After 32 Years, Crucifixion Icon Returns To Monemvasia

On Monday 23 May 2011 at 5:00PM the icon of the Crucifixion of Christ, which was stolen from the Church of the Chains of Christ (Elkomenou Christou) in Monemvasia in 1979, was finally returned after being held in the Byzantine Museum of Athens after it was rediscovered in 1980. It is now held in the Chapel of St. John within the Church of the Chains of Christ. Metropolitan Eustathios of Monemvasia was there to receive the icon. A Vespers Service was held followed by a Supplication Service to the Honorable Cross. On the morning of May 24th a Divine Liturgy was held to further celebrate the event.


The icon was stolen in November of 1979 by three looters who caused severe damage to the image, removing the canvas from the painting and chopping it up. By the time police arrested the perpetrators in 1980, the damage had been done. The best iconographers of our time helped restore the icon, who reassembled the dismembered parts and placed the canvas back onto the painting. To bring the icon back to Monemvasia safely cost 200,00 euro.


This 14th century icon of the Crucifixion is one of the largest and most beautiful of the Palaiologan Renaissance, and is therefore priceless. The Church of Christ of the Chains is the largest church of the Lower City of Monemvasia and dates to the 11th century. It takes its name from a 12th century image of Christ within where Christ is held in chains with His head tilted downwards.


Originally the Byzantine Museum of Athens rejected the return of the icon due to security issues. Eventually the Central Archaeological Council was in favor of the move. Metropolitan Eustathios of Monemvasia and Sparta also was in favor of the return of the icon. Plans have been underway for its return since 2006.

The Chapel of St. John, where the icon is now kept, has a 24-hour state-of-the-art security system.

To read more about the Church of the Chains of Christ in Monemvasia, see here.

The videos below show the return of the icon to Monemvasia:

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

"Rapeture": Apocalypse-Not-Now

10 Failed Doomsday Predictions

Woman Tries to Kill Children, Self to Avoid 'the Tribulation'

Teen Kills Herself Ahead of Foretold Rapture

Failed Doomsday Has Real Deadly Consequences

'Rapture' Apocalypse Prediction Sparks Atheist Reaction

Camping's $72 Million Business

When Doomsday Isn't, Believers Struggle to Cope

'Judgment Day' Believers Face Tough Questions After Unfulfilled Doomsday

Believers' Reactions Mixed to Unfulfilled Doomsday

Harold Camping 'Flabbergasted'; Rapture a No-show

‘Judgement Day’ Celebration Tragedy For US Boy

'Rapture' Real Aftermath: Beheadings, Shootings, Mass Graves

Harold Camping Calls May 21 An 'Invisible Judgment Day,' Says October 21 Is Real End-Of-World Date

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Saint Symeon of the Wondrous Mountain

St. Symeon of the Wondrous Mountain (Feast Day - May 24)

Saint Symeon the "New Stylite" was born in the year 521 in Antioch, Syria of pious parents John and Martha. From her youth St Martha (July 4) prepared herself for a life of virginity and longed for monasticism, but her parents insisted that she marry John. After ardent prayer in a church dedicated to St John the Forerunner, the future nun was directed in a vision to submit to the will of her parents and enter into marriage.

As a married woman, St Martha strove to please God and her husband in everything. She often prayed for a baby and promised to dedicate him to the service of God. St John the Forerunner revealed to Martha that she would have a son who would serve God. When the infant was born, he was named Symeon and baptized at two years of age.

When Symeon was six years old, an earthquake occurred in the city of Antioch, in which his father perished. Symeon was in church at the time of the earthquake. Leaving the church, he became lost and spent seven days sheltered by a pious woman. St John the Baptist again appeared to St Martha, and indicated where to find the lost boy. The saint's mother found her lost son, and moved to the outskirts of Antioch after the earthquake. Already during his childhood the Lord Jesus Christ appeared several times to St Symeon, foretelling his future exploits and the reward for them.

The six-year-old child Symeon went into the wilderness, where he lived in complete isolation. During this time a light-bearing angel guarded and fed him. Finally, he arrived at a monastery, headed by the Abba John, who lived in asceticism upon a pillar. He accepted the boy with love.

After a time, St Symeon asked the Elder John to permit him also to struggle upon a pillar. A new pillar was raised by the brethren of the monastery with the blessing of the Elder John, near his pillar. Having completed the initiation of the seven-year-old boy into monasticism, Abba John placed him upon this pillar. The young ascetic, strengthened by the Lord, quickly grew spiritually, in his efforts surpassing even his experienced instructor. For his efforts, St Symeon received from God the gift of healing.

The fame of the young monk's deeds began to spread beyond the bounds of the monastery. Monks and laypeople began to come to him from various places, desiring to hear his counsel and receive healing from their infirmities. The humble ascetic continued to pursue asceticism with instructions from his spiritual mentor Abba John.

When he was eleven, Symeon decided to pursue asceticism upon a higher pillar, the top of which was forty feet from the ground. The bishops of Antioch and Seleukia came to the place of the monk's endeavors, and ordained him as a deacon. Then they permitted him to ascend the new pillar, on which St Symeon labored for eight years.

St Symeon prayed ardently for the Holy Spirit to descend upon him, and the holy prayer of the ascetic was heard. The Holy Spirit came upon him in the form of a blazing light, filling the ascetic with divine wisdom. Along with oral instructions, St Symeon wrote letters about repentance, monasticism, about the Incarnation of Christ, and about the future Judgment.

After the death of his Elder, St Symeon's life followed a certain pattern. From the rising of the sun until mid-afternoon he read books and copied Holy Scripture. Then he rose and prayed all night. When the new day began, he rested somewhat, then began his usual Rule of prayer.

St Symeon concluded his efforts on the second column, and by God's dispensation, settled upon the Wonderful Mountain, having become an experienced Elder to the monks in his monastery. The ascent to Wonderful Mountain was marked by a vision of the Lord, standing atop a column. St Symeon continued his efforts at this place where he saw the Lord, at first upon a stone, and then upon a pillar.

Future events were revealed to St Symeon, and so he foretold the death of Archbishop Ephraim of Antioch, and the illness of Bishop Domnus, which overtook him as punishment for his lack of pity. Finally, St Symeon predicted an earthquake for the city of Antioch and urged all the inhabitants to repent of their sins.

St Symeon established a monastery on Wonderful Mountain,where the sick people he healed built a church in gratitude for the mercy shown them. The saint prayed for a spring of water for the needs of the monastery, and once during a shortage of grain, the granaries of the monastery were filled with wheat by his prayers.

In the year 560 the holy ascetic was ordained to the priesthood by Dionysius, Bishop of Seleukia. At age seventy-five St Symeon was warned by the Lord of his impending end. He summoned the brethren of the monastery, instructed them in a farewell talk, and peacefully fell asleep in the Lord in the year 596, having toiled as a stylite for sixty-eight years.

After death, the saint worked miracles just as he had when alive. He healed the blind, the lame and the leprous, saving many from wild beasts, casting out devils and raising the dead.

Source

Five Prayers Against Shameless Thoughts By St. Symeon of the Wondrous Mountain

The skull of St. Symeon at Neamţ Monastery in Romania

Apolytikion in the First Tone
Thou becamest a pillar of patience and didst emulate the Forefathers, O righteous one: Job in his sufferings, Joseph in temptations, and the life of the bodiless while in the body, O Symeon, our righteous Father, intercede with Christ God that our souls be saved.

Kontakion in the Second Tone
Desiring the heights, thou wast translated from the earth; thy pillar was made a second Heaven by thy toils; by it, thou didst shine with the splendour of great wonders, O righteous one. And thou ever prayest to Christ the God of all in behalf of all of us.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Five Prayers Against Shameless Thoughts

Written by Our Holy Father Symeon of the Wondrous Mountain (May 24)

A Prayer Against Evil and Unclean Thoughts

O Lord Jesus Christ our God, immortal Son and Word of the living God, Who puttest not to shame them that trust in Thee, Father Who lovest mankind and Lord of all consolation and tender mercies, Who, as before the ages, abidest in Thy Goodness now and unto the ages: Drive away from me, Thy servant, the evil thoughts that vex me. For Thou knowest, O Thou Who art cognizant of the heart, Who beholdest the secrets of my heart, of what sort they are. Forgive me, O Master, and let them not become for me an occasion of sin; but be Thou gracious unto me, send forth Thy Grace from the holy Throne of Thy Glory upon the soul of me, the hapless one, and overshadow me, Thy servant. Give me understanding, and I shall learn Thy commandments and live, O Physician of souls and bodies, O Lord Who alone art sinless and glorified. For Thou art blessed and lauded in all Thy Saints, unto the ages of ages. Amen.

