library, which may have been located in the grounds of the Serapeum—the large temple of the Ptolemies’ hybrid Greco-Egyptian god, Serapis—placed there either in the late third century b.c., or in the late second century a.d., when the Serapeum was restored and expanded. At least, there is good evidence that scrolls were at certain points kept among the temple complex’s colonnades.

And, in fact, the Serapeum was destroyed in 391. After a series of riots between the pagan and Christian communities of Alexandria—Alexandria was the most extravagantly violent city of the antique world, and riots were something of a revered civic tradition—a number of Christian hostages had been murdered inside the Serapeum, which led the Emperor Theodosius to order the complex demolished (though he excused the murderers, inasmuch as the Christians they had killed were now considered martyrs, and any act of vengeance would have detracted from their witness). And so a detachment of Roman soldiers, with the assistance of an eager crowd of Christians, dismantled the complex—or, at any rate, the temple within it.

As it happens, we have fairly good accounts of that day, Christian and pagan, and absolutely none of them so much as hints at the destruction of any large collection of books. Not even Eunapius of Sardis—a pagan scholar who despised Christians and who would have wept over the loss of precious texts—suggests such a thing. This is not surprising, since there were probably no books there to be destroyed.

The pagan historian Ammianus Marcellinus, describing the Serapeum not long before its demolition, had clearly spoken of its libraries as something no longer in existence. The truth of the matter is that the entire legend was the product of the imagination of Edward Gibbon, who bizarrely misread a single sentence from the Christian historian Orosius, and from it spun out a story that appears nowhere in the entire corpus of ancient historical sources.

Which brings me to Hypatia. I do sometimes wish the poor woman’s memory could be left in peace. She’s been the victim of such sordidly sentimental nonsense over the past few centuries that it’s almost impossible to appreciate her for what she was, or to disentangle the tragedy of her death from the ideological rants that typically surround its telling.

She was, all the evidence suggests, a brilliant lecturer in Platonic thought, a trained scientist, and the author of a few mathematical commentaries. Despite the extravagant claims often made on her behalf, however, there is no reason to believe she made any particularly significant contributions to any of her fields of expertise.

She was not, for instance—as she has often been said to have been—the inventor of either the astrolabe or the hydrometer. It is true that the first extant mention of a hydrometer appears in a letter written to Hypatia by her devoted friend, Synesius of Cyrene, the Christian Platonist and bishop of Ptolemais; but that is because Synesius, in that letter, is explaining to her how the device is made, so that she can arrange to have one assembled for him

At the time of her death, she was probably not even the beautiful young woman of lore; she was in all likelihood over sixty.

She was, however, brutally murdered—and then dismembered—by a gang of Christian parabalani (a fraternity originally founded to care for the city’s poor); that much is true. This was not, however, because she was a woman (female intellectuals were not at all uncommon in the Eastern Empire, among either pagans or Christians), or because she was a scientist and philosopher (the scientific and philosophical class of Alexandria comprised pagans, Jews, and Christians, and there was no popular Christian prejudice against science or philosophy).

And it was certainly not because she was perceived as an enemy of the Christian faith; she got on quite well with the educated Christians of Alexandria, numbered many among her friends and students, and was intellectually far closer to them than to the temple cultists of the lower city; and the frankest account of her murder was written by the Christian historian Socrates, who obviously admired her immensely. It seems likely that she died simply because she became inadvertently involved in a vicious political squabble between the city’s imperial prefect and the city’s patriarch, and some of the savages of the lower city decided to take matters into their own hands.

In the end, the true story of Hypatia—which no one will ever make into a film—tells us very little about ancient religion, or about the relation between ancient Christianity and the sciences, and absolutely nothing about some alleged perennial conflict between Christianity and science; but it does tell us a great deal about social class in the late Hellenistic world.

Think of it as an ideal Marxist allegory. It may seem unimaginable to us now that Christians from the lower classes in late antique Alexandria could have conspired in the horrific assassination of an unarmed woman and a respected scholar, but, as it happens, that was how Alexandria was often governed at street level, by every sect and persuasion.

In the royal quarter, pagans, Christians, and Jews generally studied together, shared a common intellectual culture, collaborated in scientific endeavor, and attended one another’s lectures. In the lower city, however, religious allegiance was often no more than a matter of tribal identity, and the various tribes often slaughtered one another with gay abandon.

The chasm between the two worlds could scarcely have been vaster. Hypatia was a victim of what might fashionably be called a social contradiction—one that none of the science, philosophy, or religion of the time had ever done anything to resolve.

David B. Hart is a contributing writer of First Things. His most recent book is "Atheist Delusions: The Christian Revolution and Its Fashionable Enemies".

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Pope Benedict XVI's First Day In Cyprus (Video)

Pope Benedict XVI arrived in Cyprus on Friday on a three-day 'pilgrimage', hoping for harmony between the rival Greek and Turkish Cypriot communities on the divided eastern Mediterranean island. This is the pontiff's first trip to the mainly Orthodox country and the first ever papal visit to Cyprus.

