A Poem About St. Prokopios the Great Martyr

By St. Nikolai Velimirovich

When it is the will of the Omniscient God,

Persecutors become His servants,

Haters, wonderful apostles

Pagans, zealots for the Faith.

By God's will, Saul became Paul

Neanias, Saint Prokopios

Prokopios, against Christ went,

As a Christian, to his mother came.

Tortures prepare and himself received tortures,

All of a sudden, the truth he recognized

Before the Son of God, bowed down,

The earthly king, ceased to serve

To the heavenly King, a servant became.

The King of Heaven to him a gift bestowed

The gift of might, the afflicted to help

As at that time, so it is today:

By Prokopios, the afflicted are comforted

For today as one time, he helps.

Read also: The Life of Saint Prokopios the Great Martyr

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

14 Russian Pilgrims Die in Ukraine Bus Crash

July 7, 2012

RT

A bus with pilgrims from Russia got into an accident on a Ukrainian highway, leaving 14 dead and 29 wounded. The bus driver reportedly lost control of the vehicle which crossed into the oncoming lane, driving into a drainage ditch and rolling over.

The bus with Orthodox Christian pilgrims from Velikie Luky in the Pskov region of Russia crashed at 5:30 am local time near the city of Chernigov in northern Ukraine. The passengers were traveling to Pochaevskaya Lavra Monastery. There were 43 people on board the bus, including 41 passengers and 2 drivers.

Preliminary data suggests the pilgrims, mostly women aged 20-70, organized the trip and hired the bus themselves. The driver, who has been detained, appears to have fallen asleep at the wheel.

Both the drivers insist they were not sleeping when the bus crashed, and deny responsibility for the accident, local media report.

“The bus had to turn into the oncoming lane because of a white car that suddenly wheeled into their lane, and was moving fast onto them,” Itar-Tass quotes a Ukrainian broadcaster as saying.

Eighteen pilgrims wounded in the crash were brought to a Chernigov hospital, RIA-Novosti reports. Six remain in serious condition.

Russia’s Ministry of Emergency Situations (EMERCOM) is actively cooperating with Ukrainian police and the Interior Ministry in investigating the tragedy. Two Russian emergency planes arrived to the country to evacuate the wounded. One of the planes flew back to Moscow Sunday night, bringing 14 of the 29 injured passengers along. The other plane flew 11 wounded passengers, who are not in critical condition, as well as the corpses of the pilgrims, to Pskov, says EMERCOM.

The transfer of three people has not been allowed due to their health condition. One more person will have to stay in Ukraine at the investigators' request.

Authorities in the Pskov Region on Russia’s western border have declared July 9-11 as days of mourning. Compensation payments have been set at 600,000 rubles (some $18,000) to the families of those killed and at 200,000 rubles (some $6,000) to those injured.

Russia’s Emergency Ministry has updated the lists of those either killed or injured in the accident:

Injured (name, year of birth):

1. Belyakov Dmitry, 1986

2. Kozitskaya Irina, 1962

3. Logvinenko Yulia, 1966

4. Chernova Tatyana, 1959

5. Polyakova Antonina, 1965

6. Sokolova Valentina, 1981

7. Illarionova Galina, 1953

8. Zubova Tatyana, 1954

9. Zhurkina Viktoria, 1988

10. Potashenkov Sergey, 1981

11. Vasilyova Olga, 1976

12. Snigiryova Natalia, 1978

13. Katerinich Andrey, 1975

14. Pavlova Maria, 1936

15. Suprun Nina, 1944

16. Kasyanova Lyudmila, 1968

17. Malakhova T., 1953

18. Belagurova V., 1960

19. Yevseeva I., 1966

20. Proshchenkova T., 1956

21. Boyarishcheva L., 1938

22. Kruglova G., 1967

23. Smirnova N., 1951

24. Timofeeva O., 1953

25. Guseva L., 1959

26. Boyarchuk A., 1974

27. Zalisova T., 1969

28. Kremkov V., 1959

29. Potashenkova K., 1953

Dead (name, year of birth):

1. Murzina L., 1946

2. Turovskaya L., 1949

3. Chernysheva M., 1941

4. Zalisova L., 1994

5. Kistova V., 1941

6. Lashchinina E., 1950

7. Golubeva L., 1964

8. Kovalyova N., 1955

9. Moryakova M., 1962

10. Furayeva E., 1995

11. Furayeva N., 1954

12. Chestokina A., 1956

13. Barabanova A., 1975

14. Kopayeva N., 1959

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

St. Kyriaki in Plovdiv, Bulgaria

The Church of Sveta Nedelya (Saint Kyriaki) in the Bulgarian town Plovdiv (Philippoupolis) is one of the biggest churches in the town. The original building was built in 1578. From this church is preserved only the main icon of St. Kyriaki.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

World's Largest Stone Cross Installed in Sevastopol

Jun 29, 2012

The Voice of Russia

The 24-ton cross, made by Russian masters in the Urals as a gift to their fellow countrymen, stands in an open area near the Church of St. Nicholas so that all those willing can touch it and feel the greatness of the Orthodox faith.

7.5 meters high, the cross is made of whole granite blocks covered in gold leaf.

St. Nicholas Church was built in commemoration of soldiers who were killed defending Sevastopol during the Crimean War in the middle of the 19th century.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

On the Pain of Being Permanently Separated From A Spouse

By St. John the Prophet

Question 129: What should I do? For my sorrow at being separated from my wife is persisting violently.*

Response: It is written about man and woman: "The two shall be one flesh" (Gen. 2:24). Therefore, just as if you were to cut off a member of your own flesh, the rest of the body would also be in pain for a while, until the wound is healed and the pain subsists; so is it necessary for you to be in pain for a while, since your very own flesh has been cut away.

* Written by a monk, named Theodore.

From The Letters of Saints Barsanuphios and John; translated by John Chryssavgis.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Saint Nektarios and Patriarch Athenagoras

The official recognition of Metropolitan Nektarios of Pentapolis, the Wonderworker of Aegina, as a Saint was accomplished by the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, under Patriarch Athenagoras, which took place on 20 April 1961.

Few people know however that Patriarch Athenagoras (+ July 7, 1972) actually met St. Nektarios. In 1918, while Athenagoras was residing on Mount Athos, he was invited by Metropolitan Meletios of Athens to come to Athens to serve under him as a deacon. During this time he met St. Nektarios and received his blessing. St. Nektarios also gave the future Ecumenical Patriarch a photograph, on which he signed: "To the man who was predestined to write history. Nektarios of Pentapolis."

(Σοφοκλέους Δημητρακοπούλου, "Ο άγιος Νεκτάριος Πενταπόλεως. Η πρώτη αγία μορφή των καιρών μας", Σελ. 281 - 282.)

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Responding To Those Who Insult Religion

By St. John the Prophet

Question 658: When I see someone insulting religion and blaspheming the holy faith, I am troubled against this person, supposedly out of zeal. What does this mean?

Response: You have certainly heard that no one can come to correction through evil, but rather only through good. Therefore, speak to this person with meekness and long-suffering, advising him in godly fear. And if you see that you are troubled, it is not necessary to say anything to him.

From The Letters of Saints Barsanuphios and John; translated by John Chryssavgis.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Video: Elder Paisios - A Saint of Our Times

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Video: A Recording of Elder Paisios

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

The Icon of St. Sisoes the Great

Concerning the icon of St. Sisoes staring over the dead bones of Alexander the Great, we do not know for sure if this depicts a historical event. We do not have a historical account of what the icon describes until its depiction first starts appearing in monasteries in Greece following the Fall of Constantinople in 1453.

The inscription on the icon reads:

Sisoes, the great ascetic, before the tomb of Alexander, King of the Greeks, who was once covered in glory. Astonished, he mourns for the vicissitudes of time and the transience of glory, and tearfully declaims thus:

'The mere sight of you, tomb, dismays me and causes my heart to shed tears, as I contemplate the debt we, all men, owe. How can I possibly stand it? Oh, death! Who can evade you?'