Another Prayer, Against the Burning of the Flesh

Thou, O Lord, Who searchest out the hearts and reins, knowest that I loathe impurity and passionate thoughts. But the evil persecutor and grievous tyrant forcibly draggeth me down to the pit of impurity, inflicting unbearable frenzy upon me, inflaming me with the fire of evil lust, setting me violently ablaze, and vehemently oppressing me, and doth not relax his grip in any wise. I am weak and wretched, engrossed in self-indulgence and indolence, having lost the vigor of my soul. Behold, therefore, and be aware of my distress, O my Master, Who art mighty and strivest on my behalf, and disdain not me, Thy servant, who am sorely agitated at this hour by the uprising and burning of this, my miserable flesh, and threatened with drowning amidst the waves. But send forth Thine invincible help, rebuke the spirit of uncleanness, subdue the sea of the passions, quell the tempest of pernicious arousal, calm the seething of sensuality, quench the flame of the flesh, dispel the onslaught of rabid burning, lull this most irksome and ferocious warfare, and deliver me from the hand of the tyrant. Drive away from me every unseemly fantasy and every filthy thought, and implant in my soul steadfast serenity and a peaceful disposition. Renew its strength that hath waxed old, bridle mine appetitive faculty with the cincture of chastity, and array me with spiritual armor, that I may remain impregnable to the assaults of voluptuousness; by the intercessions of the Saints who trampled underfoot the stings of this sin and vanquished the uprisings of nature. For Thou, Who art purity itself, dost rest among the pure, and unto Thee do we ascribe glory, to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit, now and ever, and unto the ages of ages. Amen.

Another Prayer, on the Same Subject

O Master Lord Jesus Christ, eternal Word of God, Artificer and Governor of the greatest and least natures of the universe, Only-Begotten Son Who didst shine forth timelessly from God the Father, the Same Who camest forth incarnate from the Holy Virgin and art true man, without change or confusion, dwelling among us as Thou Thyself knowest, so as to deliver us, the useless servants whom Thou hadst fashioned; Light of dispassion, Expeller of the darkness of ignorance, Radiance of vigilant souls, universal Joy of the Orthodox, Delectation of Angels and blessed souls, Who art wholly insatiable Beauty, wholly Sweetness, wholly Desire and Longing, abundant Wealth of noetic succor for those who sincerely cleave unto Thee, Who art by nature good, compassionate, and merciful: Drive away from me, the beleaguered one, the base thoughts that vex me, the offspring of my sensual appetite. For Thou knowest, O Thou Who art cognizant of the heart, Who beholdest the secrets of my heart, that they are involuntary. Forgive me, O Master, and let these thoughts not become for me an occasion of sin, but be Thou gracious unto me and send forth Thy Grace from the holy Throne of Thy Glory upon me and let it overshadow the infirmity of me, Thine unprofitable servant. Give me understanding, and I shall learn Thy commandments and live; heal the chronic wounds of my soul; enlighten the eyes of mine intellect, that I may ever comprehend Thy providence towards me. What am I to say to Thee, the Foreknower, Who searchest the hearts and reins? Thou knowest that my heart thirsteth for Thee like a waterless land; I yearn and thirst for Thee, the Light of truth, the Bestower of salvation. Yea, send me the Grace of Thy mercy, and it shall suffice for me that it burn as a flame in my heart and consume its thorns and thistles, mine evil thoughts, and bedew and enliven the faculty therein that produceth pious thoughts, but which hath become useless and barren.

O Lord, Thou Liberator of the world, deliver my captive mind, snatch it from all these invisible foes that still hunt after it, and grant that I may pass the remaining time of my life unceasingly and peacefully in a chaste way of life, in a life well-pleasing unto Thee, in purity of heart, in serene patience, in constant meditation on Thy Divine and sacred laws, and in unwavering love for felicity in Thee. For Thou art the Life of those who truly live, O Lord, and in Thee is the eternal and blessed life of those foreordained for salvation. Yea, O Master Who art exceeding good, hearken unto my supplication, and let Thy Grace henceforth dwell in me, restraining mine intellect as with a bridle, that it may not, by going astray again, become darkened and be cast out from Thy light; by the intercessions of Thine All-Immaculate Mother and of all Thy Saints, for unto Thee are due all glory, honor, and worship, together with Thine unoriginate Father, and Thine All-Holy Spirit, now and ever, and unto the ages of ages. Amen.

Another Prayer, on the Same Subject

O Lord Jesus Christ my God, in Thee have I put my hope; save me from all them that persecute me, and deliver me, lest at any time he seize my soul like a lion, while there is none to deliver or to save. O Lord my God, in Thee have I put my hope; protect my soul, O Master Christ, lest the Devil despoil me and lead me astray from Thy righteousness, and I become like them that go down into the pit. O Thou my God, save Thy servant that hopeth in Thee and despaireth not of attaining Thine incorruptible and eternal gifts. And grant me a natural state of mind, that I may remember Thy much-desired Name, call upon Thee when in need, and patiently endure whatsoever befalleth me; grant me a peaceful and sinless day, that I may also traverse the coming night, O Thou Peace that passeth all understanding. For blessed art Thou unto the ages of ages. Amen.

Prayer to the Most Holy Theotokos, Against Shameful Thoughts

O All-Holy Lady Theotokos, drive away from me, thy sinful and unworthy servant, listlessness, forgetfulness, ignorance, negligence, and all evil thoughts, both shameful and blasphemous; expel them from my miserable and beleaguered heart, from my defiled soul, and from my darkened mind. Quench the flame of my passions, and have mercy on me and help me, for I am weak and distressed. Deliver me from the evil notions and preoccupations that beset me; and free me from all wicked deeds, both by night and by day. For most blessed art thou and glorified is thy holy name unto the ages of ages. Amen.

Source One and Two: Ioannes G. Thalassinos, Ὁ Πόλεμος τῶν Αἰσχρῶν Λογισμῶν: Ὁσίου Συμεὼν τοῦ Θαυμαστορείτου Ἱερὰ Ἀκολουθία ἐπὶ Ἐνοχλήσει Αἰσχρῶν καὶ Ρυπαρῶν Λογισμῶν (The Warfare of Shameful Thoughts: the Service by St. Symeon of the Wondrous Mountain For When One Is Vexed By Shameful and Filthy Thoughts) (Athens: Ekdoseis Nektarios D. Panagopoulos, 2007), pp. 55-59.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Saint Nikita the Stylite and Wonderworker (+ 1186)

St. Nikita the Stylite (Feast Day - May 24)

Saint Nikita the Stylite, a saint of 12th century Russia, led a dissolute life in his youth. Later, as a tax collector, he was cruel and vicious. However, upon entering a church on a certain occasion he heard the words of the Prophet Isaiah (1:16) 'Wash yourselves (of your sins), make yourselves clean;' with this a profound conversion was effected in his soul.

Thus converted and with a seared conscience, Nikita left his wife and all he possessed and entered upon the ascetic life in a monastery near Pereyaslavl. His first obedience by the abbot was to stand at the gate of the monastery for three days and confessed to all his sins. When the obedience was over, the abbot shockingly found Nikita at the swamps shirtless, where he became covered with mosquito and gnat bites in an effort of repentance. Dressed then in a hair shirt, he entered the monastery and became a monk. His discipline led him, with the blessing of the abbot, to dig a well outside the monastery and cap it with a stone, and binding himself in chains he stood on there in vigil, thus the title 'stylite'. He became well known as a healer. He healed Michael, Prince of Chernigov, of palsy.

