Was Jesus Ignorant of the Time of His Second Coming?

Mark 13:32 and Matthew 24:36 seem to indicate that not only are all men and angels ignorant of the time of the Second Coming of Christ, but that also Jesus is ignorant of the time of His imminent return. In fact, Jesus says that only the Father knows the day and the hour of the Second Coming of Christ. Therefore, was Jesus indeed ignorant of the day and hour of His Second Coming?

Two Church Fathers, St. Basil the Great and St. John Chrysostom, specifically addressed this issue. St. Basil's response can be read here, and St. John's response can be read here.

St. Basil's response can be read in his letter to Amphilochius of Iconium (Letter 236), where he adamantly states that Jesus was in fact not ignorant of His Second Coming. First, he states that the opinion that Jesus was ignorant of His Second Coming has its origins from the heretics, and that the tradition he received from his youth and by all Orthodox is that Jesus was in fact not ignorant. Second, he shows how to properly interpret these passages of Scripture. He puts forwards Mark 10:18 where Jesus says that "there is none good but one, that is, God." He explains that this does not exclude that Jesus is good, but rather indicates that God the Father is the first good. Also in Matthew 11:27, where Jesus says, "No one knoweth the Son but the Father", we are not to believe that the Holy Spirit is ignorant of the Son, but rather that to the Father naturally belongs the first knowledge. St. Basil also puts forward other passages of Scripture where Jesus talks about knowing when His Second Coming will be, such as Matthew 24:6. He further brings forward the fact that Jesus as man often spoke of Himself in human terms and weaknesses, but that as God He possessed the "wisdom and power of God" (1 Corinthian 1:24).

It should also be pointed out that most Byzantine texts of the Gospels do not contain the words "nor the Son" in Matthew 24:36. It seems that this was added to the text of the Gospel of Matthew based on the text that does contain it, in Mark 13:32. This is a debateable issue why this is so, but St. Basil refers to this fact when he shows that though Mark does seem to indicate an ignorance of the Son, Matthew does not. St. John Chrysostom, in a rare exception, adds "nor the Son" in Matthew. For Basil, this indicates that the words "but My Father only" are offered in contradistinction to the angels and men, but not the Son. Rather, Matthew more clearly shows that the Father has first knowledge by nature, whereas the Son has knowledge through the Father. Otherwise there would be a contradiction here with John 16:15, where Jesus says: "“All things that the Father hath are Mine." John 10:15 also states clearly: "As the Father knoweth Me even so know I the Father."

St. Basil clarifies Mark 13:32 when he says that it should be read in the following manner: "Of that day and of that hour knoweth no man, nor the angels of God; but even the Son would not have known if the Father had not known, for the knowledge naturally His was given by the Father." Keeping in mind that the knowledge and divinity of the Son comes from the Father, this passage is much more clearly understood.

According to St. John Chrysostom in his Homilies on the Gospel of Matthew, the reason Jesus seems to indicate ignorance in this passage was so that the disciples may not even entertain the thought of inquiring into the matter. Though Jesus does know the time of His Second Coming, He is pointing out here a greater mystery, that the source of this knowledge comes from the Father and through the Father is given to the Son. But since the disciples do not yet understand this relationship between the Father and the Son, to them it is merely an indication to not further inquire into the matter. It appeared to them that the Son was ignorant so that they not feel scorned by Jesus or perplexed why they were not given knowledge He possessed. Thus, by Jesus saying "nor the Son", He was indicating to the disciples that He is indeed honoring them and has concealed nothing from them, but that knowledge of the Second Coming would be more harmful to them rather than beneficial. Meanwhile, St. John clearly indicates that the time of the Second Coming is perfectly known by the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit; for the Holy Trinity, Who created heaven and earth, created time as well. Mankind has no need to know neither the time of the judgment, nor how the Son will judge.

