Saint Ioannikios the New of Romania (+ 1638)

Saint Ioanichie the New (Feast Day - July 26)

Saint Ioannikios (Ioanichie) the New was born of pious parents from Muscel in Romania. From a young age he rejected worldly things and was pulled towards Cetatuia Monastery. For fifty years Saint Ioannikios lived in asceticism in a cave on Mount Negru Voda. His ascetic efforts, prayers for the whole world, his fasting, and his tears were covered with mystery. Only once a week a monk would come to bring him bread and water. Also the abbot of the monastery would come very often to bring him Holy Communion for him to receive.

Saint Ioannikios the New was the spiritual guide of the great prince Michael the Brave (1593–1601) and the ruler Matei Basarab.

The monk Ioannikios foresaw the year of his repose (1638) and inscribed it on the upper wall of the cave.

In 1944 Fr. Poimin Barbieri, abbot of the Cetatuia - Negru Voda Skete, as it was then called, was lowered through a hole into the cave, near a steep wall fourteen meters high, while behind him there was a cliff one hundred feet deep. Entering the cave with the monk Isidore, he found lying on a stone the relics of Saint Ioannikios. On a rock he found engraved in Cyrillic letters: "Ioannikios monk, 1638".

The relics of the Saint remained in a chapel of the Cetatuia Monastery from 1944 until 1948. That year they buried him near the door of the church.

In 1996 the chancellor was authorized by the local hierarchy to build a new cemetery when he refound the relics of the Saint.

Today the relics are in the Cetatuia Monastery. He was canonized by the Holy Synod of the Church of Romania in June of 2009. His memory is celebrated on July 26.

Source: Translated by John Sanidopoulos

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Caution Regarding the "Prophecies" of Elder Paisios

By Theo

I met Fr. Paisios in 1975. Ever since I met him 30-40 times, almost every time by myself. I never heard him say "prophecies", such as when there will be wars, when we will take Constantinople, who will be commander-in-chief, etc. After his death I saw many "prophecies" distributed in magazines and books or disseminated by the media. I thought he might have actually said such things, but not to me. Until about a month ago when I heard from a friend of mine that the day before he visited the Holy Mountain and Fr. Isaiah, who was a novice of the Elder and now lives in his cell, told him that the Elder never uttered such "prophecies", and never referred to when there will be war, etc.

As for the politicians who "use" his name, the last time I met him, together with others, on 10/09/1993, which was election day, he told us with indignation about politicians of the then two major political parties who exploited his name (of course he never recommended a politician, for the people to vote for) to gain votes and how he supposedly "decorated" one of them when he met him.

The above demonstrates the unethical use of some holy people and Mount Athos by "well-wishers". Figures like Fr. Paisios aimed towards the depth of the soul, towards that which remains and leads us to Christ and eternity, and not to the frivolous and transient.

Let those who read such "prophecies" and recommendations be careful then, and not accept and propagate them so easily.

Source: Translated by John Sanidopoulos

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

A Balanced View Of Ecumenical Dialogue

From an interview with Metropolitan Hierotheos of Nafpaktos:

Question: The question of the participation of the Orthodox Church in what is called “ecumenical dialogue” with heterodox confessions raises great unease and disagreements inside the Church community. Between the overenthusiastic immersion in such rapprochement with the heterodox, which bleaches in a sense the boundaries dividing the Church and the world, and the often too easy scandalization by every move unjustifiably suspected of even slightly compromising the identity of the Orthodox Church as Una Sancta, which had led occasionally to schism, what is the right course that should be taken in dealing with this issue? Do you consider that such “ecumenical dialogue” could be of any use to the Church?

Answer: The two temptations you mention are dominant in our days. Sometimes there is an ultra-optimism leading to secularism and doctrinal minimalism, while sometimes there is a reaction leading to fundamentalism-fanaticism.

The point is not dialogue per se. The Apostles and the Fathers engaged in dialogue. The problem is a dialogue which alters theology as revelation of truth, and the Church as the unique Body of Christ, and pastoral care as the practice of the Church which leads to deification. The problem of the so-called Ecumenism lies on these points. The Orthodox Church is Ecumenical, that is, catholic-orthodox, because it possesses the wholeness of theology and the wholeness of life, but cannot be ecumenistic, that is, live a doctrinal minimalism and an ecclesiological aberration.

The fundamental point is that in such a dialogue between the Orthodox Church and other Denominations one must set an Orthodox ecclesiological basis and the participants must be people who live empirically the truth of the Church and have a patristic mind and view the doctrines in an inner way, not externally and conceptually. This means that they will see how the doctrine answers man’s existential problems, namely, what life is, what man is, and how man is united with God.

This is why in the Divine Liturgy we refer to the unity of faith and the communion of the Holy Spirit and not to the “union of the Churches” and the communion of firms, organizations, even “Christian” ones, nor to public relations actions.

From Sobornost, September 2006.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

The Wondrous Grave of Nicholas Motovilov

Nicholas Motovilov was a spiritual child of St. Seraphim of Sarov, and is most famous for writing A Conversation On the Purpose of the Christian Life, that occurred in November 1831 in the forest near Sarov between himself and St. Seraphim.

Motovilov throughout his life worked hard to bring to Russian public awareness the name of St. Seraphim, who was eventually canonized in 1903.

Motovilov died on January 17, 1879 and was buried at Serafimo-Diveyevsky Monastery, as foretold by St. Seraphim of Sarov. On his grave a large tree has grown, which the communists at one point tried to take down but were unable. Some see on the tree a miraculous formation of the head of a bear and the icon of the Theotokos of Umilenie. Both are known from the life of St. Seraphim, with the former being a close companion of St. Seraphim in the forest of Sarov, and the latter being the icon before which St. Seraphim hung on a tree and prayed while on the rock for a thousand days and later died while kneeling before.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Metropolitan Kallistos of Diocleia on the Economic Crisis

Metropolitan Kallistos Ware of Diocleia recently spoke with Pemptousia regarding the financial crisis in Greece, which is relevant for other parts of the world as well. A partial transcript of the talk is below:

First of all, to me the problem arises from the problem that we do not distinguish between "what I want" and "what I need." I want many things, but do I need them all? The assumption in our western society has been that we should have a continuing rise in the level of our economic well-being, that people should have more and more material goods. Now perhaps we have to change our mind on that point. There are so many things that we expect to have, and that we demand, but that we do not really need. So the first thing is to distinguish between what I want and what I need.

Now people certainly need food, clothing, a home; they need also more than that to give them hope and joy in their daily life. But we cannot go on expecting, year by year, that we shall always have more material goods. We need to learn that to say, "Enough. I do not need all these extra things. I can do without them."

The resources of the world are not unlimited. But the problem is, they are very unjustly distributed. So many people have luxuries that they do not really require, and this means that other people are going hungry. So let us make that distinction. We have to stop saying, "I wish to have more," and to say, "I have enough." And we need, I think, to share far more, not only inside each country, but between different countries. In Britain certainly the gap between the rich and the poor is growing greater. This is something that we should take seriously. Something is very wrong in our society if more and more goods and benefits are being accumulated in the hands of fewer and fewer people.

So without wishing to seem too theological, I have to say what is required is repentance, metanoia, in the literal sense of the word. The Greek word means "change of mind." We need to have a new way of looking at ourselves and other people, a new way of looking at our society. We need in this way a kind of social repentance, which would also be for each of us a personal repentance; an ecological repentance, because one aspect of the present crisis is that we have lost a proper human relationship with the environment around us. We need to start again and to think once more.