The astonishment of Sisoes has been an icon of contemplation for all Christians, especially for monastics, since the 15th century and has spread so much in popularity that it appears throughout hundreds of Greek churches and monasteries. Among the most famous come from Holy Trinity Monastery and Varlaam Monastery at Meteora, and Hosios Loukas. The site of the church where this icon usually appears is on the opposite side of the altar area as people exit the church, where also the Dormition icon of the Theotokos also appears. It is wisely placed here so Christians can contemplate death as they leave the church.

It is no coincidence that this icon became so popular after the Fall of Constantinople. Constantinople, once the seat of the Roman Emperor from the time of Constantine the Great, always looked to Alexander as one of the most exemplary of rulers. In fact, this was a tradition of all the Roman Emperors. The historian Dion Cassius (155-235 AD) reports that after Augustus had visited the body of Alexander in Alexandria, he was asked if he also wanted to visit the tombs of the Ptolemies, the sovereigns of Hellenistic Egypt. He refused, saying: "I came to see a king and not dead men". Roman universal rule was considered an inheritance of the Roman Emperors received through Alexander.

It is not implausible that the depiction of Sisoes lamenting over the tomb of Alexander is a historical event lost to us in document form but survives only in iconography. In many ways, the iconographic tradition is just as reliable historically as is a written document. Since Sisoes was a contemporary of the time of the destruction of Alexander's tomb, I would find it difficult to believe that such a wise disciple of Anthony the Great living outside Alexandria would not at least make some comment in this regard.

Sisoes lamenting over Alexander is also a lament over an ideology. It is not by coincidence that both men are known by the epithet "Great". At one time, during Roman rule that lasted over a millennium and a half, Alexander was an icon of the Empire, but now that the Empire was gone the Romans looked to monastics as the only hope for suffering Orthodoxy under the Ottoman Muslims. It is this outlook which formed the Orthodox mentality during this period. That is not to say that it did not exist before, since this was always a part of christian and monastic tradition, but now Sisoes stands over Alexander's dead bones alive and learning the great lesson of the vanity of worldly glory. Roman glory may have vanished, but the Kingdom of Heaven reigns forever.

Read also: Sisoes the Great and the Contemplation of Death as a Means to True Life in Christ

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

An Atheistic Take On Living Without Hope

In “Hope Against Hope” (New Humanist, July/August 2012), British philosopher and atheist Julian Baggini offers,

Indeed, Sam Harris suggested to me that without hope we might be more at peace. “Hope and fear are completely natural responses to uncertainty. But they are two sides of the same coin: if we would be free of fear, we must let go of hope. Easier said than done, of course. But it is possible. And being without hope is by no means synonymous with despair. Rather, it is tranquility.”

The idea that we need hope much less, if at all, was confirmed to me in the conversation with Warburton and Haynes, when her mother, who had joined us after our event, volunteered the idea that “Hope surely just is that every day is astonishing in its own right. When you get to my age you do begin to think somewhat about death and what seems to me extraordinary is that I have had life.” I told her that seemed right to me, except that I wouldn’t call that hope. In a way, it’s better than hope. It’s not hope for things that might happen but appreciation for and delight in what you have. Hope is of its nature directed at the future, but often we would do better to focus on a nearer horizon.

Warburton distilled the thought. “There’s something better than hope, which is not to postpone everything but to focus on what’s going on now.” My hope is that thoughts like these can supersede hope.

This could maybe work if one is well off and filled with pleasant distractions in life - be it wealth, health, family, career, etc. But most people, through no fault of their own, have lives that don’t bear thinking about in the present day without hope. Jesus Himself acknowledged the difficulty of one well off and filled with distractions to embrace hope and meaning beyond what we can create for ourselves:

"Then Jesus said to his disciples, 'I tell you the truth, it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.'" - Matthew 19:23-24

And St. Paul advises:

"Command those who are rich in this present world not to be arrogant nor to put their hope in wealth, which is so uncertain, but to put their hope in God, who richly provides us with everything for our enjoyment. Command them to do good, to be rich in good deeds, and to be generous and willing to share. In this way they will lay up treasure for themselves as a firm foundation for the coming age, so that they may take hold of the life that is truly life." - 1 Timothy 6:17-19

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

St. Nilus of Sora: Life at the Sora River

Ten Miles from St. Cyril's White Lake Monastery is the Sora (or Sorka) River, where St. Nilus of Sora (May 7) chose to establish his Skete. It was a wild, dark and desolate place. The River Sora barely flows through this marshy, low-lying region, and it resembles more a swamp than a river. There is forest all around. Here, having erected a cross, St. Nilus built at first a chapel and a solitary cell and dug a well. And when several brothers had gathered together to live with him he built a wooden church in honor of the Meeting of the Lord. Later another wooden church dedicated to St. John the Forerunner was added. Nearby he built a mill.

From this skete St. Nilus wrote to his friend St. Innocent:

"When we were living together with you in the Monastery of St. Cyril, you know how I avoided worldly ties and strove to live according to the Holy Scripture, even though in my slothfulness I did not succeed in this. At the end of my wandering I came again to the Monastery, built a cell near it, and lived as best as I could. Now I have resettled far from the Monastery and have found by God's grace a place according with my ideas, a place little accessible to worldly people, as you yourself have seen. Living in solitude, I occupy myself with searching the spiritual writings: above all I search the Lord's commandments and their commentaries, and the Apostolic tradi­tions; then the Lives and instructions of the Holy Fathers. I reflect on all this, and whatever I find after reflection to be God-pleasing and useful for my soul, I copy out for myself. In this is my life and breath. As for my infirmity and sloth, I place my hope in God and the Most Pure Mother of God. If there is something for me to undertake, and if I find nothing about it in Scripture, I lay it aside for a time until I do find some­thing. I do not presume to undertake anything at all on my own will and according to my own judgement. Whether you live as a hermit or in coenobitic life, pay heed to the Holy Scripture and follow in the footsteps of the Fathers, or be in subjection to one who is known to you as a spiritual man in word, life and judgement. The Holy Scripture is harsh only for earthly ways of thinking, who rather desires to live according to his own passionate will. Others do not wish humbly to search the Holy Scripture, do not wish even to hear of how one should live, as if the Scripture were not written for us or need not be put in all times. The words of the Lord will always be words as pure as refined silver; the Lord's commandments for them are dearer than gold and precious stones, sweeter than honey and the honeycomb."

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

St. Athanasios the Athonite - Hard Working, Sociable, and Progressive

By Elder Joseph of Vatopaidi

According to his biography, St. Athanasios hailed from the east, from Trebizond. After finishing his education as a teacher of literature, while still very young, he was touched by Divine Grace. He forsook the world and espoused monasticism under the guidance of his uncle (St. Michael Maleinos).

It is said that when the young generals, who later played a crucial role in the Byzantine Empire, Nikephoros and Leon, visited St. Michael to confess, he guided them to the place where St Athanasios, then thirty years old, was staying and told them that he wanted to show them a ‘treasure’. After meeting and talking with Athanasios, the two men were truly amazed and concurred that indeed he was ‘a great treasure’. They were then commanded to ‘reveal all their thoughts to this very monk for ever’. Until the end of their lives, these two great men continued to have St. Athanasios as their spiritual guide. Nikephoros was so keen to be with him that they promised each other to live together as monks for ever.

Nikephoros never managed to keep his part of the promise. Being a general, he was called to free Crete from the pirates. Then he became emperor against his will, and was later murdered. However, he never stopped looking after the Monastery of Great Lavra, established by St. Athanasios.

St. Athanasios came to Mount Athos from Bythinia. When he reached Karyes, which was the centre of monasticism at the time, he never revealed who he was, but pretended to be an illiterate peasant. His elder had tried several times to teach him to read to assist him with his spiritual regime. He, however, was pretending to be incapable of learning.

Finally, those who knew him revealed the truth and he had to confess that indeed he was the renowned Athanasios. After that, since he could no longer live in obscurity, which he so preferred, he roamed the Holy Mountain, looking for an appropriate place to stay. He even reached the most eastern region of the Holy Mountain, ‘Melana’, where he lived as a hesychast in a cave for a while. Later on, being pressurized by Nikephoros, he began constructing the Great Lavra Monastery. The news that Nikephoros was crowned Emperor reached him before the construction had finished. Athanasios became upset with the news, because Nikephoros had broken his promise to the Lord to become a monk. Thus, he abandoned the monastery out of humility and hatred for glory, and because of his love for the hesychastic life. After writing a reprimanding letter to Nikephoros, he came to Cyprus with Anthony, one of his disciples.