Nikita Stylites was killed 24 May 1186 during a robbery, the thieves having believed the hermit to have been bound by silver chains as they were shining one day while he was praying. They took the chains off him and carried them away. When they came to the Volga River, the robbers saw the chains were not silver but worthless metal; so they threw the chains in the river. The pious elder Simeon of the Yaroslavl Monastery of the Holy Apostles Peter and Paul, was revealed the chains in a dream when he saw three bright lights in the Volga River. He told the abbot of the monastery and many people gathered to go find the chains. When they arrived at the river they saw the chains "floating on the river like a tree." With reverence they were brought back to the monastery of St. Nikita and placed in his tomb. Between 1420 and 1425 the tomb of the Saint was opened and his relics were found to be incorrupt. They lie in the Annunciation Chapel today.

Venerable Nikita is commemorated 24 May by the Russian Orthodox Church.

Тропарь, глас 4
Православным смыслом юношская возжеления возненавидев / и доблественныя нравы восприим, врага победил еси, / и во благоразумии Богу угодил еси, / и свыше от Него прием дар чудес, / бесы прогоняти, недуги исцеляти, / Никито преславне, / моли Христа Бога, да спасет души наша.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

What Harold Camping Got Right

Phil Cooke
May 23, 2011
The Huffington Post

The deadline has passed, the world has survived, and radio preacher Harold Camping was denied his apocalypse. All mainstream, orthodox Christians disagreed (including myself) with Mr. Camping's prediction. We believe that the Bible is right when it says that only the Father knows the day and time of His return. For Camping's followers however, it took 6pm Saturday to see that once again he got it wrong.

But let me tell you what he got right:

Getting the message out there.

Over the last few months, a remarkably tiny group of people have done a brilliant job sharing their message with the world. Inaccurate, wrong, or wacky -- they have told their story far better than major Christian denominations, mega-churches, and supposed "media" ministries have done. I travel more than most people, and I've seen their billboard campaign in cities like Los Angeles, the full page ads in major newspapers like USA Today, people handing out handbills outside subway stations in New York, mobile advertising, personal word of mouth, and more. It may not be the most creative or brilliantly designed, but at least it's unified and strategic.

All from a fringe radio preacher that 99 percent of Americans had never heard of six months ago.

In the meantime, what has the rest of the Christian world been doing to get their their message out?

The Methodist's seem to be trying to redefine church itself. Their advertising campaign "Re-Think Church" (can't remember that one, huh?) was more interested in social justice, in a vain attempt to appear relevant.

It's tough to find anything from the Episcopal Church, even though they've had a denomination-wide ad project since 1979 that seems to have resulted in an "advertising collaborative." They did try their warm and fuzzy "I am Episcopalian" series, but you don't remember that one either, right? At least on YouTube you can find a video of an Episcopal Bishop talking about "honoring your spiritual journey" -- whatever that means.

The Presbyterians haven't been sharing their message much lately, because they seem to be far more interested in making sure we all know that they're ordaining a handful of gay, lesbian, and transgender pastors. Apparently, appearing inclusive is more important than actually sharing a message of salvation.

Catholics seem to be more intent on just bringing back their lapsed members with their "Catholics Come Home" campaign.

The Baptists? Forget it. They can't even decide on a logo. After all, how are you going to agree on a common message nationally, when you can't get two Baptist churches in the same town to agree on what it should be?

The bottom line is that most of these anemic efforts are so focused on trying to convince us that Christians are "just like you" that they've completely lost any unique, compelling, or provocative message about the life-changing experience of following Jesus Christ.

So when it comes to telling his story and getting that story heard, fringe radio preacher Harold Camping and his small band of followers have embarrassed the largest denominations, churches, and Christian ministries in America.

This morning, his story was on the front page of the Los Angeles Times -- and most likely every other major paper in America. His story leads CNN and other news networks today. His story is being talked about on Twitter hashtags, blogs, social media sites, and on the street.

Why? Because Harold Camping and his followers really believe their message. When that happens, you're not afraid to spend money, creativity, passion, and energy to make sure your story impacts people's lives.

It's just a shame that it's the wrong message.

And even more of a shame the rest of us have done such a poor job of getting the right one out.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

The First Scientific Study of the Soul

On March 11, 1907 the first scientific study of the soul was published in The New York Times. The article is below (double click on image to enlarge):



Dr. Duncan MacDougall claimed to have discovered that at the moment of death we lose 21 grams of weight, which he believed was the approximate weight of the soul. However there are problems with this study. To read about these problems, read the following articles:

21 Grams

Soul Man

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

New Study Sheds Light On ‘Dark Side of Happiness’

May 23, 2011
Boston.com

The “pursuit of happiness’’ has been something Americans have valued ever since the Founding Fathers inserted it into the Declaration of Independence. Yet some psychologists now question whether happiness is, indeed, a worthwhile goal, since new findings suggest the pursuit could actually make us more unhappy.

In a review paper published last week in the journal Perspectives on Psychological Science, researchers define what they call the “dark side of happiness’’: feeling happy all the time can destroy relationships and careers, while avidly pursuing happiness is bound to lead to disappointment.

While some of us may envy those manic folks at the extreme end of the cheerful spectrum, they often have the same level of dysfunction as a person who’s too sad, some recent studies suggest. They may completely tune out sad events around them like, say, their spouse being laid off or a parent dying.

“It’s happiness turned inward,’’ says June Gruber, a professor of psychology at Yale University who is studying mania. “They’re attuned only to their own happiness’’ and completely oblivious to what loved ones are feeling around them. It’s the flip side of depression, where individuals can only focus on their own suffering.

Researchers have found that people with high emotional states are more likely to engage in riskier behaviors like drug and alcohol use, gambling, sexual promiscuity, and drag racing.

“They have persistent euphoria, may feel like they have special powers or instantly fall in love with strangers,’’ says Gruber. They also may constantly feel inspired but don’t use this creativity to produce very much.

Far more common than extreme happiness, though, is the overwhelming need to seek out happiness, evidenced by the current No.1 advice book on The New York Times paperback bestseller list called “The Happiness Project.’’ The author, Gretchen Rubin, spent a year thinking about what makes her happy by making lists, keeping a journal, and engaging in activities centered around increasing her state of well-being.

While the approach makes sense in theory, the latest studies have shown that trying to increase happiness can actually be counterproductive. “People often fall short of their goals and that can make them feel unhappy,’’ says Iris Mauss, a psychologist and researcher at the University of Denver.

In her recent research, Mauss discovered that those who value happiness the most have a lower state of well-being, less satisfaction with life, and are more likely to be depressed. She also found that teaching people to adopt happiness as a value caused them to feel more lonely and socially disconnected.

“People may be happiest when they’re not monitoring their own happiness," Mauss contends. That doesn’t mean we should completely abandon the pursuit of happiness and resign ourselves to leading unhappy lives. But rather, we should pursue happiness the right way — defining it as leading a meaningful life, rather than partaking in hedonic pleasures.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

N. A. Berdyaev: Concerning Fanaticism, Orthodoxy and Truth

By Nikolai Berdyaev

[Translator note: Russian usage has two different words both which translate as "orthodoxy". The word "ortodoksiya", which we render throughout in uncapitalised form as "orthodox", bears a generic and pejorative sense of a narrow-minded adherence to a "right-belief" of whatever the teaching, be it an orthodox Marxism or an orthodox atheism even. In contrast, the Russian word "pravoslavniya" ("right-glory" or "right-doxology") refers to Orthodox Christianity, and is capitalised throughout as "Orthodoxy", which as Berdyaev observes, properly precludes fanaticism].

The theme of fanaticism, connected with an adherence to orthodox teachings, is very relevant. History is rhythmic, in it the shifting of psychical reactions plays an enormous role. And we are entering a cycle, when there is prevalent the inclination towards an obligatory orthodoxy for all, towards an arrangement, stifling for freedom. This is a reaction against the XIX Century, against its love of freedom and humanity. The mass psychology of intolerance and fanaticism is being perfected. Amidst this, the sense of balance is shattered and man allows himself a maniacal obsession. The individual man is rendered a sacrifice of collective psychoses. There then transpires a strange effect of consciousness, the smothering and erasing of many essential human features, within all the complex of the emotional and intellectual life of man. Unity is attained not through fullness, but through ever greater and greater an impairment. Intolerance has an affinity with zeal. Zealotry is a psychosis, amidst which there is lost the sense of realities. The inner emotional life becomes distorted and fixates itself upon a single point, but that point, upon which the fixation occurs, is perceived altogether in an unreal way.