Our Lord said, "Man will not live by bread alone," but man cannot live without bread. The Russian philosopher Nicholas Berdyaev said, "Bread for myself is a material question. Bread for my neighbor is a spiritual question." So that is that spirit that I would like to look at our crisis in, that we need to appreciate our responsibility to those who are in need, who do not have enough bread to eat, who are going hungry. And we need to change our own outlook, and to start again, distinguishing between our want and our need.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Pascha At White Castle

As a fan of Jon Hein and fast food, I decided to watch the new show "Fast Food Mania" a few days ago and was surprised to see featured in their segment on White Castle a Greek Orthodox priest who was inducted into the prestigious White Castle Hall of Fame, which apparently is harder to get into than Harvard University. 7,980 people have tried to get into the Hall of Fame since 2001, but only 80 have been inducted. One of them is Father John Stavropoulos. Here is why in his own words:

When I was the pastor of the Greek Orthodox Cathedral in Columbus, Ohio, on Easter Sunday night (every year) after having fasted from meat for 40 days, a group of my parishioners and I would leave the resurrection service, which ended at 2:30 a.m. We’d immediately head down the street to White Castle and we would break the 40-day meat fast.

Now, I am not talking about a few people. There were at least 35 to 40 cars in the drive-thru. So close to 200 people would crave Sliders® (normally Greeks eat lamb on that night), but we found that Sliders® were quick, easy, tasty and available. Each year for three years the good word got out that Father John was leading the caravan to White Castle.

Source

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

The Image of the Unbeliever

By St. Nektarios of Aegina

The unbeliever is the most unfortunate person among men because he is denied the single most precious thing in this world, faith, which is the only true guide toward truth and good fortune. The unbeliever is so unfortunate because he has been denied hope, the only constant support on the long road of life. The unbeliever is very unfortunate because he is missing the true love of people which surround his troubled heart. The unbeliever is most unfortunate since he is being denied divine beauty and the divine likeness of the Creator. This is the beauty that the Divine Artist has engraved in our hearts and which our faith has revealed to us.

The eye of an unbeliever does not see anything else in creation but the forces of nature. The brilliant icon of the Holy Creator and its marvelous beauty for him remain hidden and unknown to him. His vision is out of focus in the immensity of creation. He does not see the beauty of creation anywhere. He does not find the beauty of God’s wisdom. He does not marvel at the great power of God. He does not discover the goodness of God; divine providence, justice and the love of the Creator toward creation. His mind cannot go beyond the physical world. Neither can he go beyond the realm of his senses. His heart remains insensitive before the image of divine wisdom and power. Being like this does not give birth to any feelings of worship. His lips remain sealed. His mouth is motionless. His tongue is wearisome. Wearisome is his turmoil. His turmoil is pain and his pain is despair. All things until now that attracted his attention have lost their grace. This is so because all the joys of life that he experienced are unable to make him happy.

As long as the heart of man has been created so that God can dwell in it, the ultimate joy of man revels and rejoices in this goodness because this is found only in God. But from the heart of an unbeliever, God has departed. The human heart has limitless yearnings since it was created to contain and seek out the unlimited. As long as the heart of the unbeliever is no longer filled with the infinite God, everything around him groans with despair. He seeks and desires after things but nothing satisfies him. And this is so because all the pleasures of life are powerless to fulfill the emptiness of the human heart.

When the true pleasures and activities of the world are turned off, the heart is left with a feeling of bitterness. The vain glories of the world are turned into grief. The unbeliever ignores that the happiness of man is not found by indulging in worldly pleasures but are found in the love of God, which is infinite and eternal good. It is here where we find the misfortune of those who ignore God. He who denies God is like that person who denies his happiness and its unending blessedness. The unfortunate one struggles with the toilsome battles of life without the presence of God.

And so, in despair and with fear nestled in his heart, the unbeliever walks to his already opened grave. The miraculous work that unfolds before his eyes is played out on the world stage and is directed by divine wisdom, grace and power. All these things pass by him completely unnoticed. These things play a principal role in ones’ life with the assistance of harmony and divine goodness. Although the sweet water of the river of joy and happiness flows by his feet, he is unable in his disbelief to quench the dryness of his tongue. It is a thirst that burns him because the running water from the gurgling well is unshaken because his voice cannot be heard coming out of his chest, singing praises; glorifying and thanking God.

The joy that is unfurled in the universe has forsaken the heart of the unbeliever because God has distanced Himself from it. The emptiness has been filled with sorrow. It remains obstinate because of the absence of a desire to seek the spiritual has overwhelmed his soul. He is misled in this dark night without any light, a night where no beam of light enlightens his darkened avenues. There is no one to direct and guide his steps. In the race of life he is alone. He navigates life without the hope of a better life. He walks among many traps and there is no one to free him from them. He falls into these traps and is burdened by the weight of them. There is no one to relieve him of his sorrow.

The peace of the soul and the quietness of the heart have been banished by disbelief. Grief has bound up the depths of his heart. The joy which a believer finds in fulfilling the holy commandments and the joy that comes from a moral life is for the unbeliever unknown. Joy that comes from faith has never visited the heart of the unbeliever. The conviction which flows from faith in divine providence and which lighten the struggles of life is an unknown power to the unbeliever.

The feeling of thanksgiving and favor that comes from love is a great mystery to the unbeliever. The disbeliever who places material things first has limited true happiness for himself in a very limited circle of fleeting enjoyment. This is so because he is always attempting to satisfy himself with material things. The desire for virtue is for him completely foreign. He has not tasted the sweetness of this grace. The disbeliever has overlooked that which is the source of true joy and he is rushing without realizing it, toward the source of bitterness. Indulgence filled his worldly desires and in fulfilling them has only brought him nothing but emptiness. This emptiness brought faith but then slipped away and fell from his lips.

Oh, unfortunate slave of a difficult tyrant! How did they steal the joy of life from you? How did they rip away from you this profound treasure? You lost your faith. You denied your God. You denied His revelation to you and then you threw away the bountiful gift of divine grace. How unfortunate is the life of such a person! This life is filled with a whole host of troubles for the unbeliever because the delight of life has lost its flavor before his very eyes. Nature around him appears sterile and infertile because it does not fill him with any sense of joy and delight. He does not rejoice in any of the creations of God. A veil of grief envelopes all of nature and it no longer attracts a sense of fascination for him. His life has become an impossible burden and with the passing of time appears to him to be an unbearable hardship.

This is why despair appears before him like an executioner and terrible torturer. It terrorizes the unfortunate man. His courage has already abandoned him. His resistance is weakened and his moral moorings have since been corrupted by lack of faith. He appears like a man who is motivated completely by something else, that is, disbelief. He has surrendered his life to the fearful shackles of despair which are devoid of mercy and sympathy. The thread of his life is forcefully and cruelly cut off from the gifts of God and is hurled to the depths of perdition, to the darkness of hell from where he can only be saved when he is called by the voice of his Divine Creator. This is the Creator that he has denied all his life and now he must give account for his disbelief. Then he will be judged and will be sent to the eternal fire.

Source

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Orthodoxy and Bioethics

From an interview with Metropolitan Hierotheos of Nafpaktos:

Question: When speaking about questions of bioethics, the usual attitude of the secular establishment is that these are morally “neutral” issues of science, and therefore, there is no place for religion or ethics in them. What should the Orthodox Church do in response and how it can make a difference in respect to these problems?