St. John Chrysostom puts the following words into the mouth of Jesus to explain this further: "For that indeed I am not ignorant of it [the Second Coming], I have shown by many things; having mentioned intervals, and all the things that are to occur, and how short from this present time until the day itself (for this did the parable of the fig tree indicate), and I lead thee to the very vestibule; and if I do not open unto thee the doors [of knowledge], this also I do for your good."

St. John even shows how Jesus speaks specifically of knowing the day and hour of His coming when He speaks of His coming suddenly and unexpectedly in the verses following Matthew 24:36.

We can thus conclude that according to the tradition of the Church, Jesus is not nor ever was ignorant of the time of His Second Coming.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Herman Tristram Engelhardt: How I Became Orthodox

Mr. Engelhardt was born in Texas to Roman Catholic parents, but became Orthodox in his mature years, taking the name Herman after St. Herman of Alaska. He studied philosophy and medicine and is now a professor at two Universities in Houston, Texas. His research has been done mainly in Bioethics and his most important contribution to Orthodox ethics is his book "The Foundations of Christian Bioethics".

At the Symposium for Intensive Care organized in Bucharest, Professor of Philosophy and Medicine Tristram Engelhardt presented a paper. During a discussion in Bucharest, a question was put forward on how he became Orthodox. His reply is published below.

Herman Tristram Engelhardt: How I Became Orthodox

How did I become Orthodox? The answer is: only through the love of God.

Once I went to Mount Athos and one monk told me: "Look around you at all these people. The repentance of each of these people is a miracle from God."

I had very devout Roman Catholic parents who sent me to a very good Roman Catholic school, and in the fifth grade when I was reading about the history of the Church, I realized that the Church of the first five centuries was something I had never seen before. So I asked a nun: "Why isn't the Roman Catholic Church like the early Church?" The sister looked at me like I was crazy. And because I was only in fifth grade, I stayed quiet.

Elementary school seemed very boring, but I liked the Mass. And I really liked being an altar boy. Because I was lazy, when I went to the sanctuary I did not have to be in class. I liked being an altar boy in church more than sitting in class.

In the eighth grade, in 1954, a Roman Catholic priest told me that a Uniate bishop would be coming from Palestine and that he was to perform the Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom. I did not know what that was, so I had to read it to be the altar boy for the Liturgy. And I did this. But I did not know that there was Matins before Liturgy, and for one and a half hours I could not understand what was happening. After Liturgy, this old Bishop came to me and told me: "Come here, this is for you. All true Christianity will disappear from the West in the course of your life. True Christianity will come like a light from the East and this will be very important for you." I could not imagine what he meant, so I asked him, "What?" And he repeated, "All Christianity will disappear from the West during your life. True Christianity will come as a light from the East." I asked my father, "What could this mean?" My father said, "Don't worry, he's just some crazy Palestinian." Not understanding what was meant, I continued on with my life.

In 1984 a representative of the man who came second in the last election for Pope of Rome (when Benedict XVI was elected) called me. If one wishes to be a candidate for Pope, one must start early, like a presidential candidate of the USA, except that one does not know when the election will be held. A group of intellectuals was being put together to help him in his campaign, and I was asked to become one of them. The first invitation was to go to Milan in six weeks for a meeting. I told the person who called that I could not go in six weeks, because I was too busy. But then my second daughter, who is now the mother of five sons, asked, "Can I come with you to Milan?" And how could a father tell his fourteen-year-old daughter no? So I said, "OK". The person on the phone told me that he would pay for expenses. I worked a lot with this cardinal. And I understood for the first time in my life that the entire Christianity of the West was the creation of Germans who fashioned Roman Catholicism, as well as some French and Swiss who had made the Reformation.

In 1988 I was invited to spend a year as a Fellow at the Institute for Advanced Study in West Berlin. Academically, my life was successful. But I felt like a whore, realizing that what I was doing was wrong. I prayed, "My God, if there is a true religion, show it to me and I will convert." For the first time in my life I had an experience that I had never felt before.