The man, in whom intolerance reaches the point of flaming up, of fanaticism, is like a jealous person, and he sees everywhere only one thing, only the treason, the betrayal, only the breaking of fidelity to this single thing, he becomes suspicious and mistrustful, he discovers everywhere conspiracies against his beloved idea, against the object of his faith and love. The man fanatically intolerant, just like the jealous person, is very difficult to bring back to reality. The fanatic, obsessed with a maniac pursuit, sees all around the snares of the devil, but he is always the one who himself persecutes, torments and executes. The man, in the grip of a persecution mania, and who senses enemies all around him, -- is a very dangerous being, he always becomes the persecutor, he it is that persecutes, rather than that they are persecuting him.

Fanatics, acting with the greatest of malice, coercion and cruelty, always sense themselves surrounded by dangers, and always they are beset by fear. A man always reacts with force out of fear. The emotion of fear is deeply connected with fanaticism and intolerance. To the fanatic, the devil always seems terrible and strong, and he believes in him more so, than he believes in God. Fanaticism possesses religious roots, but it readily passes over into the national and the political sphere. The national or the political fanatic likewise believes in the devil and his snares, though the religious category of the devil be completely alien herein. Against the powers of the devil there is always created an inquisition or a committee of the common salvation, an omnipotent secret police, a Cheka. These dreadful institutions are always created out of fear of the devil. But the devil has always proved himself to be the stronger, for he penetrates into these institutions and guides them.

There is nothing stronger than fear. The spiritual healing from fear is necessary for every man. The intolerant fanatic acts with force, he always excommunicates, imprisons and executes, but in essence he is weak and not strong, he is smothered by fear and his consciousness is terribly narrow, for he less believes in God than do the tolerant. In a certain sense it might be said that a fanatic faith is a weakness of faith, a lack of faith. This is a negative faith. Archimandrite Photii in the epoch of Alexander I believed chiefly in the devil and the Anti-Christ. The power of God seemed to him as nothing in comparison to the power of the devil. There was as little a belief in the power of Christian truth within the Inquisition, as there is in the Communist truth within the Soviet GPU [State Political Department]. Fanatic intolerance involves always a profound lack of faith in man, in the Image of God within man, a lack of faith in the power of truth, i.e. in the final end, a lack of faith in God. Lenin indeed lacked faith in man and in the power of truth, just like Pobedonostsev did: they were of one and the same sort. The man, having allowed himself to come under the obsessive grip of the idea of a worldwide peril and worldwide conspiracy of Masons, of Jews, of Jesuits, of Bolsheviks or of an occult society of killers, -- such a man ceases to believe in the power of God, in the power of truth, and he trusts only in his own coercions, cruelties and murdering. Such a man is, in essence, an object of psychopathology and for psychoanalysis.

A maniacal idea, inspired by fear, also is quite extreme a danger. At the present time fanaticism, the pathos of an universally obligatory orthodoxy of truth is to be seen in Fascism, in Communism, in extreme forms of religious dogmatism and traditionalism. Fanaticism always divides the world and mankind into two parts, into two hostile camps. This is a war setting. Fanaticism does not permit of the co-existence of various ideas and world-views. There exists only the enemy. The hostile powers become blended together and present themselves as a single enemy. This is entirely like, as if a man were to make the division not into the I and a multiplicity of other I’s, but rather into the I and the not-I’s, wherein the not-I presents itself to him as a single being. This strange simplification facilitates the struggle.

For the Communists there is at present [1937] only one enemy in the world -- Fascism. Every antagonist of Communism is thereby already a Fascist, and vice verse. For the Fascists every antagonist is thereby already a Communist. Amidst this setting the quantity of Fascists and Communists in the world has grown immeasurably. People hostile to Communism are placed on the side of Fascism and those hostile to Fascism are made out to be on the side of Communism. It is a union that transpires as regards one’s attitude of the devil, which is the other half of the world. They put before you an uneasy either/or choice, either Fascism or Communism. It is inconceivable, why I should have to choose between the two powers, both which deny the worth of the human person and freedom of spirit, both indeed practice making use of the lie and coercion, as methods suited to the struggle. It is clear that I ought to be on the side of some sort of third power: as in France happens with the trend, connected with "Esprit" and "La Fleche", simultaneously hostile to Capitalism, Fascism and Communism. Fanatic intolerance always presents one a false choice and produces a false line of division. But it is interesting, that the pathos of fanatic intolerance in our time is the result not of a passionate faith and conviction, but rather instead a contrived air of tension, often a stylisation, and it is the result of a collective agitation and demagoguery. There are, certainly, individual Communists and Fascists, believing and convinced to the point of fanaticism, particularly among the Russian Communists and the German Nazis, while rather less so amongst the Italian Fascists, who are more sceptical and susceptible to economic politics. But with the Communist and Fascist masses there are no sort of firm and thought-out beliefs and convictions. This is a mass, which is stylised under Fascism in consequence of agitation and imitation, but which also is interesting.

The contemporary pathos of intolerance is very distinct from the Medieval; back then there was actually a deep faith. The average man of our time possesses not ideas, he possesses instincts and affections. His intolerance is bound up with military matters and a thirst for order. He knows only whatever the truth useful for organisation. The twofold division of the world, evoked by demands for war, has its own inevitable consequences. Our epoch does not know critical and intellectual dispute nor does it know the struggle of ideas. It knows only exposing, expelling and chastisement. Those thinking differently are looked upon as transgressors. With the transgressor they do not dispute. In essence, there are no more intellectual enemies, there are only military enemies, belonging to mutually hostile domains. Dispute means tolerance, the most dangerous disputant is the tolerant man. He allows for the co-existence of ideas different than his own idea; he thinks, that from the colliding of ideas the truth can better be revealed. But at present in the world, there occurs no sort of struggle of ideas, there occurs rather the struggle of special interests and pugilists. The Communists, the Fascists, the fanatics of an "orthodox", be it Orthodoxy, Catholicism or Protestantism, dispute not with any sort of ideas, they rid themselves of the antagonist off into the opposing camp, upon which they then direct their polemic tirade.

The pathos of having an orthodox doctrine, which renders itself useful for the struggle and for the organisation, leads to the complete lack of interest for thoughts and for ideas, for cognition, for intellectual culture, and a comparison with the Middle Ages is very hapless for our times. No sort of idealogical creativity amidst all this is to be discerned. In this regard, our intolerant epoch is dramatically ungifted and wretched, in it creative thought has become placid, and it parasitically feeds on former epochs. The thinkers of the greatest influence in contemporary Europe, -- like Marx, Nietzsche, Kierkegaard, -- belong to that XIX Century, against which at present the reaction occurs. The sole area in which is to be found a dizzying level of creativity, is the area of technical discoveries. We live under the banner of the social, and in this area transpires much that is positive, but there are no sort of social ideas, there is at present no creating of social theories, and they all belong to the XIX Century. Marxism, Proudhonism, Syndicalism, even Racism, -- all issue from the thought of the XIX Century. The chief advantage of our century is in this, that it is more oriented towards realities, it unmasks the reality. But, having unmasked the old idols, the new century then creates new idols.

For the fanatic there does not exist a manifold world. This is a man obsessed by one thing. He has a merciless and malevolent attitude towards all and everything except for this one thing. Psychologically, fanaticism is connected with the idea of either salvation or perishing. This idea in particular takes fanatic hold upon the soul. There is one thing which saves, and all the rest causes to perish. It is therefore necessary to devote oneself completely to this one thing, and mercilessly to eradicate everything else, the whole manifold world, which threatens the perishing. With the perishing perdition connected with the manifold multiplicity of the world, there is connected also the emotion of fear, which always lies at the root of fanaticism.

The inquisitors of old were perfectly convinced that the cruel things done by them, the beatings, the burnings on the bonfires and other things, -- they were convinced that this was a manifestation of their love for mankind. They contended against perdition for the sake of salvation, they guarded souls from the allure of the heresies which threatened with perdition. Better be it to subject one to the brief sufferings in the earthly life, than the perishing of many in eternity. Torquemada was a non-avaricious and unselfish man, he wanted nothing for himself, he devoted himself entirely to his idea, his faith; in torturing people, he made his service to God, he did everything exclusively for the glory of God, and in him there was even a soft spot, he felt malice and hostility towards no one, and he was of his kind a "fine" man. I am convinced, that such a "fine" man, convinced in his faith and unselfish, was also Dzerzhinsky, who indeed in his youth was a passionately believing Catholic and indeed wanted to be a monk. This is an interesting psychological problem.