Answer: Bioethics is indeed the reaction of science itself to the potential negative applications of genetic engineering and molecular biology. That is, genetic engineering and molecular biology have advanced to discoveries which may exert a type of imperialism on mankind, the so-called genetic imperialism, on the one hand destroying man himself and on the other hand creating a genetic pollution to the environment. Because of this, several scientists have attempted to set some limits to this potential catastrophe and thus developed the science of bioethics which links genetic engineering with the humanities.

There are certain bioethics scientists who argue that bioethical problems are scientific and religions should keep out of them. However, the truth is that genetists, bioethicists and theologians all deal with man, thus they have a common objective, and man is a whole consisting of soul and body. If we restrict our attention only to the body, it is possible that we perceive man as a living machine and leave his existential problems unsolved. It is known that in the past, because medical science was to a large extent mechanistic, psychoanalysis developed in order to balance things.

For this reason, the message of the Orthodox Churches after the Constantinople Congress of September 2000, under the auspices of the Ecumenical Patriarchate, mentioned that bioethical problems should be dealt with through biotheology, as well.

This is why in recent years many clerics and Synods of Local Churches deal with theological problems revolving around the beginning, the extension and the end of biological life, as well as with the protection of the environment.

Of course, Orthodox theology is not opposed to science, when the latter remains within its limits. It is the science of bioethics which sets the limits of science and Orthodox theology deals with man’s pastoral care and leads him from where science ends towards deification.

Sobornost, September 2006.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

A Convert's Reflection On Ecumenical Witness

Ecumenical Impact on Orthodox Witness and Mission: A Convert's Reflections

By Fr. John Reeves

Presented September 24, 2004 at the Conference:

"Ecumenism: Origins, Expectations, Disenchantment"

The Aristotelian University

Thessaloniki, Greece

Twenty seven years ago (last week, in fact), I stood outside the doors of the St Seraphim Church, Dallas, Texas, awaiting reception into Holy Orthodoxy. I was asked whether I confessed the Orthodox Church as the Bride of Christ wherein was true salvation which was in the Ark with Noah at the Flood. I confessed it with all my heart. I believed it then. I believe it now.

Orthodoxy was for me the Pearl of Great Price. Archbishop Dmitri of Dallas had counseled me upon my entry into the Church that, as grave as the situation was in my Anglican life, there remained but one reason to convert to the Orthodox faith: Namely, that I believed it to be true. He, himself a convert from the Baptists while yet in his teens in the early 1940's, was the perfect one to give that advice.

Thus, I come before this august gathering of prelates and priests, of theologians and spiritual fathers, as an American, a convert to Orthodoxy, a "village priest," quite humbled by this privilege, to speak on a subject of concern to us all. I bring the perspective of one who has sought refuge in Orthodoxy from the doctrinal and moral morass afflicting many of our partners in the ecumenical movement.

In my seminary training, in an Episcopal seminary in the 1970's, I was alarmed by trends away from apostolic faith and witness then present in my denomination. Equivocation on the Incarnation, the Resurrection and the Miracles was readily accepted. Doctrine was nuanced away. Ordination of women to the priesthood was on the horizon. Advocacy for abortion, for which some Episcopal clergy were already providing "ministry services,"--(transporting young women to abortion clinics) -- and acceptance of homosexuality raised few eyebrows amongst faculty or most students.

Indeed, situational ethics were normative. Inclusive language was about to make its debut with little fan-fare. God, who had been our Father, now would also be our Mother. That the Episcopal Church would consecrate to its episcopate an openly homosexual priest, three decades later in 2003, or that Episcopal bishops are now authorizing rites for same-sex "holy unions" does not surprise me in the least. The die had been cast years ago. [See appendix.]

In a post-modern age, in which Americans fancy themselves to be living, truth is ultimately defined as what one wishes it to be for oneself. There are no absolutes. The ancient boundaries of faith and moral practice no longer apply. There are no meta-narratives. If Modern Man thought himself capable of discerning the Truth through reason, the Post-modern believes that individuals may come through experience to relative "truths," culturally determined, all equally valid. The Orthodox understanding that Truth is a person who is the definitive revelation of God to Man in the Person of Jesus Christ, that the Church is the ground and pillar of that Truth, that the faith we confess in word and in deed has established the Universe, runs counter to the basic tenets of the dominant, Post-modern religious culture of the majority of our ecumenical partners in America.

Orthodoxy, in the context of North American ecumenism, is somewhat unlike Orthodoxy in the Mother Lands and its historic relationship to the world-wide ecumenical movement. Lacking establishment by civil law and/or history, nationality and language, Orthodoxy is but a recent arrival in the consciousness of most Americans whether Christian or not. With the exception of Alaska and the original Russian Mission, the preoccupation of the majority of Orthodox Christians in the Americas has been one primarily of economic and/or religio-political survival. All too often, Orthodox Christians in America have preoccupied themselves with conforming to Western behavior and ethics. In fact, to paraphrase Fr. Alexander Schmemann, they have wanted not only to be Americanized, "but homogenized and pasteurized."[1]

In this cultural desire for upward mobility, homogenization and pasteurization, participation in organized ecumenical endeavors such as the National Council of Churches (NCC) and the World Council (WCC) has provided a measure of social acceptance to the children and grandchildren of immigrants. Indeed, both an Orthodox priest and an Orthodox lay woman have served as the National Council's president in America. Thus, I would argue, participation in ecumenical ventures has provided the Orthodox in America with acceptance and visibility, and, indeed, at times political influence, which otherwise might not be enjoyed. Yet this social acceptance and political influence has had a price, both in terms of mission and of Orthodox self-understanding in America, and elsewhere.

In 1995, I was privileged to speak on the subject of Evangelism at a conference held at Holy Cross Seminary in Brookline, MA. It was jointly sponsored by the Orthodox Christian Mission Center, St Augustine, FL and the WCC. I emphasized that evangelism involved a process of bringing individuals into the life of the Church and confessing the Orthodox Faith. Imagine my surprise to find that those who took audible exception to my presentation were two Orthodox bishops, both attending under WCC auspices. One queried why it was not enough merely to become "Christians", but not necessarily Orthodox Christians. Another protested similarly, vehemently denying that multiple Christ's were now being preached in America, as I had contended. Interestingly enough, he was not from America but Geneva, so I seriously doubted he was an expert on American religious life.

It was obvious to most, if not all, of those attending, that Orthodoxy seemed only a denomination to these bishops, a confessional community, part of an "invisible church", but not Una Sancta. It was truly astonishing and eye-opening. Such, can be, I fear the result of "working together ecumenically." The practical result is to reduce any concept of mission to that of pastoral ministry to one's own people in one's own lands, a sad identification of Orthodoxy as tribal faith rather than faith universal. Why then engage in mission at all?

If this be true for Orthodoxy in America, the impact on evangelism, on mission and witness, is indeed constricting. While St Innocent could rejoice at the prospects of Orthodoxy penetrating North America by means of missionary endeavor to draw Americans into Orthodoxy [2], such seems precluded by "working together ecumenically", if the reaction of those cited above is typical.