Within a week, we received invitations for a presentation of Orthodox music and went. We attended, but the people looked so strange and ethnic. We then went to Berlin for a year (1989-1990). We're from the South where it is very hot and we were afraid to stay in Berlin for Christmas where we would freeze. We wondered where to go so as not to freeze during the Christmas holiday. I arranged to give lectures at the University of Istanbul and at Marmara University. So on Christmas day my wife said: "Where can we go for Mass?" And I said: "Let's go to the Greeks." And we went to the Phanar. It was our first Orthodox Liturgy. Patriarch Demetrios was there. During the Liturgy, my second daughter touched me and said, "Papa, this is the true religion, is it not?" And I replied, 'I'm afraid you have a point, because it is very poor."

We went back to Texas and I began to ask if a Texan can become Orthodox. Someone who was a Baptist from east Texas told me, "If I can become Orthodox, so can you." And so with the patience of God my two daughters and I converted. My wife, who is Irish and was raised Roman Catholic, has authored two stories about her conversion: "Bless me, Saint Patrick, I am Coming Home" and "From Rome to Home".

I thank God for His mercy!

OrthodoxWiki: H. Tristram Engelhardt

Being Christian in a Post-Christian World: Herman Engelhardt

H. Tristram Engelhardt, Jr.'s Faculty Page At Rice University

Orthodox Teachers: Dr. H. Tristram Engelhardt, Jr.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

The Finding of the Holy Icon of St. Demetrios In Syros

On the Greek island of Syros in the Cyclades, in the village of Vapori a little outside Hermoupolis, on 25 May 1936, the icon of the Holy Great-Martyr Demetrios the Myrrhgusher was discovered. It was found by a resident of Hermoupolis by the name of Manouso Pelekis after he was told of its whereabouts in a vision. On the spot of its discovery, Metropolitan Philaretos of Syros built a magnificent church to honor the miracle. This is the first church the visitor to the island sees when approaching Syros by sea. The discovery of the icon of St. Demetrios is celebrated on the last Sunday of May.







Source

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Third Finding of the Head of St. John the Forerunner

The Third Discovery of the Precious Head of the Holy Prophet, Forerunner and Baptist John occurred around the year 850 (see the account of the First and Second Discoveries on February 24). The head of St John the Forerunner was found in the city of Emesa during a time of unrest at Constantinople connected with the exile of St John Chrysostom (November 13).

The head was transferred to Komana during the Saracen raids (about 820-820) and it was hidden in the ground during a period of iconoclastic persecution. When the veneration of icons was restored, Patriarch Ignatius (847-857) saw in a vision the place where the head of St John the Forerunner was hidden. The patriarch communicated this to the emperor, who sent a delegation to Komana. There the head was found a third time around the year 850.

Afterwards the head was again transferred to Constantinople, and here on May 25 it was placed in a church at the court. Part of the head is on Mt. Athos. The Third Discovery of the Head of John the Baptist is commemorated on May 25.

Source


Apolytikion in the Fourth Tone
Christ God hath revealed to us thy truly ven'rable head as a divine treasure that had been concealed in the earth, O Prophet and Forerunner. Wherefore, as we gather on the feast of its finding, with our hymns inspired of God, we praise Christ the Saviour, Who by thy mighty prayers saveth us from every kind of harm.

Kontakion in the Second Tone
Since we have obtained thy head as a most sacred rose from out of the earth, O Forerunner of grace divine, we receive sure healing in every hour, O Prophet of God the Lord; for again, now as formerly, thou preachest repentance unto all the world.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

How Saints Responded To Apocalyptic Questions

By St. Nikolai Velimirovich

Some misguided men think more about the end of the world than the end of their lives even though it is obvious that for him to whom the end of his life comes the end of the world has come.