Archbishop Slams Turkey As Pope Visits Cyprus

Cyprus Leaders Criticize Turkey During Pope Visit

Pope On First 'Pilgrimage' To Divided Cyprus

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Patriarch Bartholomew On Dialogue With the Non-Orthodox

The message below, whose title of "Sacred Concern and 'Ecumenical' Dialogues" was given by the periodical as a selected segment of the address by Ecumenical Patriarch to the members of the Parish Community of Saint Therapon of Mytilene, Lesvos Island, when they visited him at the Patriarchate, on Sunday, the 18th of August, 2002.

by His Holiness the Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I

...With reference to the pious concern and cautiousness that you have humbly and politely expressed in your letter, Fr. Athanasios, with regard to certain initiatives by the Ecumenical Patriarchate and other Orthodox Churches on the so-called "ecumenical dialogues" with other Christian dogmas and monotheistic religions, I would like to reassure you and to stress that we do not deviate from the guideline of our Fathers.

On the occasion of the feast-day of our Holy Mother the Theotokos, I had made reference during the Vespers for August 15th to the blessed John of Damascus, who is one of the Fathers and authors of our Church that had preoccupied themselves especially with the Most Holy Theotokos, the dogmatic teachings and the opening towards Muslim theologians. During the time of the blessed Damascene, Islam was in a period of flourishing, and even of aggressiveness. Even in a historical environment such as that, the blessed Damascene did not hesitate to embark on a dialogue with the Muslims, in order to make a "statement on the hope within us". Several centuries later, Saint Gregory Palamas - another important personage among the Holy Fathers of our Church - also had dialogues with Muslims and had written about Islam. Saint Mark of Ephesus - one of the more recent saints of our Church, whom our so-called "conservative" brothers regard as a standard-bearer and project him as a norm - had not hesitated to travel to the West and converse with the Catholics. Saint Mark was not finally convinced, and had, rightly, not signed the pseudo-union of Ferrara-Florence (1438-1439), as he had acted according to his conscience. He did not, however, hesitate, nor did he avoid discussions with the Catholics, which is exactly what the Ecumenical Patriarchate and our Orthodox Church are also doing nowadays.

The inter-Christian dialogues with the Catholics, the Anglicans, the Lutherans, the Reformers, the Old Catholics are not conducted only by the Ecumenical Patriarchate, but also by the individual, autocephalous and autonomous sister Churches, under the coordination and the leadership responsibility of the Patriarchate. It is my belief that the Orthodox Churches that are involved in discussions with the heterodox and other religions have not betrayed their faith. Pray that God enlightens us as well as the theologians who are involved in the inter-Christian and inter-religious dialogues, so that we might give a proper witness that will enlighten our brothers who are in a fallacy. And may we indeed succeed in illuminating them and enlightening them, to the degree that they will eventually decide to come to the Upright Faith. That is our prayer, our aspiration and our desire!

Sent to parishioners, September - November 2002

Source

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

The 1971 Discovery of the Holy Martyrs of Niculitel

Saints Zoticus, Atallus, Camisius and Philip the Martyrs (Feast Day - June 4)

The graves of Saints Zoticus, Atallus, Camisius and Philip were discovered in 1971.

Lesser Scythia (modern Romania), between the Danube and the Black Sea in the northeastern territory of the Roman Empire, was a place of exile or death for Christians who refused to worship the pagan gods. During the persecutions of Decius (249-251), Diocletian and Maximilian (284-305), and Licinius (308-324) thousands of people died there from cold, hunger, or torture. The relics of those who endured martyrdom because they openly proclaimed their faith in Christ were taken by Christians and buried in secret places. Accounts of the lives and sufferings of these holy martyrs were written and preserved so they would not be forgotten. When the persecutions ended, the relics were moved from their temporary resting places and placed in special crypts (martyria). Churches were built over these crypts, and the ruins of some of them may be seen today in Dobrogea.

In September 1971 a creek overflowed its banks near the village of Niculitel in the county of Tulcea, revealing one of the oldest of these martyria. The crypt, which is made of bricks, is divided into two rooms, one on top of the other. In the upper room, the relics of four martyrs were found in a single wooden coffin. All had been decapitated. The heads of three martyrs were found atop their necks, while the head of the fourth martyr was resting on his chest. An inscription on the left wall reads: "Christ's martyrs." The names of the four martyrs (Zoticus, Attalus, Camasius, and Philip) were scratched into the right wall.

According to the records which have been preserved, these martyrs were tried by the Roman authorities of Noviodunum (modern Isaccea) and sentenced to death. They were beheaded, then buried at Niculitel. The exact date of their martyrdom is not known. Some believe that they were slain early in the fourth century during the persecutions of Diocletian or Licinius. Others, however, think the four men may have been martyred north of the Danube during the persecution of the Gothic king Athanaric (370-372) against the Christians.