A believing, an unselfish, an intellectual man can become a fanatic, and commit the greatest of cruelties. To devote oneself without reservations to God or to an idea, substituting for God, whilst ignoring man, is to transform a man into a means and a weapon for the glory of God or for the realisation of the idea, and it means to become a fanatic -- wild-eyed and even a monster. The Gospel in particular revealed to people that it is impossible to build one’s relationship to God without a relationship to man. If the Pharisees put the Sabbath higher than man and were denounced by Christ for this, then also every man, who puts an abstract idea as higher than man, in effect confesses a religion of the Sabbath, which was repudiated by Christ. It is all the same regarding this, whether this be an idea of churchly orthodoxy, or of the state and nationalism, or the idea of revolution and socialism.

A man, mindful to the searching out and detection of heresies, intent upon the excommunicating and pursuing of heretics, is a man long since accused and judged by Christ, though he be not concerned over this. The pathological hatred for heresy is in the nature of an obsession by an "idea", which is set higher than man. But all the orthodox doctrines of the world are nothing in comparison with that one least amongst mankind and his fate. Man is the Image and Likeness of God. Every system however of ideas is the product begotten of human thought or thoughtlessness. Man is not to be saved nor perish by cleaving to some sort of system of ideas. The sole authentic heresy is a heresy of life.

The unmaskers and persecutors of heresy therein at the same time become heretics of life, heretics in relation to the living man, to mercy and to love. All the inquisitors were heretics of life, they were traitors to the life-vital dogma about man. Cyril of Alexandria in this regard was more so a heretic of life, than the heretics denounced by him. Behind the unmasking of heretics there is always concealed a sinful lust for domination, a will to might.

The pathological obsession with ideas of salvation and perdition, which medically should be attended to, can also be transferred to the social sphere. And therein this panicky idea begets revolutionary fanaticism and creates political institutions of inquisition. Intolerance and inquisitions justify themselves by the threat of social ruin. And thus, the Moscow Trials of the Communists are very reminiscent of witchcraft trials. In both the one and the other, the accused confesses to having criminal dealings with the devil. The human psyche changes little. And essentially, fanaticism always bears a social character. Man cannot be a fanatic when he is set before God, he renders himself a fanatic only when he is set before other people.

The fanatic always has need of an enemy, he always needs someone to execute. Dogmatic formulae that are "orthodox" are formed not in relation to God, but in relation to other people, they are formed because heretical opinions have arisen. Fanaticism always signifies social compulsion. Or one can take into account the forms of Self-Immolation, as for example, in the extreme currents of the Russian schismatics, but in this instance it likewise signifies social coercion under the reverse standard. Fanaticism of an extreme "orthodoxy" in religion bears a sectarian character. The feeling of satisfaction from belonging to a circle of the chosen is a sectarian feeling. Fanaticism quite fires up the will and readies it for the struggle, for inflicting torture and for bearing torture. Even with the most meek and mild of fanatics, conscious of the love for mankind within himself, and concerned for the salvation of his soul and society, there is an element of sadism. Fanaticism is always connected with the manifestation of torture. Ideologically, fanaticism is always a frenzy of "orthodoxy".

The categories of "orthodoxy", opposed to heresy, apply at present to types of thought, having nothing in common with religion, -- for example, to Marxism; but it is of a religious origin. Though it be of religious origin, all the same it is first of all a social manifestation and it signifies the domination of the collective over the person. "Orthodoxy" is a mental organisation of the collective and it signifies an exteriorisation of consciousness and conscience. "Orthodoxy" defines itself in opposition to an heresy. The heretic is a man, thinking not in accord with the mental organisation of the collective. People, preeminently esteeming themselves "orthodox" whilst denouncing heretics, i.e. those that think differently, love to declare that they are defending truth, and they set truth up higher than freedom. This is a very great mistake and self-deception by the "orthodox" mind-set.

The pathos of an "orthodoxy", fed by fanaticism, has nothing in common with the pathos of truth, being as it were actually contrary to it. Such an "orthodoxy" forms itself around themes of salvation and perdition, and such orthodox are themselves frightened and they frighten others. Truth however does not know fear. The guardians of "orthodoxy" are the ones that most of all distort the truth and are afraid of it. The guardians of various religious orthodoxies have distorted history. The guardians of a Marxist of Racist "orthodoxy" likewise distort history. These people always create vicious legends about a power hostile to them. Truth gets substituted for by what is useful, by the interests of the organisational order.

The man, fanatical over some sort of idea, like a person who would save himself alone, cannot be said to seek the truth. The search for truth presupposes freedom. Truth is not external to freedom, truth is bestowed only by freedom. Outside of freedom there is only that which is useful, but not truth, there is only the interests of power. The fanatic of some sort of orthodoxy seeks for power, and not for truth. Truth is not a ready given nor is it received passively by man, it is an endless task. Truth does not fall down from above upon man, like some sort of thing. And it is impossible to understand the revelation of truth in a naive-realistic sense. Truth is likewise both the pathway and life, it is the spiritual life of man. Spiritual life however is freedom and is not external to freedom.

The fanatics of an "orthodoxy", in essence, do not know truth, since they do not know freedom, they do not know spiritual life. Fanatics of a religious orthodoxy think that they are humble people, since they are obedient to churchly truth, and they accuse others of pride. But this is a dreadful mistake and self-delusion. Granted, in the Church there is enclosed the fullness of truth. But wherefore does such a religiously orthodox person fancy, that he in particular is master of this truth of the Church, that he in particular knows it? Wherefore in particular is he bestown this gift of the ultimate distinction of churchly truth from heresy, where in particular is this chosenness rendered him? This is pride and self-conceit, and no people are more proud and self-conceited, than the guardians of a religious orthodoxy. They identify themselves with churchly truth. There does indeed exist an orthodox churchly truth. But herein perhaps, thou as an orthodox fanatic, knowest it not, thou knowest but fragments of it by virtue of narrow-mindedness, ossification of heart, attachment to form and legalism, the absence of giftedness and grace.

A man, permitting himself to come into the grip of fanaticism, never presupposes such possible about himself. He, certainly, is prepared to acknowledge himself a sinner, but can never acknowledge himself as having fallen into error, into self-deception, into self-smugness. Which is why he considers it possible, amidst his own sinfulness, to torment and pursue others. The fanatic is conscious of himself as a believer. But perhaps his faith may actually possess no sort of relationship to truth. Truth is first of all an egress from oneself, but the fanatic is unable to go out from himself. He goes out from himself only in malice against others, but this is not an egress to others nor to an other.

The fanatic is an egocentric. The faith of the fanatic, his unrestrained and unselfish devotion to an idea helps him not in the least to overcome the egocentrism. The asceticism of the fanatic (and fanatics often are ascetics) does not at all conquer the absorption with himself, nor at all does it turn him to the realities. The fanatic of whatever the orthodoxy identifies his idea, identifies its truth with himself. And he is this idea, this truth. Orthodoxy -- this he is. And ultimately this is always rendered the sole criterion of orthodoxy.

The fanatic of an orthodoxy can be an extreme adherent of the principle of authority. But he always imperceptibly identifies the authority with himself and is never subject to any sort of authority in disagreement with him. The inclination towards authority in our epoch bears in particular suchlike a character. The authoritatively disposed youth recognises no sort of authority over himself, and he is conscious of himself as the bearer of authority. The ultra-Orthodox youth, who disdains freedom and denounces heresies, esteems himself the bearer of Orthodoxy. This is an example of just how far the idea of authority is contradictory and inconsistent. Authority in practice never vexes its fanatical adherents, it vexes others, their opponents, and does violence to them. In essence, no one subjects themselves to authority, if they consider it not to be in accord with their understanding of truth. The faith-confession of some sort of extreme orthodoxy, of some sort of totalitarian system, always signifies the desire to belong to a circle of the elect, the bearers of a true teaching. This means the flattering of people with pride and self-conceit. In comparison with this, the love of freedom signifies modesty.

