The Four Gospels Summarized in Four Words

 

Christos Anesti!
Alithos Anesti!

With only four words the four Gospels of Christ are summarized.

- St. Justin Popovich

 

 

Homilies on Holiness and the Saints - The Evangelists (Metr. Hierotheos of Nafpaktos)

The Evangelists

 

By Metropolitan Hierotheos of Nafpaktos and Agiou Vlasiou

Along with the twelve Disciples, of whom we spoke last Sunday and who constituted the close group of the Disciples of Christ, there were at the same time the seventy Disciples of Christ. Some of them, both the twelve and seventy, are called Evangelists because they wrote the four Gospels. They are the Evangelist Matthew, the Evangelist Mark, the Evangelist Luke and the Evangelist John.

The word Gospel in Greek is Evangelio and consists of two words "ev" and "angelia" and signifies "good news", "good information". The Evangelists, therefore, transmitted in writing the news that the Son and Word of God incarnated, taught, died, was crucified, resurrected, ascended, and will come again to judge people.

The Priesthood in the Old and New Testament

 By Grigoris Sachinoglou

The concept of the priesthood exists in the Old Testament, but has a different meaning and character from that which we receive in the New Testament. In the Old Testament period before Moses, every head of the family could offer sacrifices to God, as there are many examples of people making sacrifices, such as Noah after the flood to express his gratitude to God for his salvation (Gen. 8:20), as well as Abraham and his sons. There are also those in leadership positions, such as Melchizedek, who is presented as the King of Salem and a priest of the Most High, who offered a ritual blessing to Abraham (Gen. 14:18-20).

The institution of the priesthood is essentially established in the years of Moses, who defined the tribe of Levi as responsible for the proper observance of the religious duties of the people, while the family of Aaron and his descendants are chosen by God Himself for the performance of priestly liturgical functions. Chapter 16 of the Book of Numbers describes the process by which God chose Aaron as high priest and as leader of the tribe of Levi after his staff blossomed. Therefore, all the priests then came from the descendants of Aaron, thus making the priesthood hereditary and the descendants of Aaron hierarchically superior, since, among other things, he acquired rights to sacrifices and sacrificial meals.

Book of James (Complete NKJV Translation)

 

 

Book of James

(NKJV)

    

Salutation

1 1  James, a bondservant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad: Greetings.
    

Faith and Humility

2  My brethren, count it all joy when you fall into various trials, 3  knowing that the testing of your faith produces patience. 4  But let patience have its perfect work, that you may be perfect and complete, lacking nothing. 5  If any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask of God, who gives to all liberally and without reproach, and it will be given to him. 6  But let him ask in faith, with no doubting, for he who doubts is like a wave of the sea driven and tossed by the wind. 7  For let not that man suppose that he will receive anything from the Lord; 8  he is a double-minded man, unstable in all his ways. 9  Let the lowly brother glory in his exaltation, 10  but the rich in his humiliation, because as a flower of the field he will pass away. 11  For no sooner has the sun risen with a burning heat than it withers the grass; its flower falls, and its beautiful appearance perishes. So the rich man also will fade away in his pursuits.
    

The Original Copy of the Gospel of John in Ephesus?

The Apostle John writing his Gospel

 

The Chronicon Paschale is a seventh century Christian chronicle of the history of the world written in Greek, probably in Constantinople, whose anonymous author called it an Epitome of the ages from Adam the first man to the 20th year of the reign of the most August Heraclius.  

 

The work starts with an extract from Philo, On the Life of Moses, Book 3.  Then it says, “So much for Philo”, and tells us that after the fall of Jerusalem under Vespasian, various ecclesiastical writers discussed the question of the date of Easter, including Peter of Alexandria, an unknown Tricentius, the great Athanasius, and Epiphanios. We then pass into material on the subject itself, beginning with Peter of Alexandria from his lost work on Easter, written towards the end of the third century.

 

Amphilochios of Iconium on the Canon of Holy Scripture

Amphilochios of Iconium was a cousin of Gregory the Theologian, and served as Bishop of Iconium (in Galatia) from A.D. 373 to 394. He wrote several books, but only a few poems and some other fragments from his writings have come down to us. His teaching on the canon is preserved in his Iambics for Seleucus (Iambi ad Seleucum), a didactic poetic work formerly attributed to Gregory the Theologian.