While in Cyprus, the Lord asked him to return to the Holy Mountain and finish the monastery. He obeyed, and by completing Lavra, he became the pillar of the monastic life on Mount Athos. He managed to start the various isolated cells, Sketes and hesychastic places to communicate amongst themselves. He also initiated the communication amongst his own disciples who were living inside the coenobium. Thus, they all gradually came under his obedience. They remained in their various places of abode, but they depended on him spiritually. To be honest, he had managed to establish the balance on which the long-standing Athonite monasticism rests. Therefore he ought to be rightfully named as the Abbot, the governor and the regulator of Athonite monasticism. As I have already said, he had managed to unite the isolated and difficult to reach fathers residing in Athos, under one guide, while at the same time respecting their freedom and convincing each one that they may indeed become true monks by following the philosophy of the Holy Fathers. He truly applied the relevant saying by Paul: "Having gifts that differ according to the grace given to us, let us use them: if prophecy, in proportion to our faith; if service, in our serving...the one who leads, with zeal" (Romans 12:6-8), and also ‘the hesychast with sobriety’.

Therefore, St. Athanasios is not just a Saint amongst so many others, but is the exceptional spiritual father to all hagiorite monks. Throughout the generations each one of us may find what he needs by studying his personality, his fatherly affection and providence, his illuminating intellect and his discretion, and may be fortified to pursue his goal, preserving the blessed hope that he will eventually succeed in his monastic life.

Two exceptional elements single out this great beacon. One is his absolute love for hard work (φιλοπονία), the continuous carrying of one’s cross. He regarded this as the most essential aspect and the spinal cord of monastic discipline. He engaged his love for hard work mostly as part of his hesychastic discipline, which he began and continued until the time he assumed his important duties. He was so attracted to hesychasm that he used to complain that he had assumed great social responsibilities inherent in the monastic life against his wish. He fervently wished to be absolved of all duties and get on with his hesychastic life, which he had so many times enjoyed in his cave on the southeastern outskirts of Lavra, the so-called Vigla region.

The second element was the issue of love, of sociability and solidarity. Even though he imposed very austere asceticism and hardship on himself, he was very loving and affectionate towards others. We believe that his abundant love and affection which has truly united monks in the context of Athonite monasticism will continue to connect them unto the end of ages, as divine providence determines through the ceaseless mediation of this great beacon. Nonetheless, if we try to extol him, we will demean him. These meager facts were mentioned as a necessary duty so that each one of us is roused in imitation of some of his various and numerous virtues. He was so determined to strengthen his flock that even during the liturgy he would sit on the left of the Holy Altar and receive the confession not only of monks of his own brotherhood, but also of many others.

Prompted by the most free (πανελεύθερο) spirit of his fatherly affection to comfort and pacify all different personalities from the weakest to the strongest, he didn’t refrain using even his secular knowledge in an effort to adjust and ease the monastic discipline to enable even the weakest to boast about their monastic capacity without being discouraged. In his broad fatherly providence, he had improvised a regime which was not only unheard of, but also objectionable compared to the isolated monastic customs of the Holy Mountain. He had constructed ports, roads, cellars, vineyards, gardens and anything else which within limits could provide some comfort to the people who could and wished to become monks. This effort had created grievances. As it is mentioned in his biography, he was regarded as ‘the introducer of innovation’. He was then slandered and had the Administration of Mount Athos rally against him. They were about to pass judgment against him on charges that he had violated the regime and the type of hesychasm which the fathers followed, but the Mother of God intervened personally and pacified them. She also encouraged him to continue his task boldly without discouragement. On any occasion, when he was financially hard up and could not continue his immense task, our Lady would personally console him. Her promises and her presence were so real and perceptible that when the storage rooms and the cellars were empty once, she presented herself and told them: "I am the Provider (Oikonomos - Oικονόμος), have concern no more". Indeed on several occasions, when the numerous laborers, monks and lay people could not be fed, the storage rooms were filled with provisions at her command. Ever since, this holy monastery does not have an official Provider, like other monasteries, but only a deputy Provider. Her icon, the so-called Ekonomissa, which was the one performing this miracle, is still at the Oikonomeio and performs even more miracles. The monks show their particular veneration to the icon and express their gratitude to the Mother of God. Several times she was seen to bless and increase the provisions in the cellars according to the monastery’s needs.

This is what I wished to remind you of tonight. Most of you are already aware of it. But you must now pay more attention and direct your respect to this fact: Namely, that even though there are now several different regimes and various pious elders, the Great Elder, Abbot, Spiritual Father and Protector for each one of us is the most holy Father St. Athanasios, who is also inexplicably the continuator of the order and the provider of this place, if not of the entire eastern monasticism.

With his mediation and the mediation of the Most Immaculate Lady Mother of God, Lord Jesus Christ, our Lord, have mercy on us and deliver us from our sins. Amen.

Source: Γέροντος Ιωσήφ Βατοπαιδινού, Διδαχές από τον Άθωνα, Εκδόσεις ‘Το Αγιον Όρος’, Θεσσαλονίκη, 1989. (Translated by Olga Konari Kokkinou; edited by John Sanidopoulos)

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Video: The Feast of St. Athanasios of Athos at Great Lavra

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Russian Church Hails Possible Discovery of "God Particle"

July 4, 2012

Interfax

The Moscow Patriarchate has congratulated scientists on the possible discovery of the Higgs boson, or "God particle."

"I am glad about this discovery and I would like to congratulate scientists on it. It probably again raises the question of whether matter has always been the way it is now or initially developed according to a special scenario and is not eternal and unchanging, as some people believed several decades ago," the head of the Synodal Department for Church and Society Relations archpriest Vsevolod Chaplin, told Interfax-Religion on Wednesday.

According to earlier reports, scientists from the Cern research center in Switzerland announced the discovery of a new sub-atomic particle on Wednesday. This particle could be the "Higgs boson" or "God particle," which, according to the standard physics model, created the mass of the Universe.

The proof of the existence of the Higgs particle will fit in the theory of the Universe accepted by most scientists. When the Universe began cooling down after the Big Bang, a hypothetical force known as the Higgs field was formed. This field explains the appearance of the mass of the particles that formed atoms.

The clergyman pointed out that Sergio Bertolucchi, director on research and scientific calculations at Cern, "honestly admits that only 4% of the existing particles can currently be studied and the remaining 96% remain unknown."

"In my view, humanity is only just beginning to know the world, both spiritual and physical. We really do not even know what is located twenty kilometers down in the ground, although we can see far-away stars," he said.

This means that there is still a great deal of room for research and thought and for knowledge and understanding of their limitations, he said.

Read also: Higgs Boson Binds the Universe, but Humans Give It Meaning

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Jefferson's Support For Intelligent Design

Stephen C. Meyer

July 15, 2009

The Boston Globe

IN THE battle over how to teach evolution in public schools, Thomas Jefferson’s demand for a “separation between church and state’’ has been cited countless times. Many argue that the controversial alternative to Darwinian evolution, intelligent design, is an exclusively religious idea and therefore cannot be discussed under the Constitution. By invoking Jefferson’s principle of separation, many critics of intelligent design assume that this visionary Founding Father would agree with them.

But would he? For too long, an aspect of Jefferson’s visionary thought has been ignored, hidden away as too uncomfortable for public discussion - his support for intelligent design.

In 1823, when materialist evolutionary ideas had long been circulating, Jefferson wrote to John Adams and insisted that the scientific evidence of design in nature was clear: “I hold (without appeal to revelation) that when we take a view of the Universe, in its parts general or particular, it is impossible for the human mind not to perceive and feel a conviction of design, consummate skill, and indefinite power in every atom of its composition.’’ It was on empirical grounds, not religious ones, that he took this view.

Contemplating everything from the heavenly bodies down to the creaturely bodies of men and animals, he argued: “It is impossible, I say, for the human mind not to believe that there is, in all this, design, cause and effect, up to an ultimate cause, a fabricator of all things from matter and motion.’’