A brother standing before St. Seraphim of Sarov continually kept in his mind how he was going to ask the saint about the end of the world. St. Seraphim discerned his thought and said to him: "My joy! You think highly of the wretched Seraphim. How could I know when the end of the world will be and that great day when the Lord will judge the living and the dead and render to each one according to his deeds will be? No, no, this is impossible for me to know!"

And when the saints did not know how will the sinners know? Why should we know, that which the Savior Himself did not find beneficial to reveal to us? It is much better to think that our death will come sooner than the end of the world rather than the end of the world before our death.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Discovery of the Relics of a Saint At Neamt Monastery

The pavement at Neamt Monastery where the Saint was found.

By Hieromonk Ioanichie Balan

Suddenly on May 26, 1986 the paved path leading to the southwest entrance of the church of Neamt Monastery began slowly rising up to 30 cm. The pavement consists of large pieces of stone. The piece of stone that was rising was the length of a man and the width of a coffin, but they did not understand what it was. They thought the sewer broke down. But when there is a ground fault it goes down, not up. They dug a meter and found nothing. The stone and concrete, the dimension of the coffin, had been rubbed like flour: "What could possibly be here?" - "Come let us close it up." - No, let us dig a little more. What do we have to lose?" They dug a half meter more, and what did they find? Great miracle! The relics of a saint! Some say it's Saint Paisius Velichkovsky (who lived in this monastery from 1779 to 1794). This is what they did in the old days. When you wanted to hide something valuable you put it in a place where a lot of people passed by so that no one suspected anything.

Nobody knows which Saint it is. We pray to God to reveal his name.

It was a moment of great upheaval. People came to the monastery. They lit candles. The Securitate of Ceausescu came to the monastery. Unpleasant events occurred. Now I do not want to say. They stopped the people in Tirgu Neamt (being the last village before the monastery). They put obstacles for the bus to not pass. The fathers of the monastery, seeing that things were getting complicated and dangerous, put the relics in the coffin and hid them in a hiding place inside the wall of the monastery, which has a thickness of 2-3 meters.

The next day came the Securitate. There were queries and investigations. Two to three months passed by. More was coming. They asked us: "Where are those bones. Give them to us." They then said among themselves: "Go to the ossuary." - "Where is it?" - "Down there in the cemetery." They went there, and upon seeing so many skulls they came out scared. As if they had a hindrance of conscience. They left and did not bother anyone again. Today the relics of the unknown saint are located in the narthex of the Neamt Monastery in Romania.

Source: Translated by John Sanidopoulos

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Video: Fr. Ioanichie Balan On Orthodox Vigilance

Fr. Ioanichie (1930 - 2007) was a well-known author and preacher in Romania and a spiritual son of Elder Cleopa.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Commencement Address of Dr. Christos Yannaras

Below is the controversial commencement address of Dr. Christos Yannaras delivered at the commencement of Hellenic College/Holy Cross School of Theology on 21 May 2011. If one is not familiar with many of the writings of Dr. Yannaras, especially his book Orthodoxy and the West, it will be hard to understand what he is talking about specifically. These are very generalized comments of a deep topic that I have also addressed here at Mystagogy many times, especially the first half of the address. I don't fully agree with the presentation, but it is worthwhile to give some thought to it.

Your Eminences Archbishop Demetrios of America and Metropolitan Methodios of Boston,

Reverend President of Hellenic College and Holy Cross Greek Orthodox School of Theology,

Dear Professors of the School, Dear Students, Ladies and Gentlemen.

Please accept my warmest thanks for the honor you are doing me today: the bestowal of an honorary doctorate by the Theological School of Holy Cross. And the honor of your presence at this ceremony.

Today's event has been preceded by a special favor shown to me by the School, for which I am also grateful: the publication by Holy Cross Orthodox Press of four of my books, with two more under production. The launch of a book on the American market is a precious gift to an author: it opens up greater possibilities for his participation in current debates to be judged and evaluated. I am happy to be writing in Greek, a language with striking powers of expression. But it is only by access to an English-speaking readership that I can entertain the hope that my work will be judged by the most demanding standards.