About a hundred fragments of the bones of two men (aged between 45-50) were found in the lower crypt. It is thought that they died during the persecution of Decius, and then their relics were reinterred at Niculitsel around 370-380. The names of these martyrs are not known.

The Syrian Martyrologion and St Jerome's Martyrologion give June 4 as the date of the martyrs' execution. The Synaxaria list these four martyrs along with six others: Eutychius, Quirinus, Julia, Saturninus, Ninita, Fortunio. Twenty-five others were also beheaded with these martyrs, but are not named.

The relics of these holy martyrs were moved to the Cocos Monastery in 1971, where they are venerated by the faithful.

Source

Read more about the discovery of this shrine here.

See pictures of Cocos Monastery here and here.

See pictures of the martyrs crypt here.

See pictures of the relics in procession and veneration here.

More pictures here.

Apolytikion
Your Holy Martyrs, Zoticus, Atallus, Camisius and Philip, O Lord, through their sufferings have received incorruptible crowns from You, our God. For having Your strength, they laid low their adversaries, And shattered the powerless boldness of demons. Through their intercessions, Christ, our Lord, save our souls!

Crypt of the Martyrs
Inscription of the names of the martyrs in the crypt

Cocos Monastery

Relics of the Martyrs

Akathist to the Holy Martyrs

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

A Hymn on the Hospitality of Martha and Mary

by St. Nikolai Velimirovich

Hospitality, a virtue which by God is commanded,
Until now, by it, many souls were drawn to Paradise.
Abraham the Wonderful showed infinite hospitality,
Immeasurable and cordial and not hypocritical.
And King David greatly respected hospitality,
That is why, the life of King Saul, he strictly guarded.
And when the Ancient One [Christ] appeared, older than the aged Abraham,
From the Lineage of David, when darkness hid,
Then, Martha and Mary, sisters of Lazarus,
Showed hospitality these hospitable virgins:
Hosted the Greatest One since the sun flows,
With Hospitality, each one of them heavenly paradise attained.
With hospitality, perfect in heart and food,
Hospitality most worthy in word and in deed.
And the Lord Most-rich, abundantly repaid,
And, this hospitable home, when death saddened
Jesus, the deceased brother to the sisters, resurrected,
And, to them, eternal glory spread throughout the entire world.
This is the reward of hospitality from God Himself,
The Lord loves the Hospitality of a sincere heart.
Holy Church boasts of Martha and Mary,
Teaching that we are also guests at the table of the Lord.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Elder Paisios on the Extremes of the Ecumenists and Fanatics

The following letter was a private letter sent to Archimandrite Haralambos Vasilopoulos, who was the Abbot of the Holy Monastery of Petraki, Athens, and founder of the Pan-Hellenic Orthodox Union and its organ Orthodoxos Typos. In this letter Elder Paisios shows that his primary aim is to bring unity among Orthodox Christians by addressing the wrongs of the Ecumenists, the Fanatics, the Schismatics and pretty much everyone else in between, while also appealing to their sensibilities so as to avoid the bombardment of the extremes. It is this primary subject that we should find of benefit from this letter. We should not read this letter outside of its context, since the late 1960's on Mount Athos and even around the world was a confusing time for serious Orthodox Christians who did not know how to faithfully respond to the extreme ecumenistic actions of Patriarch Athenagoras. With the faithful on Mount Athos and in Greece divided on this issue, the following letter was written and distributed for these same faithful to unite in a bond of true spiritual love and communion.

The Holy Mountain, January 23, 1969

Reverend Father Haralambos,

In as much as I see the great uproar which is happening in our Church because of the various movements in favor of unification, as well as the interaction of the Ecumenical Patriarch with the Pope, I was pained as Her child, and considered it good, besides my prayers, to send a small thread (which I have as a poor monk), that it too may be used as a means of stitching together the multipart garment of our Mother. I know you will show love and share it only with your religious friends. Thank you.

First of all, I would like to ask forgiveness from everyone for being bold to write something when I am neither holy nor a theologian. I trust everyone will understand me, that my writing is nothing more than an expression of my deep pain for the unfortunate stance and worldly love of our father, Patriarch Athenagoras.

It appears he loved another modern woman — which is called the Papist Church — because our Orthodox Mother has not made an impression on him at all, for She is so modest. This love, which was heard from Constantinople, caused a sensational impression of sorts among many Orthodox, who nowadays live in an environment of such meaningless love, in cities across the entire world. Moreover, this love is of the spirit of our age: the family will lose its divine meaning from just such kinds of love, which have as their aim breakup and not union.

With just such a worldly love the Patriarch takes us to Rome. While he should have shown love first to us his children and to our Mother Church, he unfortunately sent his love very far away. The result, it’s true, delighted the secular children who love the world — who have this worldly love —, but completely scandalized us, the children of Orthodoxy, young and old, who have fear of God.

With sadness I must write that among all the unionists I’ve met, never have I seen them to have either a drop or shred of spirituality. Nevertheless, they know how to speak about love and union while they themselves are not united with God, for they have not loved Him.