The “ultimate cause" and “fabricator of all things’’ that Jefferson invoked was also responsible for the “design’’ of life’s endlessly diverse forms as well as the manifestly special endowments of human beings. Moreover, because the evidence of “Nature’s God’’ was publicly accessible to all and did not depend upon a special appeal to religious authority, Jefferson believed that it provided a basis in reason for the protection of individual liberty. Thus, the Declaration of Independence asserted that humans are “endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights.’’

Of course, many people assume that Jefferson’s views, having been written before Darwin’s “Origin of Species,’’ are now scientifically obsolete. But Jefferson has been vindicated by modern scientific discoveries that Darwin could not have anticipated. For example, in 1953 when Watson and Crick elucidated the structure of the DNA molecule, they made a startling discovery. The structure of DNA allows it to store information in the form of a four-character digital code. Strings of precisely sequenced chemicals called nucleotide bases store and transmit the assembly instructions - the information - for building the crucial protein molecules and machines the cell needs to survive. Francis Crick later developed this idea with his famous “sequence hypothesis,’’ according to which the chemical constituents in DNA function like letters in a written language or symbols in a computer code. As Bill Gates has noted, “DNA is like a computer program, but far, far more advanced than any software we’ve ever created.’’

This discovery has made acute a longstanding scientific mystery that Darwin never addressed or solved: the mystery of how the very first life on earth arose. To date no theory of undirected chemical evolution has explained the origin of the digital information in DNA needed to build the first living cell on earth. Yet modern scientists who argue for intelligent design do not do so merely because natural processes have failed to explain the origin of the information in cells. Instead, they argue for design because systems possessing these features invariably arise from intelligent causes.

DNA functions like a software program. We know that software comes from programmers. Information - whether inscribed in hieroglyphics, written in a book, or encoded in a radio signal - always arises from an intelligent source. So the discovery of digital code in DNA provides a strong scientific reason for concluding that the information in DNA also had an intelligent source.

Design is an inference from biological data, not a deduction from religious authority. Jefferson said just that, and based his political thinking on it. The evidence for what he presciently called “Nature’s God’’ is stronger than ever. Our nation’s existence, with its guarantee to protect each person’s “inalienable rights,’’ may be counted among the fruits of Jefferson’s belief in intelligent design.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Top Ten Movies of 2012...So Far

As I customarily list my top ten movies of the year every end of December or beginning of January, I try to divide the year in half as well in order to make the end task a bit easier. It also serves the purpose of recommending movies from the year, before the summer blockbusters begin. The movies of the first half of the year typically are not the best, so few will probably make my top ten at the end of the year. But there are still some gems which I recommend.

1. The Avengers

I'm sure everyone has seen this by now, and if you haven't, do so. If you can see it in IMAX 3-D, even better. This movie had high expectations, and it fulfilled them all very nicely.

2. The Grey

A great philosophical horror movie, where you get to also see Liam Neeson punch a wolf in the face.

3. Bernie

I hesitate to say anything about this movie. I went in cold not knowing anything about it, except that Jack Black starred in it, and I left very enthusiastic about it. Do not watch a trailer, do not read a review - just see it!

4. Moonrise Kingdom

Rotten Tomatoes gave this a 94%, so it has the critical acclaim to back me up on including this in my top ten. A perfect and funny nostalgic summer flick.

5. The Hunger Games

I already wrote a review of this movie, which can be read here.

6. Underworld: Awakening

I already wrote a review of this movie, which can be read here.

7. Safety Not Guaranteed

The description of this movie sounds silly: "Three magazine employees head out on an assignment to interview a guy who placed a classified ad seeking a companion for time travel." However the movie is very funny and good, with excellent performances. Plus, Aubrey Plaza should be better known as a female comedian.

8. Chronicle

A super hero movie with a "found footage" look, making it very believable, except for the formulaic ending.

9. John Carter

The story of John Carter is the story that inspired some of the most beloved super heroes we know today. Unfortunately it was not as well received as it should have been, which I think is due to its title and the fact that it was made by Disney. I really liked this movie however.

10. Haywire / Safe House

I was divided on my last pick, so I just went with two movies here. Both have strong performances coupled with a lot of action and thrills.

And that is my top ten...so far. Hopefully soon I will start writing more movie reviews again.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Boston, the Athens of America

“Boston is what I would have the whole United States to be.” - Charles Dickens

A nickname for Boston is The Athens of America, used mainly in literary circles during the first half of the 20th Century. The origin is believed to be in a letter written in 1764 by Samuel Adams, as quoted in History of the United States, by George Bancroft, Volume 5, page 195 (1857), in which Adams wrote "Boston might become a Christian Sparta."

Also, in 1819, William Tudor wrote a letter describing the town: "[Boston] is perhaps the most perfect and certainly the best-regulated democracy that ever existed. There is something so impossible in the immortal fame of Athens, that the very name makes everything modern shrink from comparison; but since the days of that glorious city I know of none that has approached so near in some points, distant as it may still be from that illustrious model."

On the western slope of Beacon Hill, at Louisburg Square, is a statue of Ancient Greek general and statesman Aristides the Just (530?-468 BC). Aristides led the army in a great victory over the Persians at the Battle of Plataea (479). In 478, he was a prominent leader in the formation of the confederacy of Greek city-states known as the Delian League. The Aristides statue on Beacon Hill was a significant symbol of the Athens of America alias, and also of 1850s Brahmin culture.

Louisburg Square is collectively owned by a group of wealthy Boston residents. Joseph Iasigi, of Greek descent and one of the owners of the square, received approval in 1852 and installed the statue of Aristides. The square also hosts a statue of Christopher Columbus, installed about the same time, located at the opposite end as Aristides. In the early 1900s, a club of engineering and technology students resided at a building in the square, and Aristides became known as Uncle Louisburg or just Uncle Louie by the younger generations.

Many of the quaint row houses and streets on Beacon Hill resemble parts of old London. This was of course, by design. According to the book Some Statues of Boston (1946), by State Street Trust Company, a former resident recalled that the Edison Company had at one time taken photographs of Louisburg Square, and thus avoided the need to travel to London to take photographs.

Edinburgh in Scotland was also known as a Modern Athens at about the same time Boston was espousing its similarity with the ancient Greek city.

Source

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Building American Orthodox Monasticism in the 21st Century

Friends of Mt Athos Conference, June 16, 2012, Oxford, England

By Metropolitan Jonah of Washington (OCA)

Monastic life is the emulation of the life of Jesus and the apostles, lived in obedience to his commands and his teaching, seeking to hear the will of God and do it. On one hand, this is very simple; on another, it has taken on very specific cultural expressions in the many cultures and societies that have embraced Christianity.

It is one thing to revive a monastery which has existed for a thousand years, albeit the buildings are ruins; it is another to pull together a monastic community in a culture that sees it as alien. I have had the privilege to be part of both kinds of processes, in Russia at Valaam, and in building St John of San Francisco Monastery in California. I have also closely watched the process in the founding of the monasteries of Elder Ephraim, a transplanting of Athonite and Greek monasticism to America. Now as bishop, I see how various models do or don’t work, what their strengths and weaknesses are.

I will give you a little background about myself, as an example of formation outside a traditional Orthodox culture. I grew up in the Anglican Church in the San Diego area, and converted to Orthodoxy in university. I graduated from the University of California, Santa Cruz, with a degree in Anthropology and Religious Studies. While there, I had the benefit of the tutelage of Bishop Basil Rodzianko, of blessed memory, who took a great interest in me and eventually blessed me to go to seminary; and Bishop Mark of the Moscow Patriarchate in San Francisco. Bishop Mark was the last monk of Old Valaam, who inspired me on the monastic path, and especially an interest in Valaam. Then off to St Vladimir’s Seminary for the M.Div, under Frs Alexander Schmemann and John Meyendorff; then an M.Th. in Dogmatics, with Fr Thomas Hopko, with additional studies at Fordham University and Holy Cross Orthodox School of Theology in Boston. Then eventually, to Graduate Theological Union in Berkeley, CA. for the doctoral program in church history.