It is very pleasant and flattering to esteem oneself as the solely knowing, of what such is the true Orthodoxy or the true Marxism-Leninism (the psychology is the same). Robespierre unrestrainedly loved the republican virtue, he was the most virtuous man in revolutionary France and even moreover the only virtuous one. He identified himself with the republican virtue, with the idea of revolution. This was a supreme type of the egocentric. Herein this was a lunacy built upon virtue, this was an identification of himself with it, and in him it was very hideous. The depraved Danton was a thousand times better and more human.

The egocentrism of the fanatic of whatever the sort of idea, of whatever the sort of teaching, expresses itself in this, that he does not see the human person, he is inattentive to the human personal path, that he is unable to establish any sort of relationship to the world of persons, to the living, concrete human world. The fanatic knows only the idea, but he does not know the man, he does not know the man even then, when he struggles for the idea of man. But he does not accept the world of the ideas of others rather than his own, he is incapable of entering into the exchange of ideas. He usually understands nothing and is incapable of accepting anything; this egocentrism namely deprives him of the capacity to understand. He altogether is unwilling to induce the truthfulness of something, he is altogether uninterested in truth. The interest for truth would lead one out of the vicious circle of egocentrism. But egocentrism is not altogether the same thing, as egoism.

The egoist in a vital sense of the word is quite able to egress outside himself, to turn his attention to other people, to be interested in a world of foreign ideas. But the fanatic-egocentric, unselfish, ascetic, unrestrainedly devoted to whatever the idea, -- is altogether unable to emerge, the idea centres him upon itself. For our troubled epoch not only are the flare-ups of fanaticism characteristic, but so too is the stylisation of fanaticism. Modern people are not altogether so fanatical and they are altogether not so attached to any orthodox teaching, as otherwise it might seem. They want to appear to be fanatics, they mimic at fanaticism, they pronounce the words of fanatics, they wreak the violent cruelties of fanatics. Yet all too clearly, this but veils over an inward empty void. The imitation and affected stylisation of fanaticism is but one of the ways of filling the empty void. This signifies likewise a creative impotence, an incapacity for thought. Pretensions to knowledge of an orthodox truth result in a condition of ignorance. The love for thought, for cognitive knowing, is likewise a love for criticism, for the developement of dialogue, a love for thoughts foreign to one, and not only one’s own.

They set forth tolerance in contrast to fanatical intolerance. But tolerance is a complex phenomenon. Tolerance can be the result of an apathetic indifference to truth, a non-distinguishing of good and evil. This is the lukewarm, liberal sort of tolerance, and it lacks the wherewithal to oppose fanaticism. There is possible a passionate love for freedom and for truth, a fiery adherence to an idea, but it is all amidst a tremendous attention to man, to the human path, to the human search for truth. Freedom can be perceived, as an inseparable part of truth itself. And a man ought not to tolerate everything. Towards the modern intolerance, towards fanaticism, towards the modern mania for orthodoxy one mustneeds not at all relate tolerantly, on the contrary, one mustneeds relate non-tolerantly. And to the enemies of freedom one mustneeds not at all bestow limitless freedom. In a certain sense we need a dictator of real freedom. Modern dictators however in all their forms rely upon a formation of soul, which discloses likewise an impairment of soul. A course in spiritual healing is needed.

Source: Translated by Fr. S. Janos

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Has Paganism Invaded An Orthodox Church?

In late January and early February of 2007 much commotion broke out over the iconography in the Church of "Panagia Axion Esti" in Axioupoli of Kilkis.

Originally the focus of the media was on just a few icons that caused an uproar, such as Lenin cutting with scissors the beard of St. Luke of Simferopol, a portrait of atheist writer Kostas Varnalis, and a portrait of the neo-pagan Angelos Sikelianos who envisioned the prevalence of all religions in Greece. Later it was observed that there were many more controversial images in this church which are nothing less than occultic and pagan symbols.

If Orthodox iconography is an expression of the teachings of the Church through shapes and colors that guides the people of God to a deeper liturgical experience, then naturally such symbolism and depictions should be unacceptable.

Particular attention was given to the depiction of the Platytera icon over the sanctuary where the Virgin Mary is depicted with one angel on her left and another on her right. On the mantiya of the left angel there is a questionable depiction. The depiction hearkens back to ancient Greek mythology. It depicts Ganymede, son of Tros of Dardania and of Callirrhoe. Homer describes Ganymede as the most beautiful of mortals, who was abducted by Zeus to be his cupbearer and have sexual relations with him, and he was rewarded for this by becoming the constellation Aquarius. In poetry he is a symbol of homosexual love and even paedophilia with his ideal effeminate male beauty. Even the Sistine Chapel has a painting of Ganymede being snapped up by an eagle, a symbol of Zeus, and this is titled "The Rape of Ganymede".


Such pagan stories were condemned by the Church Fathers. Athanasius the Great, in his book Against the Greeks, severely criticizes how the ancients made gods out of their passions in order to deify and worship their pleasures and desires. He specifically mentions the story of Ganymede who was abducted by Zeus and made into a god in the sky to deify his lewdness. John Chrysostom is not any less harsh in condemning such perversion, where in his Homily on Psalm 113 he reproaches all pagan images depicting lewdness and prostitution, and even brings up the example of Ganymede and the eagle. According to Chrysostom, this image showed the extent of the depravity reached by the people of the time.

How then did this image enter an Orthodox church in Greece? If iconography is supposed to be didactic and spiritual, what are we to make of this image in light of pagan mythology and the writings of the Church Fathers? What is more shocking however is that upon close observation we can see the naked Ganymede, who was known as the god of hunters, holding a cross in his hand! And this is depicted in the most sacred area of the church! Furthermore Constanse Cumbey says in The Aquarian Conspiracy that the cross is an ancient Egyptian symbol of fertility and transmigration (reincarnation). Could there be a connection between this fertility symbol being held by a deified symbol of homosexuality and paedophilia? For people involved in the New Age Movement, the cross merely symbolizes longevity, health, wisdom, peace and prosperity. Yet in Satanism the cross is a symbol of sex and fertility.


When these accusations were brought forward, the iconographer of the church in Kilkis gave the following response in summary.

First, he mentions that in the church he painted over 250 depictions in an area of 1,500 square meters. Out of these there were complaints of about ten depictions which were cut off from the context of the greater framework and misinterpreted.

Second, he mentions that the Metropolis of Goumenissa allowed the use of images from this church to be used in brochures, websites and several books. Nonetheless negative feedback has never presented itself until critics outside the Metropolis criticized the iconography in a sensationalistic fashion. Furthermore the work of painting the church, which took about seven years, was done with the supervision of priests and in a spirit of dialogue and freedom. He says: "The spiritual project managers did not want to impose at the outset a stranglehold, recognizing that the icon painter serves a functional art according to his charisma. The stylistic assimilation of my style draws from all the iconographic traditions." Then he brings up the minutes of the Seventh Ecumenical Council, which he says endorses uniformity in Faith, not necessarily uniformity in the expression and form of it through the icons.

Third, he explains the depiction of the man on the eagle on the mantiya of the Archangel Gabriel as follows. He says the man on the eagle is an early Christian representation of man rising up to God. Apotheosis, he says, was depicted by the ancients in three ways: 1. through an eagle, vulture or the winged goddess Nike; 2. a man on a quadriga (like Constantine the Great); or 3. through a ladder (like Jacob's Ladder). He further argues that the myth of Ganymede does not speak of paedophilia according to certain scholars. Thus the image should be seen as the Lord raising man to heaven through His incarnation and deifying us.


Fourth, the iconographer mentions that pagan themes were often used by Byzantines in iconography to depict Christian subjects. The mythical aquatic creatures in the Theophany icon is one example of this. Hades being trampled by Christ in the Resurrection icon is another.

Fifth, ancient pagan philosophers can be observed to be depicted in many churches and monasteries throughout Greece.

Sixth, the depictions of the zodiac signs in the dome show that Christ is the Lord of all creation, and have nothing to do with astrology. Similar depictions are also seen in many ancient Byzantine churches. One example is the Monastery of Lesnovo in 1346/7. It is depicted a few times in Crete as well. Photios Kontoglou even writes about how the zodiac signs are to be depicted by iconographers.