As a point of information, conversions to Orthodoxy in America are increasingly common, not because of marriage but by choice. The theological drift and moral relativism of the mainline confessions in the United States are a good part of the reason why. Fully 60% of the clergy in the Antiochian Christian Archdiocese and at least 30-40% of the priests in the Orthodox Church in America (Russian Metropolia) are converts, as are a majority of the OCA's bishops. At both St Vladimir's and St Tikhon's Seminaries, the majority of students studying for the priesthood are converts. Many new missions and parishes consist of virtually all converts, as well.

In fact, Orthodoxy in America experiences conversions at virtually twice the rate of the evangelical denominations while the mainline, ecumenical Protestants tend to post annual declines in membership. "How ironic that the very elements of Protestantism, the Liberal elements that have had the most to do with ecumenism, are the very elements that have become the most secularized and which represent less and less people as their numbers dwindle, plagued by the drumbeat of Protestant doubt," wrote convert Frank Schaeffer in his book, Dancing Alone.[3]

In America though, as in Europe, objections to ecumenism are at times met with arguments ad hominem. While those who object to ecumenism in the Mother Churches might be dismissed as "nationalists" and "xenophobes", likewise in America, those who question current ecumenical involvement are easily brushed aside with opprobria such as "traditionalists" or "converts", who lack the sophistication and the sobriety to make judgments or comments re: involvement in current ecumenical bureaucracies and the like. The epithets might be different but the message, and the method, is the same; and the arguments are ignored.

Perhaps, we merely embarrass or annoy them. But many of us oppose current ecumenical involvement because we have seen it from the other side. We have been members of many of the very denominations with which we partner. We know ecumenism first hand and we reject it. Suffice it to say, that many of us have converted to Orthodoxy in spite of Orthodoxy's ecumenical partnerships rather than because of them.

It has been said that there is more, true ecumenism taking place in America,ecumenism of a type which all Orthodox, I would think, might applaud,outside of, rather than inside, the institutionalized ecumenicalorganizations and bureaucracies. [4] In fact, those with whom we seem tohave the most in common in terms of faith and morals in the United Statesare those of the faith communities NOT associated with the NCC or WCC, suchas conservative Protestants and some Roman Catholic groups.So let me touch on a few of the theological and moral issues which ought tobe of greatest concern as we examine the question before us, issues whicheviscerate the liberal Protestant, and at times, even Roman Catholiccommunities in America, many of whom are our partners in ecumenicalundertakings. They are all interlinked and they herald the advent, Isuspect, of a New Religion.

THEOLOGICAL ISSUES--Advent of a New Religion?

Language and Re-Imagining

The case of inclusive language and the syncretism found at the WCC's GeneralAssembly, Canberra 1991, are but part of a new theology growing out of theabandonment of traditional theology. This demonstrates what history hasshown all along, that the Protestants are the inheritors of but a recenttradition, steeped in the tenets of and made possible by Western-Europeanrationalism and humanism.For the Protestant, man, (or rather now I suppose, humankind), is themeasure. Objective reality has been jettisoned in favor of a culturallydetermined one. That the ecumenical movement has definitely played a majorpart in attempts to redefine and to re-imagine Christian doctrine is nowbeyond dispute. Two examples can be readily examined effecting life in America. One is inclusive language, and the other, the re-imaging of God.

Inclusive Language

In "the mid-1980s, the National Council of Churches began publishing itsmulti-volume Inclusive Language Lectionary...which omitted male pronouns forGod and retranslated Jesus's traditional title, the Son of Man, as the HumanOne." [5] Despite Orthodox dissent, the influence of the inclusivistmovement has continued to be felt and promoted in ecumenical circles.

Coupled with an ecumenical convergence about worship the Presbyterian Church(PCUSA), the United Methodist Church, and the United Church of Christ (UCC),the Episcopal Church and the Evangelical Lutheran Church all agree thatinclusive language is to be employed, though they treat it differently. Somemerely seek to remove (most) masculine nouns and pronouns, but others gofurther, much further.

The UCC, in fact, has been constrained to caution its clergy: "The recognition of our baptism by the ecumenical church is important to us, and the Book of Worship encourages the use of language recognized in most Christian churches: 'I baptize you in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.' Feminine images for God may surround these words to enrich understandings and offer balance." (Emphases added.) [6] (One should note that the use of Trinitarian formulae is "encouraged," but not required!)

However, one of the feminine images for God permitted "to enrich understandings and offer balance" is the following prayer: "We give you thanks, O Holy One, mother and father of all the faithful... [7]

Likewise, the United Methodist Book of Worship provides this prayer: [#466:]"God our Mother and Father, we come to you as children," [8]

One thus finds an ecumenical trend towards a radically different doctrine of God, a Christology other than that of the Church:

"Gracious God,...you have brought us forth from the womb of your being andbreathed into us the breath of life..."[9]

"Our Father-Mother, who is in the heavens, may your name be made holy, mayyour dominion come, may your will be done..."[10] And many, many more. [See appendix.]

Re-Imagining: God is good, isn't She?

UCC theologian, Willis Elliott, worries that this is the advent of a new religion. By means of certain worship forms, a new religion is coming. This is where the path of ecumenical convergence is leading. [11] Perhaps a concern for more historic forms of worship has emerged in part because of Orthodox participation. Yet this convergence must be seen hand in hand with a new theology, not unlike the position of pre-exilic Jews who followed old ritual forms of Yahweh worship at the same time pagan idols were erected in the Temple.

This ecumenical convergence about worship cannot be described otherwise as but an ecumenical divergence from Orthodox Christology. The ancient landmarks that Jesus is Christ, that Jesus is Lord, that He is the Son of God, and that the first Person of the Holy Trinity is the Father, both his and ours, are being removed by our "partners" in ecumenical endeavors. Whatever de-mythologizing might have been contended with at the beginning of the ecumenical movement, what is now occurring can only be described as re-mythologizing: Re-Imagining/re-imaging.

An obvious case in point was the Re-Imagining Conference held in Minneapolis in November 1993. It celebrated the World Council of Churches' Ecumenical Decade of Churches in Solidarity with Women. "Wisdom/Sophia" was addressed as an alternative to and in distinction from the triune God, not merely a divine attribute, while a milk and honey ritual was offered as an ersatz eucharist. Worship of "Sophia" as goddess was definitely encouraged. [12]

Subsequently one of the conference organizers was discharged by her Presbyterian denomination only to be hired by the WCC as deputy director in Geneva.[13] Another co-convener of the conference, lesbian Methodist bishop, Jeanne Audrey Powers, was active for years in Faith and Order Work for the WCC.[14] Indeed, one might ask, "Whose faith and whose order?"

In the decade since the Re-Imagining Conference, advocacy for "Sophia" worship and rituals continues amongst certain of our ecumenical partners. Only this past June/July, during the Presbyterian General Assembly, Richmond, VA a meeting was held of "Voices of Sophia", a continuation of theRe-imagining/re-imaging movement, still invoking "Sophia" as a goddess. Whatever the Ecumenical Decade meant to Orthodox women, over a decade later,some of our ecumenical partners have yet to distance themselves from Sophia-worship. As one speaker said: "God is good. Isn't she?"[15]

Is this not that of which our Saviour warned, that many would come in his Name and say, Here is Christ, and there is Christ?

MORAL ISSUES

Abortion

Ecumenical dealing with the two most contentious moral issues in American society, abortion and homosexuality, indicate the failure to reach convergence, much less agreement, on the morals once delivered to the saints. For example, membership in both the NCC and WCC can be interpreted as endorsing a pro-abortion agenda, based upon statements and actions of the councils and its representatives.