From my teenage years I was interested in monasticism, and was part of a small effort to create a community during one summer between my third and fourth years of university. That went nowhere, and I went to seminary, finishing in 1988, and then grad school, in 1991. None of the American monasteries really interested me. Being disgusted with academic politics, I went to Russia in 1993. There, working for a joint venture between an American Orthodox publishing venture and the Publication Department of the Moscow Patriarchate, Русский Паломник, I had the chance to go to Valaam. I first meet the abbot, then Archimandrite and now Bishop Pankratiy, in St Petersburg; who became my spiritual father. Eventually I went to Valaam to become a novice. Fr Pankratiy took me to his Elder, Archimandrite Kyrill of the Trinity St Sergius Lavra, who in turn blessed me to be both a priest and a monk, fulfilling the sense of calling and preparation I had made to serve the Church.

Mine was an odd novitiate, working with foreign donors and on the financial side of the monastery’s life. However, the Abbot kept me close, and showed me what he thought I needed to know. As it appeared Russia was going to descend into civil war, it was decided I could do more for the monastery from America than simply be there as a hieromonk with a funny accent, not quite able to fully identify with the culture. That decision indeed proved fruitful for the monastery, so I returned. In 1994 in California I was ordained a deacon and priest, and while continuing my relationship with Valaam, working as a missionary priest, and hoping to set up some kind of Valaam podvorye in America. That was not to be. In 1995, I was tonsured to the Small Schema at St Tikhon’s Monastery in Pennsylvania. Fr Pankratiy, while visiting the Bay Area together with Elder Ephraim, gave me the obedience, and blessing, to start a monastery there. From this eventually was born the Monastery of St John of San Franciso, first at Point Reyes Station, California, in Marin County just north of San Francisco.

While I had no one to work directly with me in establishing this monastery, I did receive constant guidance from both Fr Pankratiy and the fathers at Valaam, and also from Elder Kyrill. AT this time Fr Pankratiy was developing his contacts with the fathers of the Holy Mountain, and remaking Valaam both according to the founding traditions of that monastery, but interpreted through the lens of the Holy Mountain, especially Fr Ephraim of Vatopedi. I also went to the Holy Mountain, and visited the fathers at Iveron and Vatopedi; as well as much more influence and guidance from Elder Ephraim and some of his close disciples. My own experience of the Athonite monasticism provided me a vision and model: the centrality of discipleship to the elder, the centrality of the abbot as the spiritual father of the monastery, all the monks go to all the services, the use of the Jesus Prayer as the core of the cell rule. These are central structural elements. All of these things were different than contemporary Russian practice, but found their place in our monastery. While Valaam derived directly from the Holy Mountain, we received our tradition from Valaam and thus, indirectly; however, it is like a grandson deriving from his grandfather through his father. My own experience of Athos contributed to building the vision and the guidance to work it out, albeit in an American context.

It is amazing how God sends people with particular issues that need to be dealt with, and gives the grace to learn how to deal with them, as a spiritual father. God gives a whole tutorial through pastoral work. I give thanks that for four years I was the chaplain to the women’s Skete of Our Lady of Kazan, with several nuns, that helped to form me as a confessor. Another mainstay of my formation as a spiritual father was monastic literature: the writings of the Holy Fathers, Pachomius, Basil, Cassian, Benedict, the Philokalia, particularly Maximos, Gregory of Sinai, Gregory Palamas. Then there were the later Russian Fathers, Nil Sorsky, Ignatiy Brianchaninov and Theophan the Recluse. Perhaps most important, which I will deal with later, is the influence of Fr Sophrony’s writings, especially interpreted through a hermit on Valaam, Fr Isaakiy.

Another major figure who supported much of my work was a Benedictine hermit, Fr Dunstan, who invited me to come weekly for a day of stillness and recollection at his hermitage. Fr Dunstan always had a word for me, always from the Fathers, especially St Isaac the Syrian, whom he studied for decades. Fr Dunstan guided me through the writings of St Isaac, and helped me build on the foundation of the Fathers in the practice of hesychia.

There were certainly ups and downs in the life of the community, as we struggled to figure out what it meant to be monks in late 20th century California. With years of theological education, I was able to understand the writings of the Fathers, but the brothers who came needed to have them interpreted for them and administered in small doses. Here again, God sent people with different problems and issues for me to deal with, and to learn from. What this did was to force me to learn to interpret the patristic texts on monasticism, and the Russian and Greek practices of monastic life, into forms and words the brothers could receive, and which would allow them to undergo the same process of healing and growth to spiritual maturity.

There were three major phases in the growth of our community: the initial foundations, where a handful of hippie kids came and began to live a life of obedience and discipline, with a substantial liturgical life; the second phase of that, also at Pt Reyes, where the first group was forced to leave by the chancellor of the Diocese, and a new community formed of far more mature people; and the third, where the community expanded from Pt Reyes to Manton, in the mountains of Northern California 250 miles north. The second phase, about four or five years into the project, was where the most growth occurred, both in me through dealing with the issues of the brothers, and what they brought up in me. Finally, when the community moved into larger, more adequate quarters, it doubled in size within a year, and then, two years later, they pulled me to be a bishop. It continues to grow and prosper under Fr Meletios Webber, the new abbot. Now I am in the process of establishing a new monastery in the Washington, DC, area, both to be the context for my own life as well as a community to develop those who wish to serve the Church.

It was this life experience that led me to my own synthesis, which I present below. It stands on the basis of a complete commitment to Christ in the Orthodox Church, a commitment that becomes a foundation for young men who are seeking to pour their lives into something, to find a foundation and context for their lives that will not only heal their souls and bring them into spiritual maturity, but will give meaning to their lives and commitment through love and service to others. This thirst for Christ, for the Church, for a whole and integrated life, is what monasticism in the 21st century, as in all centuries before that, provides an answer to. It is why monasticism is one of the most critical institutions with the Church, and it must be fostered and nurtured, so that it can in turn nurture the life of the Church.

Monasticism is at the heart of the Orthodox Church. It is the most radical expression of faith, in which a person leaves the world and “normal life,” in order to live in community, in poverty and self-denial, for the sake of Christ. It takes a certain maturity for a church, as Bp Pankratiy of Valaam said, for it to produce monasticism. This is perhaps why it took 100 years of the existence of Orthodoxy in American culture to start to bring forth monasteries.

Often people will focus on the cultural expressions of monasticism, the external forms that vary. Often these become more important than the real substance, and a kind of external formalism takes the place of spiritual process. “If it looks right, it is right” unfortunately doesn’t work. This is a great temptation for those who are “traditionalists,” and get caught up in the externals. While there is a place for obedience to form, what is most important is the inner work of monastic life, the life of repentance, being “transformed in the renewal of mind” which may or may not be visible to any but the spiritual father of the monk. We should observe the one, while being also mindful of the other.

Internal to monasticism is its unique monastic culture, distinct from the overall ecclesiastical culture shared by the Orthodox Churches but part of it; and yet independent of any particular ethnic cultural expressions. There are uniquely Athonite, Greek, Russian, Romanian, Serbian and other particular expressions of this culture. For example, it is said that in Russian monasteries, the liturgical life is very strict and corners are turned with military precision, but the inner life of the community, how the brothers relate to one another, is rather casual; whereas in the Greek monasteries, liturgical life can be rather casual, but there is a very strict order to personal relationships among the brothers. This, of course, is from a Russian. But underlying all of them is the unique monastic culture of shared values and a shared way of life.

The true monk is not only outwardly a monk, but rather, inwardly.

In the late 19th Century, St Ignatiy Brianchaninov wrote that all monastic life must be absolutely based in Scriptures, and any that is not is going astray. What we need to consider is what that means. Monastic culture is nothing other than life according to the Gospel, both for each monk and for the communities. Its goal is the purification, enlightenment and deification of the monks through a life of repentance, and the building of communities that incarnate the Gospel. There is always a corporate side of things, as well as individual. This is because monastic life has as a goal to bring out and foster authentic personhood in each of its members, which can only be done in community. The gifts of each one need to be discerned, and applied to the life of the community, so that each person reaches his potential and thus, is fulfilled; and so that the community receives the gifts intended by God for its upbuilding, given to each. Essential to this is the role of the spiritual father, the elder, to whom the monks are in a relationship as disciples, as spiritual sons. Not only does this emulate the relationship of Christ and the apostles; it is the way the Lord has given his followers to live.