I would like tenderly to beseech all our unionist brothers: Since the issue of the union of the Churches is something spiritual, and we have need of spiritual love, let’s leave it to those who greatly love God and are theologians, like the Fathers of the Church — not the legalists — who have offered up and continue to give themselves in service to the Church (instead of just buying big candles), and who were and are lit by the fire of love for God rather than by the lighter of the church sacristan.

We should recognize that there exist not only natural but also spiritual laws. Therefore, the future wrath of God is not averted by a convocation of sinners (for then we shall receive double the wrath), but by repentance and adherence to the commandments of the Lord.

Also, we should know well that our Orthodox Church does not have even one shortcoming. The only apparent insufficiency is the shortage of sober Hierarchs and Shepherds with a Patristic foundation. “Few are chosen.” This should not, however, be upsetting. The Church is Christ’s Church, and He governs Her. It is not a Temple built by the pious from rocks, sand and mortar, which is then destroyed by the fire of barbarians; the Church is Christ Himself. “And whosoever shall fall on this Stone shall be broken: but on whomsoever it shall fall, it will grind him to powder.” (Matt. 21:44-45)

When He needs to, the Lord will bring forth the Mark of Ephesuses and Gregory Palamases, so as to bring together all our scandalized brethren, to confess the Orthodox Faith, to strengthen the Tradition, and to give great joy to our Mother, the Church.

In times past we see that many faithful children of our Church, monastics and laymen, have unfortunately broken away from Her on account of the unionists. In my opinion, separation from the Church each time the Patriarch makes a mistake is not good at all. From within, close to the Mother Church, it is the duty and obligation of each member to struggle in their own way. To cease commemoration of the Patriarch; to break away and create their own Church; and to continue to speak insultingly to the Patriarch: this I think, is senseless.

If, for this or that occasional deviation of the Patriarchs, we separate ourselves and make our own Churches — may God protect us! — we’ll pass up even the Protestants. It is easy for one to separate, but difficult to return. Unfortunately we have many “churches” in our times, created either by big groups or even just one person. Because there happened to be a church in their kalyve (I am speaking about things happening on the Holy Mountain), they figured they could create their own independent Church.

If the unionists gave the Church the first wound, the aforementioned give the second.

Let’s pray that God will illumine all of us, including our Patriarch Athenagoras, that union of these “churches” will come about first; that tranquility would be realized within the scandalized Orthodox fold; so that peace and love would exist among the Eastern Orthodox Churches. Then let’s think about union with other “Confessions” — and only if they sincerely desire to embrace Orthodox Dogma.

I would further like to say that there does exist another, third group, within our Church. They are the brethren who remain as Her faithful children, but who don’t have spiritual concord between themselves. They spend their time criticizing one another, and not for the general good of the struggle. The one monitors the other (more than himself) to see what he will say or write so as to ruthlessly nail him. However, if this person had said or written the same thing, he’d certainly have supported it with numerous passages from the Holy Scriptures and the Fathers.

Great harm comes of this; for while the one injures his neighbor, the other strikes him back before the eyes of all the faithful. Often times, disbelief is sown in the souls of the weak, because they are scandalized by such people. Unfortunately, some from among us make senseless claims against the others. We want them to conform to our own spiritual character. In other words, when someone else doesn’t harmonize with our own character, or is only mildly tolerant — or even a little sharp — with us, immediately we jump to the conclusion that he is not a spiritual person.

We’re all needed within the Church. All the Fathers, both the mild and the austere, offered their services to Her. Just as the sweet, sour, bitter and even pungent herbs are necessary for a man’s body (each has its own flavor and vitamins), the same is true of the Body of the Church. All are necessary. The one fills up the spiritual character of the other, and all of us are duty bound to endure not only the particular spiritual character, but even the human weaknesses we each have.

Again, I come sincerely asking pardon from all for being so bold to write. I am only a simple monk, and my work is to strive, as much as I am able, to divest myself of the old man, and to help others and the Church, through God, by prayer. But because heartbreaking news regarding our Holy Orthodoxy has reached even my hermitage, I was greatly pained, and thus considered it good to write that which I felt. Let’s all pray that God grants His Grace, and may each of us help in his own way for the glory of our Church.

With much respect to all,

Monk Paisios

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

An Interview With Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew: The Past and Future of Orthodoxy

Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I: Eastern Orthodox Church Looks to Both Past and Future

Ivan Dikov
Novinite
June 3, 2010,

An exclusive interview of Novinite.com (Sofia News Agency) with His All Holiness Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople Bartholomew I.

This interview comes days after His All Holiness paid a visit to Bulgaria for the opening of new churches in the Burgas region where he was welcomed by the Bulgarian Orthodox Church and Bulgarian Prime Minister Boyko Borisov. Shortly after that, on May 24, 2010, Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew was in Moscow where he performed a service together with Russian Patriarch Kirill on the occasion of the Day of St. Cyril and St. Methodius, the authors of the Slavic script.