Seventh, the iconographer argues the same about his depictions of the Wheel of Life and the personifications of the virtues and passions. He cites the ancient character of their use by Christians in the Byzantine era and cites examples of churches and monasteries where they are depicted. That he tries to transform these pagan images into Christian ones is seen in the depiction of the god Eros, who holds wedding crowns in his hands to show that erotic love should only be within the blessing of holy matrimony. As for the Wheel of Life, this merely portrays the cycle of the life of man from birth to death, coupled with the ravages of time and the futility of worldly pleasures.

Eighth, he addresses the depiction of historical persons in churches, among whom he depicted Makriyiannis, Papadiamandis, Kontoglou and Pavlos Melas. He says he did this for purely historical reasons for their contribution to the Church. Kontoglou allows for these also. He notes that none of these have halos or bear the name "Saint". He argues that many examples of older churches support the depiction of historical persons and events, most popularly being the mosaic of Justinian and Theodora in San Vitale of Ravenna. Even St. Neophytos was depicted while he was alive.


In conclusion, the iconographer, known as K. Vafiadis, argues that the sensationalistic arguments of the critics are unfounded and they should have consulted him before they went to the media. He also argues that religious painters should be given the freedom and responsibility to assimilate and continue the tradition of iconography as handed down to them.

To what extent therefore are pagan images to be shown in iconography? Certainly there are valid arguments on both sides, but the debate remains open. The Church of Panagia Axion Esti in Kilkis is an excellent place to start this debate.

This article was adopted from these links:

H μαγεία εισέβαλε σε ορθόδοξο Ναό - Το σύμβολο της παιδεραστίας "Αγιογραφία"

Απάντηση του Αγιογράφου των τοιχογραφιών στην Αξιούπολη – Κιλκίς

See more photos here.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Eugene Ionesco and the Elder On Mount Athos

Eugène Ionesco (26 November 1909 – 28 March 1994) was a Romanian and French playwright and dramatist, and one of the foremost playwrights of the Theatre of the Absurd.

In an interview with French magazine Paris-Match, Eugene Ionesco mentions the following experience he had on Mount Athos:

I was born in an Orthodox family and I lived in Paris. At twenty-five years, I was a genuine young man of the secular culture of the then Paris. I got the idea to visit Mount Athos because of its position as - and indeed was - a place of asceticism in the Orthodox Church. And there I had another thought in mind: to confess. So I went and found a hieromonk, a spiritual father. What did I say to him? The usual sins of a secular young man who lives without knowing God. The hieromonk, after hearing me, said:

'Do you believe in Christ my child?'

'Yes, yes, I believe Father. Besides, I am baptized Orthodox Christian.'

'Well, my child, do you believe and accept fully that Christ is God and Creator of the world and us?'

I lost it, because this was the first time a person put forward this question to me, and which I had to answer honestly and take a position. Not just if I believe someone made the world, but that this God, the Creator of the world, has to do with me. And that I have a personal relationship with him! I replied:

'Father, I believe, but help me understand this fact well.'

'If you really believe, then all corrects itself.'

This incident caused the shift of Ionesco's life, who up to deep old age, being famous and notorious, lived as a pious and deeply faithful Orthodox Christian.

What do the words of the elder mean, that "If you really believe, then all corrects itself"? He wanted to show Ionesco that belief in God is not some abstract theory, or words full of hot air. Rather, faith in Christ means complete trust and obedience to a Person who is the Creator and my Savior at the same time.

Therefore, faith in Christ is not only in words, but mainly works of conscious repentance and returning back to the will of Christ and the embrace of Christ, which is the Church.


See the interview below with Ionesco:

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

The Spiritual Life Is Interesting Because It Is Dangerous

By Archimandrite Vasileios of Iveron

The spiritual life is interesting because it is dangerous. At any moment the last can become first and the first last.

Great are not the noise-makers who raise themselves as spiritual leaders or prophets, to amaze and to asphyxiate the world. Great is the humble and "nonexistent", who have received the supplication of the Spirit and are the consolation of the world. Grace is enough for them. And this they emit perpetually with the radiance that endlessly feeds from the contrition of the heart and the feeling that they have polluted the land with their presence. For they themselves are a blessing for all creation while they live and though they may pass, because the Holy Spirit gives meaning and reason to their presence and absence.

On the other hand, once you believe that you are something in virtue or knowledge, then you lose everything and you become polluted, regardless of whether you - or others - think that you are a model of virtue and the renewal of spiritual life.

That which is possessed by the Saints are not human talents or qualities: wisdom, poetry or rhetoric. But all these they sanctified by offering them to God. And through them is manifested the Grace that comforts and deifies humanity.

From the book Apolytikion. Translated by John Sanidopoulos.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Synaxarion For the Sunday of the Samaritan Woman

By Nikephoros Kallistos Xanthopoulos

SUNDAY of THE SAMARITAN WOMAN

On this day, the fifth Sunday of Pascha, we commemorate the conversation of the Lord with the Samaritan woman.

Verses

When thou camest to obtain perishable water, O woman, thou didst
Draw forth living water, whereby thou didst wash away the stains of thy soul.


Synaxarion

Since on this Sunday Christ openly confesses Himself to be the Messiah, which means “Christ” or “the anointed one” (for messa is the Hebrew word for oil), for this reason, the present feast is placed in the week of Mid-Pentecost; and also because, on the previous Sunday, Christ wrought a miracle at the Sheep’s Pool. On this Sunday, He works a miracle at Jacob’s well, which Jacob himself dug and bestowed upon his son Joseph. This was a special place, for here, in the vicinity of Mount Somor, the Samaritans inhabited many cities. Christ came to Sichar, where Jacob once lived with his daughter Dinah and his sons. Sychem, the son of Emmor the Chorræan, lusted after Dinah and raped her; thereupon, her brothers, provoked to zeal, suddenly entered their city and slew everyone, including Sychem and his father Emmor. Jacob lived in that place and dug the present well.

The Hebrews who originally lived on this mountain were not called Samaritans, but Israelites. During the reign of King Pekah, they offended God by falling into idolatry and other iniquities. During the reign of King Hoshea, who became a vassal of the Assyrians and paid tribute to them, the Assyrians came and deported the inhabitants of Samaria, together with their women and children, to their own country. Subsequently, the King of the Assyrians, in order that the land should not remain uncultivated, dispatched men from Babylon and the neighboring regions to settle in the territory of the Israelites; but God sent lions against the heathen, and by His permission, the lions devoured them. On learning of this, the King of the Assyrians wanted to know the reason why. The Israelites held captive in Assyria replied that it was because the settlers did not know the ways of the God of that place. Hence, the King sent them a priest from the Jews to instruct them in the Law of God. They accepted only the five books of Moses, rejecting the Prophets and the rest of Scripture, and continuing to worship their own idols. They were called Samaritans after Mount Somor. They were hated by the Hebrews who returned from captivity, because they were only semi-Jewish; the Jews did not eat with them, regarding them as worthy of abomination. For this reason, they frequently called Christ a Samaritan, on the ground that, like the Samaritans, He supposedly violated certain provisions of the Law.

Jesus, therefore, came to Sichar, and being weary from His journey, sat down at about the sixth hour of the day. A certain woman came from the city to draw water, the Disciples having gone to purchase food. Jesus asked her for water, but she excused herself by saying that the Jews had no dealings with the Samaritans (St. John 4:9); for she knew who He was, both by His accent and by His apparel. Jesus raised their conversation to a higher level by introducing the idea of spiritual water, which connotes abundance and cleansing power, since the Spirit is always likened to water and fire. The woman was sure, from the fact that He had not brought a bucket, that He did not have such water, and added that the well was deep. She then went on to talk about their forefather Jacob, saying that he had dug the well and that he and his children had drunk from it, commending the rich resources of the well, and also its usefulness and the coolness of its water. Christ, however, did not say that He was greater than Jacob, so as not to frighten the woman, but again He spoke about the water, thus proving His superiority; for one who drank from that water, He said, would in no wise be thirsty.


The woman asked for this water, but He told her to call her husband, since His words needed to be more firmly understood. She denied that she had a husband. Jesus, knowing all things, replied: “Thou hast well said, I have no husband: For thou hast had five husbands,” which the Law forbiddeth, and the sixth whom thou now hast, since thou livest with him unlawfully, “is not thy husband” (St. John 4:17-18).
Some interpreters consider the five husbands to be the five books of Moses, which the Samaritans accepted, and the sixth to be the very words of Christ, which were not yet hers, since Grace had not yet been poured out upon her. Other interpreters suppose that they are the five laws given by God—in Paradise, after the banishment of Adam and Eve from Paradise, in the time of Noah, in the time of Abraham, and in the time of Moses—and the sixth to be the Gospel, which she did not yet have. There are still others who say that they are the five senses.