Orthodox presence in the NCC has thwarted an attempt to proclaim a pro-abortion position officially, but its "witness" has not been sufficient to preclude then General Secretary Dr. Joan Brown Campbell's having gone on record for the NCC in support of a national health care reform proposal which included abortion coverage as an integral part, in 1993. Yet, both Roman Catholic Bishops and conservative Protestants, who are not NCC members, specifically denounced the abortion coverage provisions. [16]

Internationally, the World Council, for its part, in the mid '90's lobbied for the admission of feminist and pro-choice groups to attend the Beijing Conference on Women. [17] Likewise, concluding the Decade of Solidarity with Women, at Harare, 1998, the WCC issued a statement endorsing the concept of Reproductive Rights, a catch-phrase for abortion added after consensus was supposedly reached, much to the chagrin of Orthodox participants. [18]

Homosexuality

The other moral issue threatening the very fabric of society is, of course, the approbation sought by many secular forces to regard homosexuality as but an alternative life-style and homosexual marriage as a "holy union."

As with abortion, Orthodox presence has stalled acceptance into the NCC of a largely homosexual denomination, along with objections from some of the predominantly African-American Baptist council members. According to then General Secretary Campbell, the differing opinions on this issue, ranging from those of the Black churches and the Orthodox to that of the United Church of Christ, (which ordains openly gay and lesbian pastors), are all based in who the constituent bodies are. [19]

That is, Orthodox positions on homosexuality are viewed not as based on revealed truth but as opinions rooted in the cultures of the various member bodies. Thus, the Orthodox, like the Black Baptists, have their pigeon-hole, their historically determined niche. "Keep in it, conform to the stereotypes, and we will tolerate you." We Orthodox, after all, are seen as giving the movement its "integrity," to quote Ms. Campbell.[20] Yet, our "witness" seems to be nothing more than a patch on the quilt of multiculturalism rather than being the fabric of the apostolic faith. The most the Orthodox Churches have been able to do in the area of abortion or homosexuality is to preclude the adoption of positions officially favoring either. The behavior of our ecumenical partners otherwise exhibits even more dramatically the failure of our witness. Evidence of such can be notedin the following quote in 1996 by Dr Konrad Raiser, then General Secretary of the WCC:

"...the unity of the Christian Churches is facing serious new problems in the bosom of the World Council of Churches because of differences on matters of Christian ethics, such as contraceptives, sex education, and homosexuality," and he offered the further explanation that "many of the Council's 330 member-Churches unquestioningly accept homosexuality and have special ceremonies for all those homosexual couples who wish to seal their relationships with marriage." [21]

CONCLUSION: Truth and Falsehood

The interrelatedness of inclusive language and feminist theology, abortion and homosexuality, cannot be dismissed by anyone serious enough to be alarmed about ecumenism's role in current theological debate. In fact, the writings of feminist theologians would precisely tie all of these together and see them as parts of a whole. [22] The ecumenical convergence, to borrow a phrase, is one now so radically different from that of those early days ofthe World Council in Amsterdam. And it is a convergence that we lend credence to and "give integrity" to by our membership in and association with the institutionalized ecumenical movement.

Fr. Justin Popovich would offer us a critique of ecumenism, thus: "The contemporary dialogue of love, which takes the form of naked sentimentality, is in reality a denial of the salutary sanctification of the Spirit and belief in the truth (2 Th. 2:13), that is to say the unique salutary love ofthe truth. (2 Th. 2:10) The essence of love is truth; love lives and thrives as truth. Truth is the heart of each Godly virtue and therefore of love as well."[23]

His viewpoint is paralleled succinctly in the writings of German pastor, Dietrich Bonhoeffer in another context: "There can be no creedal confession without saying, 'In the light of Christ, this is true and that is false!'"

Even as we meet, an article has gone to press on the subject "Orthodox Christians and Public Life," for inclusion in the fall edition of Again Magazine. The author, Fr Patrick Reardon, a priest of the AntiochianChristian Archdiocese strongly advocates a serious realignment of Orthodox Christians in America in matters ecumenical.

He argues that the time has come to break off ecumenical relations with those liberal bodies such as are represented in the National Council of Churches if Orthodoxy is to have any major impact on American culture andsociety

"Some of these mainline Protestant churches should properly be considered part of the problem, not the solution...(I)t is in Orthodoxy's best interest to break off, cleanly and expeditiously, our inherited ties to the mainline Protestant churches in respect to social and political matters. Those alliances pertain to a decrepit, self-serving, superannuated ecumenism that has long outlived its favor with either God or man."[24]

So, let me repeat what I said at the beginning: Accepting the Orthodoxf aith, I confessed that this Church was the Bride of Christ in which was true salvation. I believed it then. I believe it now. I also believe that our ecumenical associations can, do, and will continue to have a cloying effect on the import of that confession, both in witness and mission.

Is it not high time to say, in the Light of Christ, what is true and what is false?Is not some form of disassociation the best way to say it? Is it not, as Fr Justin would warn us, the twelfth hour?[25]

To the glory of God the Father. Amen.

Notes

Schmemann, Alexander. Church, World, Mission. St. Vladimir's Seminary Press, 1979. p. 202.

Garrett, Paul. St. Innocent: Apostle to America. St. Vladimir's Seminary Press, p. 184.

Schaeffer, Frank. Dancing Alone. Holy Cross Press. p. 308.

George, Robert P. "What Can We Reasonably Hope For?" First Things, January 2000.

Niebuhr, R. Gustav. "The Lords Name: Image of God as He Loses Its Sovereignty in Americas Churches." The Wall Street Journal; April 27, 1992,A-4.

The Book of Worship. The United Church of Christ. "Baptism, " as quoted online: http://www.ucc.org/worship/tnch/baptism.pdf

Ibid.

The United Methodist Book of Worship. The United Methodist Church.#466.

The Book of Worship. The United Church of Christ. "Service of the Word II," as quoted online: http://www.ucc.org/worship/tnch/word2.pdf

The Book of Worship. The United Church of Christ. "Morning Prayer," as quoted online: http://www.ucc.org/worship/tnch/mp.pdf

Woodward, Kenneth L. "Hymns, Hers and Theirs." Newsweek. Feb. 12,1996, p. 75.

Small, Joseph D. and John P. Burgess. "Evaluating Re-Imaging". The Christian Century. April 6, 1994, p. 342-43.

Williamson, Parker T. "Sophia upstages Jesus at ReImagining Revival." The Layman Online, May/June 1998.

"Methodist Official Comes Out." The Christian Century. July 19-26, 1995.

Williamson, Parker T. "Staying Alive: Re-Imagining god group gathers at General Assembly." The Layman Online. Wednesday, June 30, 2004

"Religious Groups and Health Reform." The Christian Century. Oct. 6,1993. [At another time, Dr. Campbell discussed her role as spokesman for the NCC: "I try to root our statements in our theology and to make it clear we are speaking for the churches, not a secular organization." The Christian Century, Nov. 8, 1995. p. 1052 .]

"WCC Protests UN Plans for Women's Meetings." The Christian Century, 1995. p. 560.

"Together on the Way: Official Report of the Eighth Assembly." World Council of Churches.

"An Interview with Joan Brown Campbell." The Christian Century. Nov. 8,1995. p. 1052.

Campbell, Dr. Joan Brown. Address. Banquet. All-America Council of the Orthodox Church in America. Chicago. July, 1995.