In establishing monasticism in America, I believe what is most important is to look at the essential principles of monastic life, rather than try to duplicate culturally specific forms. It is these principles and shared understandings of how monastic life is to be lived that are the core of monastic culture, whatever the particular cultural expression. Over the past twenty plus years, I have tried to understand and incarnate monastic life, taking the principles I learned as a novice in Russia, and particularly on Valaam, through the various books on monastic life from the ancient Fathers as well as contemporary Russian and Greek Elders. These principles are as follows.

First monasticism is a life of repentance, the transformation of the mind and heart. This involves not only a turning away from sin, but also a renewal of the spiritual faculty within a person. It involves grief for sin, and purification of the soul from the effects of sin; but more than that, it is about an opening up and maturing of the spiritual consciousness in illumination. Repentance is thus the process of deification, the gradual ascent of the person to union with God. However, it is also the process of renunciation and detachment, a gradual ascent to freedom from attachment to sins, then to things and relationships, then to one’s own ego, and to even one’s conceptual images of God. Repentance is at once turning away from and renouncing all things that hold us back from following Christ, a reordering of one’s entire life and system of values, and ultimately, of one’s consciousness itself. Yet, it is also the work of detachment, letting go of these things by which one has defined himself and his life, and refocusing solely on God.

Monasticism is about inner work. While all Orthodox Christians are called to a life of prayer and fasting, according to the rules of the Church, the purpose of fasting is to bring oneself under control. Thus fasting is not only the abstention from various foods. It is, on a much broader level, the fasting from all things which lead us into temptations and passionate behavior. At the heart of such fasting is inner watchfulness and vigilance, so that passionate thoughts do not gain control of our awareness, and lead us into sinful thoughts, obsessions, and actions. At the core of this is the battle with thoughts, afflictive emotions, which lead us into sin. On other words, the battle with thoughts (logismoi) is at the core of the inner work, both rooting out their causes through detachment and renunciation, as well as the constant self-denial that comes through vigilance, in dismissing passionate thoughts and stopping the process which leads to sinful actions. Prayer and fasting, the discipline of keeping one’s awareness (nous) focused on God, and the practice of self-denial, support this inner work.

The first stages of the inner work are the process of purification, in which we confront all the behaviors, habits and ingrained ways of acting and thinking that have constituted our life and our identity. When we begin a serious spiritual discipline, especially one involving silence, one of the most important processes that happens is the emptying out of the conscience: memories, resentments, anger, guilt, and all other kinds of repressed emotions and memories come to the surface. This is why it is so important that the novice have access to his elder, so that he can confess his thoughts, and thus deal with the result of years of living in the world. The thoughts, images, emotions, feelings, memories and resentments that come to awareness all should be taken to confession, and dealt with. Thus also is the practice of life confessions, first when one becomes a novice; then later when one is tonsured. That process of purification begins in earnest during the first years of monastic life as a novice. It continues, but in a different way as one becomes more mature, and has dealt with the results of his past life.

Hand in hand with this is the practice of silent prayer, hesychia, using the Jesus Prayer; together with the context of the liturgical and sacramental cycles of the prayers of the Church. The liturgical prayers give shape and words to our prayer, and are one main context for the experience of communion with God. The most powerful aspect, though is the practice of the Jesus Prayer, the prayer of stillness. The goal of prayer is to enter into Christ’s own prayer to the Father; thus, the practice of the Jesus Prayer is transformed and becomes the prayer of Jesus, by the Holy Spirit. It is an ascent to communion, to participation in Christ’s own relationship with the Father by the Spirit. On another level, the prayer of silence is the means of stilling the mind, and the context of vigilance against intrusive thoughts, so that we can keep our attention/consciousness/awareness fixed on the Presence. This in turn allows us to enter more and more deeply into the living experience of communion, without distraction. There is a correspondence between the liturgical prayer and the prayer of stillness: the deeper one’s experience of silent prayer, the deeper also will be the liturgical prayer. Also, it is very easy to loose one’s moorings, as it were, in non-conceptual silent prayer. Liturgical prayer provides a conceptual framework to keep one from going off into mystical darkness too far, at least on the initial levels of practice.

Crucial to this whole process is the relationship with a spiritual father, who can guide, hear thoughts, and be present to the monk undertaking this process of inner transformation. Monasticism is about spiritual discipleship, the sacrament of obedience. The relationship of discipleship is about obedience: for the disciple to listen to the master, and enter into synergy with him. The whole monastery is about building a community that lives in synergy with one another, and with the will of God. It is a community that seeks to live in obedience to the will of God, by living out obedience to their elder and to one another. It is a community united in love of one another, expressed as obedience and cooperation. The very core is the relationship between the elder and the disciple: the disciple knows that he is unconditionally loved, and can expose the deepest pain and shame in his heart, so that it can be healed. This healing comes from learning to be in synergy with God, through obedience to the elder. The point is always obedience to God, to the Gospel, to the commands of Christ. The focus must always be Christ. It is not the elder, it is not the community, or the buildings that are the goal of monastic life, but rather life lived in communion with Christ, Who is the criterion of all things. The disciplines are not ends in themselves, nor the services, nor the asceticism. All is there to lead us more and more deeply into Christ. It is at once healing, and at the same time, growth to spiritual maturity.

Let us apply this on another level.

In the beginning of our spiritual journey, when we are spiritually immature, our entire religious outlook is ego-centered, emotional and rational. The deeper level of awareness, the noetic consciousness, has not yet been fully opened. We don’t know our true self, and we live in function of rules and external observance. Our prayer is words in the mind, and not yet descended to the heart. We love God from duty, and our neighbor from obedience. Yet, it all remains self-centered, ego-centered. We want to be “right,” and we zealously defend our positions, whether doctrinal, ritual or otherwise. In short, we are our egos, defined by our passions. We are far from being authentic persons, caught up in our isolated individualism.

As we grow, and gain more and more control over our passions, and our soul is purified, grace illumines our spiritual (noetic) consciousness. We become more aware of God’s presence, more aware of the other. We move away from our self-centeredness, to the restoration of the focus of our attention on God. As this happens, as Elder Isaakiy of Valaam put it, our own personal “I” expands, and encompasses others, so that we cannot conceive of ourselves in isolation from God and our brothers; they are who “I” am, and “I” includes them. It is the bond of authentic spiritual love, powered by grace. The more we grow in this noetic consciousness, the more our love embraces all those around us. We pray from the heart for them, and for the whole world. We are purified by grace, so that we can authentically love in a purely unselfish way. This is the essence of what it means to be a Christian: to authentically love.

By truly loving God and our neighbor—for our love for our neighbor is the criterion of our love of God (cf. 1 John)—we are purified, illumined, deified. We are healed from our falleness, from our ego/self centeredness, from the tyrrany of our rational and emotional consciousness. The passions come under our control, subordinated to the love of the Other. We become purified of all that focuses us in ourself, and becomes a barrier to love.

“Our brother is our life” as St Silouan said. This is what authentic monasticism is: the love of our neighbor. The more purified our love is, the more we actualize our own personhood, and the more our personal “I” expands, to include the whole monastic brotherhood, the town, the region, the country, the Church, the whole world. The saints are those whose “I” includes the whole Church, and their prayer is for all as their true self. Having attained to true personhood, to authentic spiritual maturity, the Christian realizes in his life what Fr Sophrony calls “the hypostatic principle,” existence like that of Christ, in Christ, for Christ, as Christ. Our deification is realized in becoming perfected in love, embracing the whole creation, as Christ did, and being grounded in His divine Person. It is a state of true synergy with God: our love in co-operation with His love, which is His energy, His grace, His life.

The real significance is the spiritual authenticity of this contemporary monasticism, whether in Athos, Russia or England, or wherever it manifests itself. It is based in love, in the Gospel of Jesus Christ, in the transcendence of external observance and psychological/ rationalistic religiosity by the ascesis of purification from egocentrism and growth to authentic personhood through the illumination of noetic consciousness. In short, by overcoming self-love by the love of the Other. This monasticism is the way of Christ, and nurtures true disciples of Christ, who pray for the whole world as their true self, in self-denying love.