The Greek text reproduced below is from vol. 37 of Migne's Patrologia Graeca, where the Iambics of Seleucus is printed among the works of Gregory the Theologian.

St. Nicholas the Studite and the Uspensky Gospel Book

Text of John 17:2-12 from the Uspensky Gospels

St. Nicholas the Studite and Confessor (Feb. 4) was an accomplished scribe, copying several manuscripts, the most famous being what is today known as the Uspensky Gospel Book. The Uspensky Gospels are a New Testament minuscule manuscript written in Greek, dated at 835 AD. They are the oldest known dated manuscript of the New Testament; it was not customary for Greek scribes to date their work at the time.

Recommended Reading from Saint Porphyrios

In the following conversation, the Holy Elder Porphyrios offers some reading recommendations. He asked a certain visitor:

"Honestly, what books do you read?"

"I have no particular preference. I read all kinds."

"Do you read the lives of Saints?"

"I have read many. And I like them a lot!"

The Blind Shepherd Who Memorized the New Testament

John Hasiotis was born in Milia Metsovo of Pindos in 1947. His village was inhabited by Vlachs and their language in the early twentieth century was Vlach.

Young John first came into contact with the Greek language during his studies in elementary school in his village, since the villagers at that time had neither television or radio.

After graduating he worked as a shepherd of his father's sheep. At a young age he had a reduction of visual acuity. He visited an ophthalmologist in Trikala, who diagnosed that he was suffering from a serious eye disease (retinitis pigmentosa), which causes blindness.

How the Passion of Christ Reversed the Fall of Adam

By John Sanidopoulos

- Jesus voluntarily and successfully fasted forty days in the wilderness and overcame the temptations of the devil, because Adam voluntarily yet unsuccessfully kept the God-commanded fast to abstain from the Tree of Knowledge after being tempted by the devil.

- Jesus rebuked Peter as inspired by the devil for trying to dissuade Him from going to Jerusalem to be crucified, because Adam gave in to the suggestion of Eve who was inspired by the devil to eat the forbidden fruit of the Tree of Knowledge.

- Jesus submitted His will to the Father in the Garden of Gethsemane, because in the Garden of Eden Adam disobeyed the will of the Father.

- Jesus was crucified on the wood of a tree, because the fall of Adam took place through a forbidden tree.

Was Zechariah, the Father of John the Baptist, a High Priest?

By John Sanidopoulos

According to the entire tradition of the Church, Zechariah, the father of John the Baptist, was the High Priest who entered the Temple in Jerusalem on the Day of Atonement in September and received a revelation from an Angel of the Lord. St. Nikodemos the Hagiorite informs us that it is for this reason that the Church celebrates the conception of John the Baptist on September 23rd and his birth on June 24th, nine months after the conception. Since the Gospel of Luke tells us that Jesus was conceived six months after John was conceived, the Church celebrates the Annunciation to the Virgin Mary on March 25th and the Birth of Christ nine months later on December 25th. Forty days later, on February 2nd, Jesus was presented to the Temple. Hence, according to St. Nikodemos, the immovable liturgical calendar of Despotic Feasts of the Orthodox Church revolves around the fact that Zechariah was the High Priest who entered the Temple on the Day of Atonement in September and received a revelation from an Angel of the Lord.

"Israel Does Not Know Me..."

By Panagiotis Melekidis, theologian

Having completed the period of Holy and Great Lent, we are now being led to the Passion, Burial and Resurrection of Christ. Already, on Clean Monday, we read the prophecy of Isaiah: "The ox knows its master, the donkey its owner's manger, but Israel does not know Me, My people do not understand" (1:3).

We are often troubled by the hatred shown by the fellow countrymen of the Lord against His person, a hatred that resulted in a painful death. But in order not to interpret this attitude with emotional or moralistic criteria it is necessary to consider the spiritual condition of those specific historical-societal conditions.