What would you say are the major, basic characteristics that continue to distinguish today Eastern/Greek Orthodox Christianity from the other Christian churches?

It is sometimes best to discern similarities and common ground, rather than differences and distinctive features among Christian Churches. There is often more that unites us than separates us, and we should not be complacent in a defensive presence of Orthodox Christianity in the world.

Nevertheless, the Orthodox Church has a profound wealth in its spiritual tradition, which retains a more cosmic, liturgical and mystical world view.

This is why current issues of global concern, such as the ecological crisis, are of utmost importance to us inasmuch as they underline how doctrine and ethos are integrally related. The way we worship and pray to God reflects the way we lead our lives and treat our planet.

What is the most unique thing about the tradition of Eastern/Greek Orthodox Christianity? What should members of the other Christian churches or other religions know about it?

The Orthodox Church is often seen as a traditional Church. And, while it is true that we preserve many elements from the early Apostolic community, which witnessed the Resurrection of our Lord and the Pentecost of the Church, we are also a Church that seeks to dialogue with the present.

In this regard, we are a Church that looks both to the past (with the treasures of the Church of the Fathers) as well as to the future (with an expectation of the heavenly kingdom, as we profess in the Nicene Creed). This all-embracing theology and all-encompassing spirituality is “always prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks us to give the reason for the hope that lies within us.” (1 Peter 3.15)

There is a widespread impression that Western churches are generally more pro-active with respect to social causes and initiatives. What is the main attraction and the main message of the Eastern Orthodox Church in the 21st century, the rapidly changing time of the Global Age?

In many ways, there is truth in that widespread impression, and it would be helpful for us as Orthodox Christians to be prepared also to learn from our Western brothers and sisters.

As we observed earlier, it is more helpful and beneficial for us to work together in a spirit of healthy ecumenism, rather than work in an isolation that resembles a closed ghetto-like community. From as early as the third century, the West emphasized the role of the Church in the present world, excelling in law, ethics, and the worldly institution.

By contrast, the East stressed the heavenly (or eschatological) dimension of the Church, presenting unparalleled models and examples of mysticism and spirituality. So both East and West can learn from one another.

The Orthodox Church can reveal how the Holy Spirit and the Divine Liturgy are able to inspire all aspects of the earthly Church – including the organizational leadership of the Church and the social standards of the people.

Is it correct to say that the Orthodox Christian religion is a key trait of a Greco-Slavic Civilization, as it is often described by western scholars?

While it is true that Orthodox Christianity was the cradle of civilization on the Eastern world – both Greek and Slavic – the unfortunate truth is that the Western world has neglected its Byzantine roots.

It is a sad reality that Western historians have been dominated by the importance and influence of the Renaissance, while overlooking the fact that Constantine the Great moved the capital of the Empire to New Rome, Constantinople, in 330AD as well as the fact that all seven Ecumenical Councils of undivided Christianity were held not in Greece or Rome, but in the East, in what is now Turkey.

Nevertheless, more recent scholarship has embraced a more comprehemsive view of history. As shown in Dr. Runciman’s great books, the memory preserved by the Mother Church of Constantinople through the centuries was the memory of an Orthodox ecumenical civilization. However, it is not easy to turn around a tide of historical prejudice.

Greeks and Bulgarians used to have more powerful medieval empires, which boosted Orthodox Christianity. What is the role of these two nations today as far as Orthodox Christianity is concerned? Is it fair to say that Russia is the leading Orthodox nation nowadays?

We should remember that the situation of the first millennium no longer prevails in our world, and we should not live in such a manner that reflects those circumstances. Moreover, while the original system of Pentarchy emanated from respect for the apostolicity and particularity of the traditions of these ancient Patriarchates, the autocephaly of later Churches grew out of respect for the cultural identity of nations.

Thus, today, we have reached the perception that Orthodoxy comprises a federation of national Churches, frequently attributing priority to national interests in their relationship with one another. Yet, secular forces have never been the primary focus or foremost definition of Orthodox ecclesiology.

Our criteria of ecclesial identity and unity are not the measures of this world – of numbers and wealth – but derive instead from the Holy Spirit, as this is revealed in the Church Councils and the Holy Eucharist.

We do not, as during Byzantine times, have at our disposal a state factor that guaranteed – and sometimes even imposed – our unity. Nor does our ecclesiology permit any centralized authority that is able to impose unity from above.

Our unity depends on our ecclesial conscience. The sense of need and duty that we constitute a single canonical structure and body, one Church, is sufficient to guarantee our unity, without any external intervention.

This is precisely why we have to date convened five meetings (Synaxes) of Heads of Orthodox Churches throughout the world, while we have at the same time insisted on advancing preparations for the Holy and Great Council of our Orthodox Church.

We have been blessed with a recent official visit to Russia at the invitation of His Beatitude Patriarch Kirill of Moscow and we have, therefore, witnessed the vital rejuvenation as well as the complicated adversities of the Russian nation.