This vision of monastic life of Father Sophrony, shared by many contemporary fathers and mothers, illumines monasticism as the very soul of the Church. It reveals what authentic Christian spirituality is about, by producing saints—who incarnate the love of Christ. This vision shows what monasticism is really about, the love of the other. And it give a definition to monasticism as the mystery of holy obedience.

Obedience is the very heart of monasticism. Christian obedience, monastic obedience, has nothing at all to do with institutional or military discipline. To paraphrase Archimandrite Zacharias, those kinds of discipline are impersonal, structural, having to do with the continuity of an organization, enforced by compulsion. This may be necessary for the lowest level of spiritual development, but will otherwise quench the Spirit.

Authentic monastic obedience is profoundly personal, a communion of love, a willing self-offering by the disciple in which there can be no compulsion. It is through this profound personal relationship of love that the disciple is transformed, empowered to transcend his passions and ego, and to control his thoughts; and to work out his growth to maturity through purification by self-denial. Being loved, he can grow in love, and be illumined by the grace of God, which is love, forgiveness, acceptance and healing. The spiritual father becomes God’s co-worker in bring a man up from an isolated individual into an authentic person. The authentic relationship of elder and disciple in holy obedience can only work in profound freedom, as the disciple’s free offering to God of his obedience to his elder. The grace of self-denial in obedience breaks down the ego, the self-centeredness, and self-will. Thus the father begets a son, who in turn becomes a father. The community becomes one in Christ in the bond of love.

This is what contemporary monasticism strives for: The love of the brothers for one another, the growth in spiritual maturity, the transcendence of externalism and self-will, are a product of this kind of authentic obedience in love. Truly this is the model for what monasticism can and should become, as we strive to grow and to love.

This also is what monasticism has to offer to the Church in the 21st Century, an answer to the secularism and atheism that is enshrouding our world: a vision of a community gathered together in love, in which each person finds his authentic vocation and the fulfillment of his life by living it in communion with God and one another.

Program of the monastery

Brokenness of youth, self-hatred, need for unconditional love, need for father’s love

A question was posed about the program of the monastery. The monastery’s program, its daily cycle of prayer and work, is essential for the formation of the monks. Monasticism is a life of prayer and work, that shows how work is sanctified and prayer is a state of awareness that permeates all of life. The daily cycle of services, the Liturgy and the personal prayer rule all have to be balanced and support one another. The deeper one’s personal prayer, the deeper the experience of the Mysteries and the better the attention for the daily cycle of services.

The rule of St John’s Monastery, when I was abbot, was for the brotherhood to gather in the church and prayer the Jesus Prayer corporately for 20-30 minutes before each main service, morning and evening. The basic cycle was matins early in the morning, followed on Tuesday, Thursday, Saturday and Sunday, by the Divine Liturgy, where each would partake of communion. In the evening, the Ninth Hour and Vespers would be served, then dinner, then eventually compline. Each brother also had his own personal prayer rule, consisting of the prayer book prayers, and the Jesus Prayer, each with his own schedule. In addition the brothers each would prepare for Communion with a set rule. This might consist of the three canons and akathist, as per the Russian monastic rule, plus the prayers before communion; or a combination of some of this and the Jesus Prayer. The Jesus Prayer would lead into silence. In addition, each brother read Scripture each day, and some other spiritual literature. The writings of the Fathers were read during the meals.

The rule of prayer is part of the rule of the monk; the other part is to labor for the brotherhood. These are called obediences. There are two aspects to this: the daily chores necessary for the upkeep of the monastery, cooking, cleaning, shopping, chopping wood, stoking the fire (we heated with wood), and so forth. Then there were the tasks to bring in income for the community: making candles, coffins, publishing, the bookstore, painting icons, hospitality, and so forth; now, they make soap, and some other things as well. Some of the brothers were involved in administration of the monastery, the book keeping, assignment and oversight of obediences, and pastoral work.

The idea is that prayer and work are integrated, that we work prayerfully and our work becomes prayer, and thus, an offering of love for the brothers. It manifests how life can be integrated and whole. Prayer also is work, the conducting of the services, singing, serving and hearing confessions. It is living and acting in communion with God and one another, in synergy and cooperation. Work done prayerfully becomes an experience of grace, just as the services are. It gives far greater meaning to work, and to a life of prayer. Thus, for the people who come to the monastery, and are used to a compartmentalized life, it shows a whole new way of living. It is the ultimate answer to secularism, which is life compartmentalized.

Another question… What is unique about the situation of monasticism in America in the 21st century?

Probably the biggest difference is the level of maturity and spiritual development of young people coming from contemporary Western culture, as opposed to those raised in a traditional Orthodox home. Those coming from a traditional Orthodox upraising are often already mature by the time they are ready to enter a monastery, having been brought up in a context of obedience to their parents, and obedience to the basic disciplines of the life of the Church. They are able to take and bear full responsibility for their own lives and others around them, and are emotionally stable. Many young people of our Western culture come to the monastery very immature, often from broken homes; with even greater issues of they have suffered abuse in their lives. One of the most important ministries the monastery has to offer is that it is a place of growth and healing, nurturing growth to maturity, and healing from the wounds of the past. Orthodox spirituality is both about growth and about healing.

In our culture, men have come to mature later and later. That thirty is the new twenty one is not funny. A hundred years ago, a twenty one year old was fully a man, probably married with a kid or two, a responsible job and household. Now, this would describe someone closer to thirty years old. A young man growing up with only one parent, from a broken home, often has tremendous emotional issues and instability, which have to be overcome if he is going to become mature, much less live a monastic life. Other issues can include gender confusion, and an inability to relate to others. If there has been abuse, there is deep pain that needs to be confronted. If there has been no father in his life, much less one that has rejected him, there are major issues of self-acceptance and masculine identity which need to be confronted. All of these issues isolate a person within himself, erect huge barriers to relationships, and an inability to make commitments. The result is that we have an immense epidemic of self-hatred and self-loathing among young people. The first task is to accompany a person to being able to heal and grow.

Monastic life is all about community. Thus, if a young man cannot relate freely to other people, in love and compassion, he is not going to be able to enter into the monastery. One mistake many parish clergy make is that they think that people who are anti-social or socially awkward are automatically candidates for the monastery. This is not at all the case. Rather, a person needs to be very balanced in order to be able to enter into monastic life. Someone with acute social or behavioral, much less any kind of serious psychological problems, will find it impossible to remain in a monastic community because of the issues that their problems create, causing pain to both the person himself as well as members of the community.

How do you bring someone with these typical kinds of issues to maturity? The key is unconditional love and acceptance. We had a young man come to the monastery in our “summer novice” program. He stayed on the margins, not really entering in to the degree that most of the other young men did. Yet, when he left, he said that this was the first time he had ever felt that he was loved. All we did was accept him in the brotherhood for this short term, have him work with the brothers, and participate in our life, the liturgical cycle and common meals and activities. And yet, this was transformative, because for the first time in his life he felt accepted and recognized by other men. How many kids are there that have never experienced love and acceptance? How many have internalized this as self-hatred?

One of the things that often happened in the States was that after a boy would get into puberty, he would no longer be hugged by his father, receive no physical affection. He was told that this was not manly. However, what is subconsciously conveyed to the boy is that with all these changes in his body, he is no longer acceptable to his father, but rejected. What does this do to his self-acceptance, the acceptance of his new manhood? It creates tremendous confusion.

A close friend, the Abbess of a Greek Orthodox monastery which I had served as a young priest, herself an Eldress, gave me strict instructions: “You must hug your monks.” It is only by this very natural, human physical affection, which has no sexual content or implication, that can help a person build a sense of being loved and accepted, a sense of security. I tell men when I give talks, when you go home, give your son a hug, tell him you love him and are proud of him, no matter how old he is, and no matter that he will think it strange. He will grow to be a better man because of it. This kind of foundation is what is critical to build a strong, integrated person who will be able to grow to his full potential, unhindered by emotional pain and insecurity. It is from families that love and care for one another, work through their issues with each other, and express their love and affection, that produce young adults with the stability and maturity to take on monastic life, married family life, and leadership within the community and society.