Raiser, Konrad. "Unconventional Morality" Katholike, No. 2802, January 16, 1996. p. 4 [in Greek]. Viz, for example:

Pagels, "Images of God in Early Christianity;" Womanspirit Rising; Carol P. Christ laine H. "What Became of God the Mother? Conflicting and Judith Plaskow", Ed. Harper & Row, 1979. pp. 107-119.

Raming, Ida. "Male discourse about God in the liturgy and its effects on women" Lumen Vitae, Revue Internationale de Catéchèse et de Pastorale 55 (1999) pp. 47 - 57.

Mollenkott, Virginia Ramey. Sensuous Spirituality: Out from Fundamentalism New York: Crossroad. [Dr Mollenkott helped prepare the NCC's Inclusive Language Lectionary and participated in the Re-Imagining Conference in 1993.]

Popovich, Archimandrite Justin. Orthodox Faith and Life in Christ. Institute of Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies, Inc. Belmont, MA. 1994. pp. 170 ff.

Reardon, Fr Patrick Henry. "Orthodox Christians and Public Life."

Again Magazine. Conciliar Press. Fall 2004. (Available on OrthodoxToday.org)

Popovich, op cit.

A longer, much earlier version of this article was published by "The Christian Activist" in 1996 with the title "The Price of Ecumenism: How ecumenism has hurt the Orthodox Church". The present article reflects a number of events which have transpired amongst our ecumenical partners since then.

Fr John Reeves is an Orthodox priest in the Diocese of Western Pennsylvania, OCA.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Fr. Feodor Konyukhov To Cross Pacific Ocean On Oar Boat

June 7, 2012

Interfax

Priest and traveler Feodor Konyukhov will start a new large-scale voyage.

"I crossed the Atlantic Ocean in an oar boat ten years ago. I felt myself reproachfully that I had to cross the Pacific Ocean. But the Atlantic Ocean is three thousand miles, while the Pacific Ocean is eight miles. We need another boat, bigger and more powerful. I told my friends from the Chelyabinsk Region about my dream and they supported me," Father Feodor was quoted as saying by the Chelyabinsk edition of the Komsomolskaya Pravda daily.

He intends to leave Chili and reach Australia in 160-180 days.

"No one has ever done it, a thousand islands will be on my way, and there will be temptation to stop and land. There's no time to think in the sea, you always need to row. That's why I wrote so short a diary when I was crossing the Atlantic Ocean. And beside food and a water distiller I will take the Gospels and fishing rods to my new trip. It's nice and useful to do some fishing," the priest said.

Not long ago, he climbed Mount Everest from the north, from the side of Tibet.

"There are no thoughts on the top, where they can come from if your blood gets dense from oxygen starvation, you don't feel hands and legs, to say nothing about your head. I always prayed to St. Nicholas, I said: 'Nicholas, pull me up!' And he pulled me to the top. I lost eight kilos for the trip, my beard was rubbed from the oxygen mask. But it's nothing if compared to what can happen. Everest takes mountain climbers every year. This year, it's been eleven people," Father Feodor said.

According to him, it is not only physically hard to climb Mount Everest.

"I'm thin and I don't have muscles. No one saw me working out with weights. But they saw me praying all night long. And only with God's help I do what I do. I don't have physical, moral and intellectual abilities to cross the ocean alone or to reach the pole. All this is possible only with God. I dig in snow a small icon of St. Nicholas in Tibet. We've recently sent a similar icon to the International Space Station. The icon makes 16 turns around the Earth each day and protects us," the traveler said.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Vatican Publishes Guide On Supernatural Discernment

They have been closely guarded for more than 30 years, but guidelines on how to deal with divine apparitions of the Virgin Mary and "supernatural phenomena" have now been released by the Vatican.

Nick Squires

June 1, 2012

The Telegraph

The "norms" on how the Roman Catholic Church should deal with mystical apparitions were initially drawn up in Latin in 1978 under Pope Paul VI and were intended for strictly internal use.

They shed light on the sorts of apparitions which have inspired the establishment of shrines such as those at Lourdes in France and Fatima in Portugal, which attract millions of pilgrims a year, many in search of cures for illnesses or other "miracles".

The guidelines are intended to help bishops "in their difficult task of discerning presumed apparitions, revelations, messages or, more generally, extraordinary phenomena of presumed supernatural origin," Cardinal William Levada, the American prefect of the CDF, wrote in a preface.

Deciding whether a spiritual revelation is genuine or not is based on its "orientation to Christ Himself," Cardinal Levada wrote. "If it leads us away from Him, then it certainly does not come from the Holy Spirit." Determining whether a spiritual revelation is authentic or not is the responsibility of the local bishop, the Vatican said.

He is required to set up a special panel of theologians, psychologists and doctors to judge the "psychological equilibrium and rectitude of moral life" of the person or people reporting the apparition and whether it corresponds with Church doctrine.

The bishop should try to "discern quickly" the authenticity of an apparition, although his judgment could be impeded by "critical scientific investigation", the Vatican said.

A revelation would be dismissed if there was evidence that the person who had witnessed it was mentally unsound, whether the vision was the product of "collective hysteria" or if there was a suspicion that the whole thing was a fraud concocted for profit.

If the bishop cannot make a decision, the judgment can ultimately be referred to the Pope himself.

The Vatican decided to make the guidelines public, and to translate them into five languages, including English, because elements had leaked out into the public domain over the years.

They have been published by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF), the powerful Vatican department which was headed by Benedict before he was elected Pope in 2005.

The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith is currently investigating claims that a group of six Catholic children began to see apparitions of the Virgin Mary in the town of Medjugorje in Bosnia-Herzegovina, starting in 1981.

The apparition claims have been judged groundless by a local bishop, but that has not stopped an estimated 30 million believers from visiting the pilgrimage site.

Lourdes, in the foothills of the Pyrenees, became a shrine after apparitions of the Virgin Mary were witnessed by a shepherd girl, Bernadette Soubirous, in 1858.

The publication of the guidelines may provide temporary distraction from one of the worst crises of Benedict XVI's seven-year papacy – the leaking of confidential documents and the arrest of his personal butler, amid claims of vicious faction fighting within the Holy See.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Is Greece European?

Robert D. Kaplan

June 6, 2012

Stratfor

Greece is where the West both begins and ends. The West -- as a humanist ideal -- began in ancient Athens where compassion for the individual began to replace the crushing brutality of the nearby civilizations of Egypt and Mesopotamia. The war that Herodotus chronicles between Greece and Persia in the 5th century B.C. established a contrast between West and East that has persisted for millennia. Greece is Christian, but it is also Eastern Orthodox, as spiritually close to Russia as it is to the West, and geographically equidistant between Brussels and Moscow. Greece may have invented the West with the democratic innovations of the Age of Pericles, but for more than a thousand years it was a child of Byzantine and Turkish despotism. And while Greece was the northwestern bastion of the anciently civilized Near East, ever since history moved north into colder climates following the collapse of Rome, the inhabitants of Peninsular Greece have found themselves at the poor, southeastern extremity of Europe.

Modern Greece in particular has struggled against this bifurcated legacy. In an early 20th century replay of the Greco-Persian Wars, Greece's post-World War I military struggle with Turkey led to a signal Greek defeat and as a consequence, more than a million ethnic Greeks from Asia Minor escaped to Greece proper, further impoverishing the country. (This Greek diaspora in Asia Minor was a massive source of revenue until the Greeks were expelled.) Not only did World War I have a bloody and epic coda in Greece, so did World War II, which was followed by a civil war between rightists and communists. Greece's ultimate escape from the Warsaw Pact was a rather close-run affair: again, the effect of Greece's unstable geographical location between East and West.