From your position as the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople you have sought to promote peace among Christians, Muslims and Jews. What are some of your successful initiatives in that respect? In an age of rising sectarian violence, what can religious figures of your rank do to help bring about peace and understanding?

In addition to the bilateral academic dialogues that we hold on a regular basis with both Jews and Muslims (since the early 1970s), the initiatives that we have promoted in recent years include: the Peace and Tolerance Conference (Istanbul, 1994); the Conference on Peaceful Coexistence between Judaism, Christianity, and Islam (Brussels, 2001); the Conference on Religion, Peace and the Olympic Ideal (Athens, 2004); and the second Peace and Tolerance Conference (Istanbul, 2005).

These gatherings, and others like them, have proved both pioneering in purpose and historical in substance. For they opened our eyes to the diversity of cultures and religions that comprise our fragmented global world. It is our firm conviction that all religious leaders can benefit from such meetings inasmuch as they widened people’s awareness of racism and fundamentalism, while assisting in distinguishing between religious tolerance and religious absolutism.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

The Dangers In Being 'Spiritual But Not Religious'

I've been noticing a trend recently away from this mantra of being 'spiritual but not religious' in pop culture, but it still is the prevailing way of professing one's theism in society to show that one's religion is secularized and individualistic. Until pop culture veers away from it, then maybe society will follow. For example, this past week on The Larry King Show, Lady Gaga was asked if she was religious or spiritual, and she responded by saying she was religious, having been raised Catholic and holding to a belief in Jesus, though she also claimed to be working out what it all meant since she disagrees with the Catholic Church's stance on homosexuality. But as I have been posed this question many times in the past few years as to whether or not I am spiritual or religious, my usual response these days is to say, "I am an Orthodox Christian" or sometimes I may say, "Both" along with it. What I find is that this usually opens up the discussion away from the presuppositions that the prevailing either/or mantra squeezes one into. Regarding organized religion, see my posts here and here.

Are There Dangers in Being 'Spiritual But Not Religious'?

By John Blake
June 3, 2010
CNN

"I'm spiritual but not religious."

It's a trendy phrase people often use to describe their belief that they don't need organized religion to live a life of faith.

But for Jesuit priest James Martin, the phrase also hints at something else: selfishness.

"Being spiritual but not religious can lead to complacency and self-centeredness," says Martin, an editor at America, a national Catholic magazine based in New York City. "If it's just you and God in your room, and a religious community makes no demands on you, why help the poor?"

Religious debates erupt over everything from doctrine to fashion. Martin has jumped into a running debate over the "I'm spiritual but not religious" phrase.

The "I'm spiritual but not religious" community is growing so much that one pastor compared it to a movement. In a 2009 survey by the research firm LifeWay Christian Resources, 72 percent of millennials (18- to 29-year-olds) said they're "more spiritual than religious." The phrase is now so commonplace that it's spawned its own acronym ("I'm SBNR") and Facebook page: SBNR.org.

But what exactly does being "spiritual but not religious" mean, and could there be hidden dangers in living such a life?

Did you choose "Burger King Spirituality"?

Heather Cariou, a New York City-based author who calls herself spiritual instead of religious, doesn't think so. She's adopted a spirituality that blends Buddhism, Judaism and other beliefs.

"I don't need to define myself to any community by putting myself in a box labeled Baptist, or Catholic, or Muslim," she says. "When I die, I believe all my accounting will be done to God, and that when I enter the eternal realm, I will not walk though a door with a label on it."

BJ Gallagher, a Huffington Post blogger who writes about spirituality, says she's SBNR because organized religion inevitably degenerates into tussles over power, ego and money.

Gallagher tells a parable to illustrate her point:

"God and the devil were walking down a path one day when God spotted something sparkling by the side of the path. He picked it up and held it in the palm of his hand.

"Ah, Truth," he said.

"Here, give it to me," the devil said. "I'll organize it."

Gallagher says there's nothing wrong with people blending insights from different faith traditions to create what she calls a "Burger King Spirituality -- have it your way."

She disputes the notion that spiritual people shun being accountable to a community.

"Twelve-step people have a brilliant spiritual community that avoids all the pitfalls of organized religion," says Gallagher, author of "The Best Way Out is Always Through."

"Each recovering addict has a 'god of our own understanding,' and there are no priests or intermediaries between you and your god. It's a spiritual community that works.''

Nazli Ekim, who works in public relations in New York City, says calling herself spiritual instead of religious is her way of taking responsibility for herself.

Ekim was born in a Muslim family and raised in Istanbul, Turkey. She prayed to Allah every night, until she was 13 and had to take religion classes in high school.Then one day, she says she had to take charge of her own beliefs.

"I had this revelation that I bow to no one, and I've been spiritually a much happier person," says Ekim, who describers herself now as a Taoist, a religious practice from ancient China that emphasizes the unity of humanity and the universe.