The New Testament Apocrypha and Agrapha in the Orthodox Church

By Panagiotis Melikidis

In November the Church celebrates the Entrance of the Theotokos (Nov. 21). The event of the Entrance is not mentioned in the books that make up the New Testament canon, but is in the so-called "Apocrypha" books of the New Testament. What are the "Apocrypha" (Απόκρυφα) and "Agrapha" (Άγραφα) Sayings?

The "Apocrypha" are the books written from the second century onward. The aim of their authors is to cover the gaps of the canonical books of the New Testament related to the life of Christ and the Apostles (these stories are mostly fiction created out of the imagination of the authors) in order to present heretical opinions. Indeed, to gain prestige these literary works bear (falsely) the name of a certain Apostle. Surely the Apocrypha are not inspired by God. They satisfy the curiosity of readers, but do not lead to repentance and salvation. Yet they do preserve traditions underlying certain feasts of the Church (such as the Entrance of the Theotokos), and they extract themes of ecclesiastical hagiography. Origen notes that even in the "muck" of these texts a kernel of truth can be found. It is a fact that the Apocrypha do not add anything essential to the canonical books of the New Testament and are dangerous because, as noted above, they profess heretical opinions.

The Apocrypha are divided into:

Gospels,

Acts,

Epistles and

Apocalypses.

The most important are:

Apocryphal Gospels - Protoevangelium of James, Gospel of Peter, Gospel of Thomas (refers to the childhood miracles of Christ), Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew, etc. In Nag Hammadi, Egypt in 1948 Gnostic texts were found, such as the Gospel of Philip.

Apocryphal Acts - Sermon of Peter, Acts of Paul, Acts of John, Acts of Andrew, Acts of Barnabas, Acts of Bartholomew, Acts of Thaddeus, etc.

Apocryphal Epistles - Correspondence of Paul and Seneca, Epistle of Paul to the Laodiceans, Correspondence of Abgar and Jesus Christ, etc.

Apocryphal Apocalypses - Apocalypse of Peter, Apocalypse of Paul, Apocalypse of Thomas, Apocalypse of Mary, Sibylline Oracles, Prayer of the Apostle Paul, etc.

With the term "Agrapha" are characterized the Sayings attributed to Christ by some writers of the first centuries, but are not included in the four Gospels. Such Sayings have survived in books of the New Testament separate from the four Gospels, in the margins of certain manuscripts of the Gospels, by ecclesiastical authors of the first centuries in apocryphal books or even in liturgical books of the Church.

To name a few examples:

In Acts of the Apostles (20:35) the Apostle Paul says his farewell as follows to the presbyters of the Church of Ephesus: "And remember the words of the Lord Jesus, that He said, ‘It is more blessed to give than to receive.’"

Didymus the Blind makes the following reference in his commentary on Psalm 88:8: "On this account the Savior says: 'He that is near me is near the fire. But he that is far from me is far from the kingdom.'" This passage is also found in Origen (commentary on Jeremiah 20:3) and in the Gnostic Gospel of Thomas.

Finally, in the Service of Anointing (Unction) we encounter in the prayer after the second Gospel reading the following sentence: "You said: 'As often as you fall, get up, and you shall be saved.'"

Based on the above we can draw the following conclusions:

A) Many of the sayings attributed to Jesus are variants of well-known phrases from the Gospels or further develope what the Lord said.

B) Sometimes ecclesiastical writers cite from memory various biblical passages consistently not verifiable to a text of the Bible.

C) A large number of agrapha derived from apocryphal books, so it is suspected that these are fake.

D) Agrapha passages are figments of the imagination of writers and attributed to Jesus.

These sayings do not add anything to the knowledge we gain from the canonical books of the New Testament on the teaching of Christ, but reveal the existence of an ancient oral tradition long before the Church determined the canonical books of the New Testament.

Source: Ekklesiastiki Paremvasi, "ΑΠΟΚΡΥΦΑ ΕΥΑΓΓΕΛΙΑ", November 2002. Translated by John Sanidopoulos.

Questions About Judas Answered

By Fr. Maximus of the Sacred Monastery of Paramythias in Rhodes

1. It is worthy of wonder, how Judas betrayed his Master, even though he saw Him do many great miracles?

Judas initially must have been good. Like the other disciples of Christ, he left family and work for the Messiah.