Source

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

The Autograph Neomartyrologium Collection of Monk Caesarius Daponte (1713-1784)

The Autograph Neomartyrologium Collection of Monk Caesarius Daponte (1713-1784) [Νεομαρτυρολογικά Σύμμεικτα Α΄] is published by "Mygdonia", Thessaloniki 2012, and involves a critical edition of the autograph (in its majority) manuscript of Caesarius Daponte – now belonging to the Public library of St Petersburg – the cod. Petropolitanus gr. 253 (ff. 97r-149v) - , which contains a very important, unknown hagiologic work: a neomartyrologium collection prepared by himself, which failed to attract the attention of those who were dealing with the neomartyrological literature.

This Daponte collection has a two-fold interest. First, it records the suffering of 38 neomartyrs previously unknown. These neomartyrs were either known to Daponte or they came from relevant sources. Second, he was also the pilot who directed the iconography of the neomartyrs contained in the liti of the new Katholikon of Xeropotamou Monastery on Mount Athos in 1783. In this way it becomes a classic, perhaps unique, example of speech and image interpretation in the late Ottoman Empire and attracts the interest not only of hagiologists or of historians but also the art historians.

414 pp. [+ 34 Images + 8 tables (photo manuscripts)], shape 24 × 17, ISBN 978-960-7666-71-0.

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Video: Metr. Kallistos of Diokleia on Elder Sophrony

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

If Jupiter Was the Same Distance Away From the Earth As the Moon

Tweet

Share on Tumblr

Agios Yakinthos, The Saint Of Love In Crete

We all know St Valentine’s Day, the festival of love. But how many people know that in Crete the day of love comes many months later, on 3 July, the feast of St Hyacinth, known here as Agios Yakinthos?

The day of Agios Yakinthos is not particularly promoted. What lover has given or received a gift, from a flower to a solitaire, on 3 July? Indeed, few people knew that there was a patron saint of lovers called Yakinthos until the late 1990s.

Agios Yakinthos is the Orthodox St Valentine. The patron saint of love, youth and loving couples, his feast-day, according to the Orthodox Church, is on July 3.

Agios Yakinthos became widely known in Crete in 1998 when the composer and singer "Loudovikos ton Anoyion" (Loudovikos of Anogia), founded the not-for-profit company “Agios Yakinthos” along with the inhabitants of the mountain village of Anogia, and persuaded Anthimos, the Metropolitan Bishop of Rethymnon, to build a small church in honour of Agios Yakinthos on Mount Psiloritis. The proposal was accepted by Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew and the church was soon built.

The small, stone-built church was designed by architect Stavros Vidalis in the style of a traditional Cretan “mitato”, the round shepherds’ hut used in the mountains of Crete.

It is set at an altitude of 1200 m. on Psiloritis, the highest mountain of Crete in the centre of the island, in the Fourni area 12 km from Anogia. The surroundings have all the beauty of the Cretan mountains: a rough landscape of rocks and stones, with trees whose trunks are knotted by time, dotted with a few stone mitata.

Yakinthia festival in Anogias

On the feast-day of Agios Yakinthos on 3 July, various cultural events are held in Anogia each year. These are the “Yakinthia”, which are gradually becoming better known.

Agios Yakinthos was originally celebrated not in order to replace the imported St Valentine, but to form the opposite pole to the completely commercialised day of love.

One of the founders of the Yakinthia, the Anogian songster Loudovikos ton Anogion (PHOTO), says:

“...Agios Yakinthos as an ideology can be expressed in three words: the Saint of emotions, remembrance and expectation.

That’s why I tell them, when you go to Agios Yakinthos, light two candles, one to remembrance and one to expectation.

In this place of prayer I am bound, on the one hand, to remember a great love I have lost, but I can also, on the other hand, pray to be visited by the emotion again.

So Agios Yakinthos is not the Saint of Love, but the Saint of remembered and hoped-for emotions.”

Churches dedicated to Agios Yakinthos in Greece

Agios Yakinthos in Anogia is not the only church in Greece dedicated to this Orthodox saint of love:

Near Patras there is a Church of Agios Yakinthos at the 116 Fighter Squadron in Araxos.

There is also a church at the skiing centre of Kalavryta, and another on Mykonos, in the Panormos area, in a holiday resort of traditional houses.

PHOTO: The sign that points to Agios Yakinthos church on Mt Ida near Anogia in Crete

The Life of Agios Yakinthos

Agios Yakinthos (St Hyacinth) was born in Caesaria in Cappadocia in 98 AD. The ruler of the mighty Roman Empire was Trajan, who fought against the spread of Christianity. Yakinthos worked in Trajan’s service as a cubicularius or chamberlain.

When Trajan unleashed his persecution of the Christians, Yakinthos gathered up the courage to reveal to his lord and master that he had embraced the Christian faith. This was to cost him dearly. Trajan considered this a monstrous ingratitude by his hitherto trusted servant Yakinthos, and had him imprisoned.

Yakinthos would be released if he ate idol meat, i.e. meat which had been offered in sacrifice to an idol - in other words if he renounced Christianity. Yakinthos withstood 40 days in prison without food, until on the 41st he departed this life as a Christian martyr, at just 20 years of age.

The saint’s life does not seem to have any direct connection to love or lovers. But let us not forget that the young Yakinthos was martyred for his great love of Christ, “divine love” as it is described in religious writings.

The calendar of the Orthodox Church includes another St Hyacinth, who is honoured on 18 July. This Hyacinth was born in Amastris on the Black Sea, to devout Christian parents. His faith was so great that he is said to have performed his first miracle at the age of three, when he resurrected a little child. His end, however, was a tragic one and he is honoured as a martyr. One day he uprooted a tree which he saw being worshipped. The local lord, Castrinsius, had him punished for this sacrilege. He was beaten mercilessly and his teeth were pulled out before he was dragged outside the city with ropes and pierced with sharp canes. In the end he was thrown in prison, where he died.

Hyacinth in Greek mythology

Ancient Greek mythology tells of Hyacinthus or Hyacinth, a young and handsome prince of Sparta who lost his life due to the jealousy of his friends.

Legend has it that Hyacinth’s friendship was contested by Apollo, god of fire and music, and Zephyr, god of the West Wind.

One day when Hyacinth was throwing the discus with Apollo, Zephyr became jealous because he preferred Apollo’s company, and made the west winds blow the discus back at Hyacinth, striking and killing him.

From the blood of the young man sprang a beautiful flower, the hyacinth.

Agios Yakinthos, an unpublished song by Alkinoos Ioannidis

Agios Yakinthos wakes at noon
He takes Crete in his wings, love in his arms
Goes down the mountain along the path
As soon as the sun sees him, it smiles and sets.

Agios Yakinthos opens windows
He brings breasts and bodies together and builds the bridges
To make people fall in love and grace the world
To make basil, oregano and spearmint flower.

Agios Yakinthos wakes on Psiloritis
If only he could come and pass by your house too
To bring you and tell you his Holy Love
So that you’d wake at once and come near him.

Ο Άγιος Υάκινθος ξυπνάει τα μεσημέρια
Παίρνει την Κρήτη στα φτερά, τον έρωτα στα χέρια
Κατηφορίζει το βουνό, το μονοπάτι παίρνει
Κι ο ήλιος μόλις τον κοιτά χαμογελά και γέρνει

Ο Άγιος Υάκινθος ανοίγει παραθύρια
Σμίγει τα στήθια, τα κορμιά, και χτίζει τα γιοφύρια
Ν' αγαπηθούν οι άνθρωποι, να ομορφύνει ο κόσμος
Ν' ανθίσει ο βασιλικός, η ρίγανη, κι ο δυόσμος

Ο Άγιος Υάκινθος ξυπνάει στον Ψηλορείτη
Να 'ρχότανε να πέρναγε κι απ' το δικό σου σπίτι
Να σου 'φερνε, να σου 'λεγε τον άγιο έρωτά του
Να ξύπναγες απ'την αρχή, να 'ρχόσουνα κοντά του



Source

Tweet

Share on Tumblr