The woman replied to Him, calling Him a Prophet, and then asked Him about the mountain where one should worship: should it be in Somor or in Jerusalem? For the Samaritans, being imperfect in their understanding, did not believe that God existed everywhere, but abode only in that place where they worshipped, that is, on Mount Gerizim, on account of the blessings given by God in that place, or because it was there that Abraham first set up an altar to God. The Jews, likewise, also said that one must worship God only in Jerusalem, and for this reason Jews from everywhere gathered there for feasts. Christ replied that the salvation of the world was of the Jews, but that God is non-material and that those who would be vouchsafed to worship Him would do so, not with sacrifices, as they had thitherto, but in Spirit and truth, and in this way they would not only know God, but would also know Him in the Holy Spirit and in the Son; for the Son is the Truth. The woman then said: “We have heard from the Scriptures that the Messiah cometh Who is the Christ” (St. John 4:25). Jesus, foreknowing the woman’s gratitude, said: “I am He.” The Samaritans, too, knew about the Messiah from the books of Moses, especially from the verse, “The Lord God shall raise up a Prophet for you” (Deuteronomy 18:15), and many others.

At the conclusion of this conversation, the Disciples returned and were amazed at Christ’s extreme condescension in talking with a woman. In the meantime, they besought Him to eat, both because of His weariness and on account of the heat of the day. But He spoke to them about eternal food, namely, the salvation of mankind and how they needed to harvest the labors of the Prophets.


When the woman reached the city and recounted what had happened to her, all the inhabitants were aroused and went to Christ, convinced that the woman would not have reproached herself unless she had come to know something of importance. They implored Him to stay with them and persuaded Him to remain for two days. He worked very many miracles during His sojourn there, which, on account of their multitude, are not recorded by the Evangelists.

The woman in question was the Samaritan woman, who was subsequently named Photine by Christ, and who, along with her seven sons, received the crown of martyrdom in the reign of Nero, after much hardship, in the course of which her flesh was scraped, her breasts were cut off, her hands were crushed, fine reeds were inserted under her fingernails, she was forced to swallow molten lead, and suffered countless other torments.

It should be known that the Emperor Justinian transferred from there with honor to the palace of God the Word, that is, the Great Church of Hagia Sophia, not only the mouth of that well, which he placed on a well outside the narthex, but also the stone on which Christ sat and conversed with the Samaritan woman. To this day, they remain there, healing every kind of disease, and providing remedies especially for those suffering from fevers and chills.

By the intercessions of Thy Martyr Photine, O Christ God, have mercy on us. Amen.


Kontakion in the Plagal of the Fourth Tone
The Samaritan Woman, having come to the well in faith, beheld You, the Water of Wisdom from which she drank plentifully and inherited the Heavenly Kingdom as one who is blessed forever.

Source

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

What Does It Mean To Worship God In Spirit and Truth?

By Sergei V. Bulgakov

In the words: "The hour is coming, and now is, when true worshippers will worship the Father in spirit and truth" [John 4], the Lord Jesus Christ points out the distinctive character and features of Christian Divine Services in comparison with Old Testament worship: Christian worship is the highest and fullest worship or service to God, a spiritual and true service in relation to the physical and typological Old Testament service. The Old Testament worship was only the sign of God's covenant with the chosen people and the omen of salvation for all of the human race, which was fulfilled with the advent of Christ. This was, so to say, a will written on parchment, which, as a simple parchment, has no value, but which is precious for the one holding it, because it gives to him the right to receive the valid inheritance in due time. Whoever fulfilled the Old Testament rites with living faith in the coming of a future Redeemer, even though he did not receive the grace of redemption and salvation, but had a faithful pledge of this salvation also might die in the good hope of being a participant in the kingdom of Christ. These are not Christian mysteries: whoever receives them with living faith in the Son of God who came and suffered for us, by that same action also truly receives the grace of deliverance, sanctification and salvation. The divine grace of the All Holy Spirit of God and the all-perfect blessing of the heavenly Father are also bestowed on us in all the sacred deeds of Christians. Therefore both the performing and the participating in the sacred deeds by Christians perform a spiritual service to God and worship the Father in spirit and truth.

Together with these words of the Lord about the worship of God in spirit and in truth means that when praying to God, we should pray with all our being, in both body and spirit; that the words and actions of our prayer be the expression of the valid feelings of our heart, and not the prayer of a solitary individual. The one who prays to God in spirit is the one who, saying the words of a prayer, says them not only with the lips, but with all one's soul and heart; who, protecting himself with the sign of the cross of Christ, looks in spirit at the Lord Himself crucified on the cross; who, bending his neck, bows before God with both his heart and soul; who, prostrating himself to the ground, subjects all of himself into the hand of God in deepest humility and submission of heart, in full devotion to the will of God; who, standing in the flesh before the image of the Lord or His Most Pure Mother, in spirit stands before Him Himself, sitting on the throne of glory, and with His Most Pure Mother standing on His right hand; who, kisses with his lips a holy icon of the Lord, kisses in his heart His most pure hands and feet.

The one who prays to God in truth is the one whose soul and heart is enlivened with that same faith and love, with those ideas and feelings, with those hopes and desires, with which the prayers of those men who composed the saints and Spirit-bearers; who, worshipping God in the temple, does not bow to the idols of passions outside the temple; who, serving God by participation in the Divine Services in the church, serves Him also by his very life and deeds; who, calling God his Father, really loves Him, fears Him, obeys Him and fulfills His holy will as His true son. "In prayer", as St. Tikhon of Zadonsk teaches, "we receive every good and consequently our enemy knowing this great benefit of prayer interferes with us, by presenting every image to us: like presenting thoughts of secular things, annoying evil thoughts, putting us into depression. Therefore even God-fearing people should be cautious in prayer to oppose the enemy by not letting him raise these thoughts in them, and to heed God alone, so that in both body and spirit we stand before God; and as we fall before Him in the flesh, so also we fall in spirit; that our tongue speaks about that which our mind and heart would not be silent; in a word, that the interior prayer agrees with the exterior".

Together with this, commanding us to worship God not only in spirit alone, but also in truth, the Lord orders us to pray not how we would think to do it, but how He Himself taught us by example and positive assertions and commandments (see Luke 6:12, Mt. 14:23; John 17:1; Luke 22:42-45; Mt. 26:39; Mt. 7:7, 21:22, Luke 22:40, John 14:13, 15:7; Mt. 18:19-20, 6:6; Mt. 4:9-13; Mt. 19:13-15, Luke 24:50, Mk. 8:7; Mt. 10:12, Luke 10:5-6; Mt. 21:13, Mk. 11:15, Luke 19:16; Mt. 26:26 -29, Mk 14: 22, Luke 22:19, 1 Cor. 11:24; Mk. 16:15-16, John 22:21-24), as the apostles of Christ and the holy fathers have established, and as the holy Church of Christ urges us to serve God. Whoever teaches to serve the Lord God not as our Holy Church urges us is the adversary of the Church of Christ and is a false teacher. The Dukhobors, the Molokans, the Stundists and many other heretics, for example are those who teach contrary to the direct teaching of the word of God: "So glorify God in your body and in your souls" (1 Cor. 6:20), means that they teach to worship God only in spirit; they reject the ceremonies of the Church, its communal Worship, and through it they even lose the redemptive grace of the Sacraments, losing also whoever listens to their teachings. They worship God not in spirit and truth and they ignobly or carelessly stand in prayer, especially when present at the Divine Services in the temple of God; they do not want to sign themselves with the cross or to bow their heads, as indicated in the Church commandment to sign oneself with the cross of Christ correctly and with piety. The sincere true prayer must even be expressed in those various visible, awesome external actions, which are established by the Holy Church (see the podr. Sbornik krat. poucheniia (details from a Collection of Concise Instructions), Priest A. Smirnov, 1 part, pages 214-221).

Source

Tweet

Share on Tumblr