Academic custom demands that someone honored with a doctorate from an academic institution should set down, as a symbolic response, a brief account of his scholarly contribution, a kind of echo of Cavafy's poem "I Brought to Art." I shall attempt to do this, and try to show how fresh and relevant today is an old and much debated topic: the relationship between Orthodoxy and the West, between the Orthodox ecclesial tradition and modern Western life.

I was set this topic "Orthodoxy and the West" here at the Theological School of Holy Cross forty years ago (the first time I came to America) in 1970. I was then a postgraduate student in Paris, and I was invited to participate in a conference of the Orthodox Theological Society in America. Four decades later, what relevance does that same topic have and what is new about taking it up again?

A timely element is, I believe, the problem of neoconservatism and fundamentalism which currently afflicts the way life is led in most Orthodox churches. The "Zealots" of Orthodoxy, as our own fundamentalists are called, are as a rule ; fanatically anti-Western: they regard the Christian churches and confessions of the West as opponents of the Orthodox camp, as a real threat. They proclaim that the West is steeped in error and at the same time has evil designs on Orthodoxy. Thus for the Zealots any attempt at Orthodox "dialogue" with Western Christians, any participation in the "ecumenical movement" signifies a betrayal of Orthodoxy, a surrender to error, an abandoning of the conviction that the Church is One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic.

But this Zealotry certainty does not constitute a defence of the decisions of the Councils; it does not derive from a conciliar expression of catholic ecclesial experience. It is an individual choice and conviction, based usually on the opinion of some geron, or elder, also chosen individually, who is lent "objective" authority by his hagiorite, or other, monastic affiliation. The defense of Orthodoxy by the "conservatives" is conducted on the basis of their individual choices and judgements, not on the basis of the Church's conciliar expression. It is therefore a defense thatmanifestly undermines the coherence of the ecclesial body. It invalidates the conciliar system; it denies the episcopal ministry.

Thus the individualistic character of Zealotry-Fundamentalism and the accompanying idolization of formalism - of "dogmas" and "canons" rendered independent of ecclesial experience - assimilate the "Orthodoxy" of conservative Christians to every other ideological "orthodoxy": to that of conservative Marxists, conservative Freudians, etc. All these "orthodoxies" have the same characteristics in common:

They attribute a quality of infallible authority to "sources": to the original formulations of an empirical testimony, or of a hermeneutic theory, or of a proposition concerning regulative principles (of a practical deontology). And they bitterly oppose any deviation from the original formulation because its objectified "truth" can be possessed and offer assurance to the individual, cladding the ego in certainties. The texts of Marx or Freud or the Fathers of the Church become the infallible measure that gauges the correctness of every opinion, view, or proposition - that judges which person individually possesses the truth and which is in error, which person will be saved and which will go to perdition. And the measure of this judqernent is applied authoritatively by the "zealot," the defender of original authenticity.

It is thus perfectly obvious that this understanding of "Orthodoxy" is to be identified with the specific product of the post-Roman West that we call "ideology." In defining ideology, I would say that it is the transformation of experiential knowledge into a certainty that is purely intellectual - or, more generally, the substitution of experiential assurance (which is always verified through the relations of sharing in the experience) by individual (intellectual-psychological) convictions. Ideology replaces the attaining of participation in a shared experience of truth simply with the individual understanding of the formulations of truth or with something inferior to that: blind insistence alone on the letter of the formulations.

The cultural paradigm generated by the post-Roman West, which has now attained global dimensions, is proudly acknowledged to be individualist - to be founded on the absolute priority of the potentialities and needs of the natural individual, on the protection of individual rights. On the basis of this fact one could say that one of the most western manifestations of the West today is the ideological anti-Westernism of the "Orthodox" opponents of the West, the individualism of the "Zealots" of Orthodoxy.