Greece struggled on. As recently as the mid-1970s it was governed by a particularly brutal military dictatorship (led by colonels from the backwater of the Peloponnese), which lasted for seven years, and fear of another coup persisted during the initial stage of its reborn democracy. Even though the Olympic tradition began in Greece in antiquity and the first modern Olympics were held in Greece in 1896, Greece was denied the right to host the centenary modern Olympics in 1996 owing to the country's lack of preparedness in organization and infrastructure. Greece did host the 2004 Olympics, but the financial strain that the games put on Greece contributed to the country's economic fragility in the run-up to the current debt crisis.

It is not entirely an accident that Greece is the most economically troubled country in the European Union. The fact that it is located at Europe's southeastern back door also has something to do with it. For Greece's economic and political development bear marks of a legacy not wholly in the modern West.

Roughly three-quarters of Greek businesses are family-owned and rely on family labor, making meritocratic promotion difficult for those outside the family. Tax cheating is rampant. The economy suffers from a profound lack of competitiveness, even as Greece is mainly a service economy, relying on tourism, in which manufacturing constitutes a weak sector. Of course, these features have much to do with bad policies enacted over the years and decades, but they are also products of history and culture, which are, in turn, products of geography. Indeed, Greece lacks enough productive land to be an agricultural power.

Then there is political underdevelopment. Long into the 20th century, Greek political parties had a paternalistic, coffeehouse quality, centered on big personalities -- chieftains in all but name -- with little formal organizational support. George Papandreou, the grandfather of the recent prime minister of the same name, actually headed a party called the "George Papandreou Party." Political parties have been family businesses to a greater extent in Greece than in other Western democracies. The party in power not only dominated the highest echelons of the bureaucracy, as is normal and proper in a democracy, but the middle- and lower-echelons, too. State institutions from top to bottom were often overly politicized.

Moreover, rather than having a moderate left-wing party and a modern conservative one, as is common throughout Western Europe, in Greece through the early 1990s there was a hard-left party, the Pan-Hellenic Socialist Movement (PASOK), which during the Cold War openly sympathized with radical Arab regimes like Hafez al Assad's Syria and Moammar Gadhafi's Libya, and a somewhat reactionary right-wing party, New Democracy. The drift of both those leading parties toward the center is a relatively recent affair.

And so the creation of late of a hard-left party, SYRIZA, and a hard-right neo-Nazi movement, Golden Dawn (vaguely reminiscent of the military junta that ruled Greece from 1967 to 1974), both harbor distant echoes of Greece's mid-20th century past. Ironically, while Greece's extreme economic crisis created these radical groupings in the first place, if these new parties fare badly in the upcoming poll it might indicate a firm rejection of extremism by Greek voters and a permanent turn toward the center -- toward political modernity, that is.

There is a tendency in all of this to throw one's hands up at the specter of the Greeks and declare them too much trouble than they're worth, at least for Europe. But such an attitude reeks of hypocrisy, even as it denies Western self-interest. When Greece joined the European Union in 1981, its economy was manifestly not ready; Brussels had made a rank political decision, not an economic one -- just as it would in admitting Greece to the eurozone in 2002. In both cases, the ground-level, domestic reality of the Greek economy was swept aside in favor of an abstract quasi-historical vision of Europe stretching from Iberia to the eastern Mediterranean.

Of course, Greece, during the 1980s -- when I lived there for seven years -- might have used the influx of cash from the European Union in order to discipline and reform its economy. Instead, then PASOK Prime Minister Andreas Papandreou used the money to swell the ranks of the bureaucracy. Thus, did Greece remain underdeveloped, and the dream-gamble of Brussels failed. The saddest irony is that the sins of the hard-left Andreas Papandreou were visited upon his well-meaning, center-left son, George, who had his short tenure as prime minister from 2009 to 2011 poisoned by his father's economic legacy.

But Western self-interest now demands that even if Greece leaves the eurozone -- and that is a big "if" -- it nevertheless remains anchored in the European Union and NATO. For whether Greece drops the euro or not, it faces years of severe economic hardship. That means, given its geographic location, Greece's political orientation should never be taken for granted. For example, the Chinese have invested heavily in developing part of the port of Piraeus, adjacent to Athens, even as Russia's economic and intelligence ties to the Greek area of Cyprus are extremely close. It has been speculated in the media that with Greece short of cash and Russia enjoying a surplus, were the Russians ejected from ports in Syria in the wake of a regime change there, Moscow would find a way to eventually make use of Greek naval facilities. Remember that Greece and Cyprus both have modern European histories mainly because they were claimed by Western powers for strategic reasons.

In other words, from the point of geography and geopolitics, Greece will be in play for years to come.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Elder Paisios and Hagia Sophia

The postcard above was sent by Elder Paisios to one of his spiritual children, who later became a monk on Mount Athos, in October of 1974. It says the following:

My beloved brother John, I pray God quickly grants the waning of the Turkish moon. Amen. On Saint Demetrios it will be two years since I prayed in our Hagia Sophia, and I said my complaints to the Good God. The Turkish guard understood that I was praying and was driving me off, etc., and I added other complaints to God. I believe He will not leave our Hagia Sophia in the hands of the dirty Turks. They are a people like the gypsies, dirty and fearful. Now they have no ideal, because before they believed in Muhammad, later Kemal. Now they neither believe in Muhammad (because they somehow got educated, and have seen that Muhammad was an impostor) nor Kemal, but in the worship of the flesh. But we believe in Christ, who continually has His Divine Value, and the Greek people always have an ideal. May Christ and the Panagia be with them.

With love in Christ,

Monk Paisios

Source: (Μαρτυρίες Προσκυνητών Τόμος Α΄ 6η Έκδοση – Γέροντας Παϊσιος ο Αγιορείτης 1924-1994, σελ 450), Αγιοτόκος Καππαδοκία Εκδόσεις, Ζουρνατζόγλου Νικόλαος. Translated by John Sanidopoulos

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

U.S. House Supports Return of Hagia Sophia to Orthodox

This occurred in July of 2011.

Read also:

House Foreign Affairs Committee Passes Berman-Cicilline Amendment Calling on Turkey to Return Christian Churches

Committee Grants Christians Freedom in Turkey

Read the Berman-Cicilline Amendment here.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

On the Relationship Between Church and State

From an interview with Metropolitan Hierotheos of Nafpaktos:

Question: A question that presently preoccupies a number of local Orthodox Churches is the relationship between the Church and the State. On one hand we see fervent efforts of many Orthodox hierarchs who try at all costs to preserve the constitutional links of the State and the Church, but on the other hand a dilemma could be put forward of whether it is in the interest of the Orthodox Church itself to have such constitutional links with a state which in its legal system denies the most fundamental tenets of Christian ethics (as seen, for example, in the legalization of abortion, euthanasia, homosexual marriages…). How would you comment on these opposing views?

Answer: First of all, I have to emphasize that while we refer to the relation between Church and State, in older times there was a debate about the relation and difference between Priesthood and Kingship, meaning the relation and difference between ecclesiastical and political administration. The latter terminology is the Orthodox one.