"I make my own mistakes and take responsibility for them. I've lied, cheated, hurt people -- sometimes on purpose. Did I ever think I will burn in hell for all eternity? I didn't. Did I feel bad and made up for my mistakes? I certainly did, but not out of fear of God."

Going on a spiritual walkabout

The debate over being spiritual rather than religious is not just about semantics. It's about survival.

Numerous surveys show the number of Americans who do not identify themselves as religious has been increasing and likely will continue to grow.

A 2008 survey conducted by Trinity College in Hartford, Connecticut, dubbed these Americans who don't identify with any religion as "Nones."

Seminaries, churches, mosques and other institutions will struggle for survival if they don't somehow convince future generations that being religious isn't so bad after all, religion scholars warn.

Jennifer Walters, dean of religious life at Smith College in Massachusetts, says there's a lot of good in old-time religion.

Religious communities excel at caring for members in difficult times, encouraging members to serve others and teaching religious practices that have been tested and wrestled with for centuries, Walters says.

"Hymn-singing, forms of prayer and worship, teachings about social justice and forgiveness -- all these things are valuable elements of religious wisdom," Walters says. "Piecing it together by yourself can be done, but with great difficulty."

Being a spiritual Lone Ranger fits the tenor of our times, says June-Ann Greeley, a theology and philosophy professor.

"Religion demands that we accord to human existence some absolutes and eternal truths, and in a post-modern culture, that becomes all but impossible," says Greeley, who teaches at Sacred Heart University in Connecticut.

It's much easier for "spiritual" people to go on "spiritual walkabouts," Greeley says.

"People seem not to have the time nor the energy or interest to delve deeply into any one faith or religious tradition," Greeley says. "So they move through, collecting ideas and practices and tenets that most appeal to the self, but making no connections to groups or communities."

Being spiritual instead of religious may sound sophisticated, but the choice may ultimately come down to pettiness, says Martin, the Jesuit priest, who writes about the phrase in his book, "The Jesuit Guide to (Almost Everything)."

"Religion is hard," he says. "Sometimes it's just too much work. People don't feel like it. I have better things to do with my time. It's plain old laziness."

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Georges Vasilievich Florovsky: Philosopher of the Orthodox World (3 of 8)

Continued from Part Two

Soon after the St. Sergius Institute of Orthodox Theology was founded in Paris on April 30, 1925, Florovsky was invited by Dean Sergius Bulgakov to join the faculty as Professor of Patristics. Florovsky’s interest in Patristics dates from his days in Odessa, but he only began to study this field seriously in 1924 when he was in Prague. In Patristics, it must be noted, Florovsky discovered his true vocation. Henceforth Patristic thought was to become his intellectual home, the foundation of his world view, the standard by which he would judge and find wanting the course of Russian religious thought and of Orthodox theology in general. In fact, Patristic theology became for Florovsky the criterion for all authentically Orthodox theology and for an accurate and comprehensive understanding of the Sacred Scriptures of the Church. Patristic theology was also the source of Florovsky’s many later contributions to and criticisms of the Ecumenical Movement. It was through his ongoing research of the original sources and his constant teaching of Patristics that Florovsky actually mastered the field. Throughout his lifetime he taught and wrote about the pre-Nicene Fathers, the golden age of the Fathers of the Seven Ecumenical Councils, the Byzantine theologians up to the fifteenth century, as well as the history of Russian theology. For a man of his scholarly stature and erudition, it is astonishing to note that Florovsky was an autodidact in theology and had never earned a theological degree in the strict sense. All of his many subsequent doctoral degrees were honorary, bestowed upon him, deservedly no doubt, by countless institutions of higher learning that acknowledged his singular achievements everywhere he went and worked throughout his long life.

It was during the pre-war years of the 1930s that Florovsky did a great deal of research in various European libraries and produced his most important writings. Most notable among his writings of this period were his Fathers of the Fourth Century7 and The Byzantine Fathers of the Fifth to the Eighth Centuries.8 These two volumes reflect the in-depth study of the Fathers and the salient characteristics of Florovskian scholarship: judicial analysis of primary material, richly detailed factual documentation, succinct and penetrating generalizations, a broad historical perspective, a terse and compelling style, and always an extensive bibliography that invariably included his very latest reading. These works placed Florovsky at the front ranks of Patristic scholarship. While praise for their erudition and power was unstinting, they also clearly pointed out that “everything was not stable and whole from the very beginning” in the life of the early Church, as she struggled to define and defend her faith. The fact is that these writings became a turning point in modern Orthodox theology, as the sequence of events in the life and work of Florovsky clearly demonstrate.