This paradox proves that the issue of relations between Orthodoxy and the West remains extremely topical, since in the extreme case of the fundamentalist "Zealots" the historical challenge that arose for the Church with the arrival of Modernity becomes abundantly clear. The West in Modernity is no longer the portion or party that at the time of the Schism cut itself off from the body of the One Catholic Church. Now the whole of Christendom is the West, since all of us who bear the name of Christian live integrally and self-evidently within a Western cultural context; we embody the Western mode of life. Our routines, our mental outlook, our reflexes, our prioritization of needs, the way our social institutions are formed and function are all absolutely obedient tothe Western-individualistic not the social-ecclesial model. We live, we think, and we act in the mode fashioned by Augustine, Anselm, Aquinas, and Descartes.

That is why on the level of Modernity, too, our opposition to the West, whatever our defence of ecclesial Orthodoxy, is inescapably fleshness, unrelated to the reality of our common life: an abstract piece of ideology. We recognize differences between Christians but we regard them as "confessional": as by definition ideological. They are discussed by scholarly committees of "specialists" - university professors and bishops (that is, the "professional cadres" of ideology). It has never occurred to us to bring people of experience into ecumenical dialogue, people such as authentic monks and gifted artists.

The incontrovertible fact of the Westernization of Christians in the Modern age leads us to understand that the ecclesial critique of the errors that led the West to break away from the body of the One Catholic Church cannot today (in the nature of things) be anything but self-criticism (that is, repentance - metanoia). There is no entity called the West "confronting" Orthodoxy; the West is "within us" and Orthodoxy is the common nostalgia of all who perceive the falling away of both East and West. The pioneers of self-criticism, the guides to metanoia, are not those who engage in "dialogue" about "primacy" and "infallibility," or about the puerile doctrine of the Filioque, but those who have boldly attempted to make a painful break with moral error: Nietzsche, Heidegger, and Sartre, and closely related to them in the language of art, Baudelaire, Kafka, Bergman, and Fellini: All those who have proclaimed painfully that the alienating transformation of a relationship with God into ideology and legalism has led to the death of God - the God of individual "convictions" and crutch of egocentric Morality has died: "we are all his murderers" - Wir haben ihn ge late t, wir aile sind seine Marder!

An attempt to express a criticism of the West in the form of Christian self-criticism began with sincerity and with no little risk in the 1960s on two fundamental levels of interconnected topics: On the level of ontology, with a proposition for the formation of a new (and methodologically coherent) hermeneutic of the existential event on the basis of the reality of person and eros. And on the corresponding level of the reconnection of the ecclesial event with the chiefly existential problem, on the basis of the so-called eucharistic ecclesiology.

These two bold undertakings, which even today are still denigrated and ridiculed, are both based on the admission of a pair of propositions: that of the empiricism preserved by the apophaticism of the formulations of knowledge, and also that of the empirical realism of the distinctions between nature (or substance) and person, and between nature and nature's energies. Only by the admission of these propositions can the existential otherness of personal hypostasis be grasped as the empirical reality of freedom.

The ontology of the person and eucharistic ecclesiology implement criticism of the West as Christian self-criticism, because they were both born from a consistent grappling with the impasse to which the West (and now also the East) has been led by intellectualism and legalism - the rendering of Christian "religiosity" independent of the ecclesial event. The ontology of the person could not have emerged if it had not been for the need to confront Heidegger's nihilism - as an attempt to articulate as an experiential counter-proposition a (Christian) metanoia for the (Christian) errors which lead with the utmost consistency to Heidegger - to the plumbing of the depths of existence's absence of "meaning." And eucharistic ecclesiology could not have emerged except as an attempt to shed light on ecclesial catholicity, as the existential wholeness of the kath'ekasto, the uniqueness of each of us, in the face of the nightmarish manifestations of the totalitarianism of ideologies.

I am grateful to you for honoring this evening an attempt to give a self-critical account of the relationship between Orthodoxy and the West.

Source

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

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