In each individual case, the relations “between Church and State” depend on the historical memory and the cultural tradition of each people. This means that in different States there may prevail different traditions regarding this issue. Nevertheless, the basis is that each Local Church has to teach and express the whole revealed truth, has to live the way the apostolic Churches lived, as described in the Acts and the Epistles of the Apostles. In these Churches there existed Apostles, Prophets, Martyrs, that is, members who felt deeply the gift of the Holy Spirit and had experiences of deification. It is also important that political administration neither enters the internal life of the Church nor regulates it by laws.

In general, we have to be careful so that the spirit of secularism does not permeate theology, pastoral care and the administration of the Church. On the other hand, no State can be completely “Christian”, because it will be forced to pass antichristian laws, but, at least, it should respect the Church and not intervene in its internal affairs.

From Sobornost, September 2006.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Video: Leviticus Laws and Homosexuality

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

That Christians Should Be Dead To Both Insult and Praise

From The Sayings of the Desert Fathers, that the disciple of Jesus must be dead alike to insult and to praise.

Once a tribe of Mazici burst into the Scetis desert, and killed many of the fathers who dwelt there. Seven of the fathers found safety in flight, among whom were the elder Pimenius, and another older elder called Anub. These seven came in their flight to Terenuthi. There they found an ancient temple of some heathen god, now deserted by the worshippers. Into it they entered, meaning to dwell together for a week without speaking to each other, while each sought a place where to build his solitary cell, for in the Scetis desert these seven had lived as hermits.

Now, there was in the temple an image of the ancient idol. The elder Anub guessed the thought of dwelling together which had entered the minds of the brethren. He therefore, when he rose in the morning, used to cast a stone at the face of the idol. In the evening he used to speak to it, and say, "I have done wrong. Pardon me." On the Sabbath day, when the brethren met together, the elder Pimenius said to him, "How is it that you, a Christian man, have for a whole week been saying to an idol, 'Pardon me?'" The elder Anub replied to him, "I did this for your sakes. When I cast stones at the idol, was it angry? Did it speak to rebuke me? When I asked pardon of it, was it pleased? Did it boast?" The abbot Pimenius answered, "Surely no, my brother." Then said the elder Anub, "We seven are here together. If we wish to remain thus and yet find profit for our souls, this idol must be our example. When one of us is insulted or vexed by another, he must not get angry. When one of us is asked for pardon by his brother, he must not be puffed up. If we are not willing thus to live together it is better for each of us to depart to whatever place he wishes." Then all of them fell upon their faces to the earth, and promised that they would do as he advised.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

A Recent Appearance of the Theotokos in Bethlehem

This is the story of the miraculous appearance of the Panagia to a Muslim in Bethlehem on the first day of Holy Week 2012. The Orthodox monastic community of the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem related this story to Mr. Lycourgos Markoudes who writes here as he heard it.

The story begins on Holy Monday afternoon when the Church of the Nativity was practically empty of pilgrims. The monks were in the area of the church where they attend to the needs of the church. This is a short distance from the steps that lead to the Cave of the Birth of Christ. At one point, they saw a man approach them and he appeared to be very emotional. He took two candles and with great emotion he approached the icon of the Panagia of Bethlehem. He lit the candles before the icon and with tears flowing from his eyes he turned towards the monks who were looking at him with concern. He told them that he was a Muslim from the area around Bethlehem and that during the previous day he saw the Panagia in his sleep. The Panagia invited him to visit the place where She had given birth to Her Son and he was to enter the area through a low doorway. He was told to proceed to the right and then go to the area where he would find Her and then light two candles before her icon.

This man had not visited this church since he was a very young child and he did not remember anything about the church. When he arrived there on that afternoon, he left his car running with its emergency lights flashing in front of the main entrance of the church, in an area that has restricted parking. His wife had remained in the car. When he arrived, he proceeded to enter walking briskly toward the low doorway of the church. He realized as he was proceeding ahead that everything was exactly the way that our Panagia had described it to him. He then went right and down some stairs of Justinian’s Church and he entered the right area of the church. This is the area that is under the jurisdiction of the Orthodox Church and it leads to the Cave where Jesus was born. The icon of the Panagia was exactly in the place where She had indicated it would be. And the icon was exactly the same one he had seen in his dream.

It was the icon of the Panagia of Bethlehem. This miracle-working icon is the resident icon of the Church of Bethlehem and it is located on a prominent icon stand on the right side of the steps that lead to the Cave of the Birth of Christ. The facial features of this icon overflow with an infinite expression of love and calmness while the faint smile on her face brings joy to the hearts of pilgrims. The icon is surrounded with precious fabrics and jewels. There are no solid details about the origin of the icon but tradition says that it comes from Russia and it is connected with the Russian Empress Katherine. This Empress visited the Holy Land after a miracle that was performed by the Mother of God. As a result of this, she gave her imperial clothing so that the Mother of the World could be dressed in them. She also gave her jewelry so that they could be placed on the icon. She also directed that future empresses should not wear rubies so that henceforth this distinctive honor would only belong to the Panagia. This is the icon that this Muslim came to reverence when he arrived at the Church of the Birth of Christ late afternoon of Holy Monday. He naturally did not know how to speak Greek and the conversation with the monks was in Arabic.

This was unbelievable news that this Muslim brought to the monks. The monks offered him a small icon of our Panagia which he accepted with thanksgiving. He left the Church quickly, just the way he arrived, but he then returned again in a few moments. He had forgotten that Our Holy Mother had also told him that while entering the Church, he should see her friends on the columns of the Church. The monks then took him to see the columns of the Church which have icons of saints painted on them; some of these icons today are just shadows, some are blackened and others are completely faded. These are life size figures of the Saints of our Church. These are the friends of our Panagia.

After seeing the columns the Muslim again left quickly and has never again returned to the church. But the All-Holy One, the Mother of God and our Mother, through this miraculous occurrence came to show Her support for us so that we will have patience, hope and consolation and also to assure us that: “Her Son will come again and He will gather up all those who are close to Him.” Let us, therefore, not dare to distance ourselves from Him, so that we can taste His salvation. Amen.

Source

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

It Is Better To Bear Five Crosses Than One

From the counsels of Elder Paisios the Athonite:

- Elder, the little cross you gave me to wear continually helps me with difficulties.

- See, such little crosses are our own crosses, like the ones hanging around our necks and protecting us in our lives. What, do you think we have large crosses?

Only the Cross of our Christ was very heavy, because Christ out of His love for us people did not want to use for Himself His divine power.

Further He lifts the crosses of the whole world and He reduces the pains of our tests with His divine help and sweet consolation.

The Good God economizes for each person a cross analogous with his resistance, not to be tortured, but to be raised from the cross to Heaven - because in essence the cross is a ladder to Heaven.

If we understood the treasure we gather from the pain of testing, we would not murmur, but glorify God while lifting the little cross given to us, so that in this life we will rejoice, and in the next life we will receive retirement and a "lump sum".

God has secured for us estates there in Heaven. But when we ask that God spare us from testing, He gives these estates to others and we lose them. However, if we have patience, He will give with interest.

Blessed is the one who suffers here, because, the more one struggles in this life, so much more he will be helped in the next, having repaid for his sins.

The crosses of testing are higher than "talents", the charisms, which are given from God. Blessed is the one who has not one cross but five. Some suffering or a martyric death is clean payment.

So in every test, let us say: "Thank you, my God, because this was needed for my salvation."

Translated by John Sanidopoulos

Tweet

Share on Tumblr