In 1932 Florovsky accepted ordination to the priesthood of the Orthodox Church. This important decision came rather naturally for him, given his early background in a clerical family, and his responsibilities as a priest and as a pastor provided many opportunities to enrich his theological work through the liturgical life of the Church, which he so profoundly appreciated from his youth. Moreover, his experience as a priest of the Church, imbued by the spirit of worship and pastoral service, freed him from the strictures of a school theology and added a powerful dimension to his theological work and witness. In 1935 Florovsky delivered an important lecture on “The Tasks of Russian Theology” at St. Sergius Institute that critically outlined the history of Russian religious thought. A year later in Athens, Greece, he delivered at the First Congress of Orthodox Theological Professors two additional important papers: “Western Influences in Russian Theology” and “Patristics and Modern Theology.” Through these two lectures Florovsky challenged his colleagues by calling on all Orthodox theologians to overcome the so-called “pseudomorphosis” of Orthodox theology that had come about in past centuries, under both Roman Catholic and Protestant prevailing influences.

It must be remembered that the fateful Schism of 1054 had left the two major geographical areas of the Church to go their own separate ways for a very long time. The Western Church developed through Scholasticism and the Renaissance to the Protestant Reformation and the Counter-Reformation, to the Enlightenment and finally to the modern age. The Eastern Church underwent a series of historical misfortunes, brought about by the militant expansion of Islam in the Middle East and the Balkans, with the final collapse of the Eastern Roman Empire in 1453. While the Christian Empire came to an end in the East, the Orthodox Church actually survived there for four centuries under Islam. In the Russian lands to the north, the Orthodox Church even flourished, notwithstanding the Western influences she experienced. Not too long after the Balkan countries gained their independence from the Ottoman Empire in the nineteenth century, Russia itself experienced the Bolshevik Revolution, ushering in the anti-Christian Communist rule which gradually engulfed the countries of central and eastern Europe except Greece.

Out of this broad historical background and unlike most of his contemporaries, who drew their inspiration and influence from the more current trends in Western Europe, Florovsky reached back into the past history of Russia and beyond into the tradition of Byzantium and the Greek Fathers of the undivided Church in the East. It was from this early and normative tradition of the Church that Florovsky not only drew his inspiration but also actually established his now famous theological framework known as “the neo-Patristic synthesis.” In the long historical journey of Christendom the writings of the Fathers had to a large extent become dead historical documents, and Florovsky wanted to revive them from within, to recover the mind of the Fathers and the existential questions with which they struggled in their own time to develop their own theological synthesis. Following the Fathers, in a neo-Patristic synthesis, always means moving forward, not backwards; it means fidelity to the Patristic spirit and not just the Patristic letter. Fathers and teachers of the Church are those who, in the measure of their humility before the truth, receive the gift of expressing the catholic consciousness of the Church, and we learn from them, not only their personal opinions or conceptions, but also the catholic testimony of the Church.

By calling for a return to the Fathers of the early Church, Florovsky also called for an authentic re-Hellenizing of Orthodox Christianity. This does not mean at all an ethnic Hellenism, nor the Hellenism of antiquity with its anti-Christian elements, but a Christian Hellenism, one that has been baptized, transfigured, and incorporated into the very reality of the Church as an eternal and perennial category of Christian existence. When Christianity ventured out into the pagan world, she encountered Hellenism. The Good News of the Gospel and later the dogmatic theological definitions of Christianity became expressed and fortified precisely in the categories of a Christianized Hellenism. Biblical prophecy found its actual consummation precisely in Christian Hellenism. The truth of the Old Testament was already incorporated in the New Testament, and the New Testament as a Greek Book was already the beginning of a Hellenic synthesis that has become an inseparable part of the Church. The theological definitions of the Fathers of the Ecumenical Councils only completed an ongoing process of synthesis that has become an inseparable and essential element of the Church. Any attempts to escape from Christian Hellenism invariably become backward relapses into the untransfigured and pre-Christian Hellenism of antiquity, which was in time actually transcended and assimilated by the Patristic synthesis of Christian Hellenism that makes up the world of Orthodox Christianity.

The powerful and pioneering call of Florovsky for a creative “neo-Patristic synthesis” in Orthodox theology was heard with keen interest by Orthodox theologians in 1936, particularly by Greek Orthodox theologians, who began to take Florovsky’s thought seriously and to bring about an astonishing renewal in Orthodox theology that is continuing to the present time. Florovsky, however, cautioned that for Orthodox theology to recover its independence from Western influences it is not enough simply to return to its Patristic sources and foundations. Returning to the Fathers does not mean abandoning the present age, escaping from history, or quitting the field of battle with contemporary problems. The Patristic experience must be rediscovered, preserved, and brought into life for the present time and conditions. Independence from the influences of the now non-Orthodox West should not be an estrangement from it. A radical break with the West would provide no real liberation. It is not enough to refute or reject Western errors or mistakes; they must be overcome and surpassed through a new and creative act of encounter. Orthodox theology has been called upon to answer non-Orthodox questions from the depths of her catholic and unbroken experience, and to confront Western Christianity, not with accusations but with the testimony and the truth of Eastern Christianity. And this precisely has been the fundamental focus and abiding legacy of the thought and work of Georges Florovsky throughout his lifetime.

Continued...Part Four

Tweet

Share on Tumblr