Surely he must have endured hardships on his journeys during the three year public ministry of Christ. Christ would send His disciples on missions to towns and villages to prepare the people.

The disciples then, together with Judas, preached that the Messiah came, and they would confirm their words with miracles (Matt. 10:1-8). Judas was particularly honored by Christ to hold the common funds. From this he would shop and give money philanthropically to the poor (Jn. 13:29). When Christ began from Galilee to Judea to be sacrificed, Judas followed Him, listening to the words of his fellow disciple Thomas: "Let us go and die with Him" (Jn. 11:16).

John the Evangelist writes that Judas had a certain passion for avarice (12:6). It seems he was committed to this passion, and driven to infidelity against Christ. Avarice opened his soul to Satan, giving rights to the evil one.

Luke the Evangelist (22:3) writes that before Judas consulted with the chief priests for the betrayal, Satan entered him. This is confirmed by John the Evangelist (13:2), saying that Satan put betrayal into the heart of Judas. The same Evangelist says that at the end of the Mystical Supper Satan again entered Judas (13:27). Let us see: in Bethany Christ's feet were anointed by a woman with very costly myrrh. Judas with other disciples resentfully complained (Matt. 26:8 and Jn. 12:4-6). This protest is a sign that they questioned the infallibility of Christ: how did He allow this? When Christ stepped in and asked not to embitter the woman for her manifestation of love, for she prepared His body for burial, the others humbly hushed, but Judas was annoyed, and influenced by Satan he left to betray Him. Selfishness blinded him. Surely Judas did not believe in the divinity of Christ. A God deserves all honor and sacrifice, not betrayal. He wanted to be a teacher to Christ. Indeed he hid his avarice under the cover of being interested in the poor. Sinners usually try to cover their sins and justify them.

Through the mediation of Judas the chief priests rejoiced (Mk. 14:11 and Lk. 22:5), because now they could arrest Christ away from the mob at night, while everyone slept. Judas even openly assured them and gave them a promise that Christ will be delivered without the presence of a mob (Lk. 22:6).

The cause of the betrayal was not so much greed as it was about ego. If he was only a miser, he would have left his poor teacher Christ earlier. Although he eventually received money, yet he did not abandon Christ. Now he abandoned Him, because his ego elevated. If he did not have a big ego, he would have continued stealing and not betrayed his Master. Certainly he had avarice, because he took the money to betray Christ.

Perhaps Judas, when he lost his faith in the divine origin of Christ, started to explain away the miracles of Christ, like the Pharisees, as demonic energies. Egoism darkens man, so that he cannot discern what is right.

Judas was blinded by avarice, egoism and the devil and did not know where he was going.

2. Was the betrayal of Judas inevitable and had to be done?

That a disciple would become a traitor, God foreknew. Besides that, David also prophesied it in the Old Testament (Ps. 40:10 (41:9)). Christ prophesied it many times. Christ foreknew it, but did not predetermine it. He prophesied it because He knew it would happen. God saw the betrayal and foretold it. The foreknowledge of God is not to blame, but the freedom of Judas.

When after the multiplication of the five loaves and two fish, long before His Passion, Jesus spoke of Holy Communion, His body and blood, and some disciples told Him, "this is a hard saying" and left Him. Christ then told the twelve: "Do you also want to leave?" Peter responded: "Where will we go, You speak words of eternal life and we believed and have seen that You are the Christ, the Son of the Living God." Jesus responded: "I did not choose the twelve of you, and yet one of you is a devil." Here he was speaking of Judas (Jn. 6:60-71). Here Christ says something paradoxical: "If I chose you, among you is a traitor."

The sacrifice of Christ on the Cross was more painful, having been betrayed by His disciple. This betrayal teaches us that all of us who are near to Christ are in danger of betrayal. Judas is a model of many future traitors. If the disciple of Christ who saw the great miracles of Christ betrayed Him, how much more danger are we in who have not beheld Christ and His miracles?

Christ would have been arrested and sacrificed without the mediation of Judas. It is not possible for the All-Good God to use a person for His plan and lead him to eternal damnation. If Judas did pious work, He would not have allowed him to commit suicide. Judas shows the great corruption of people and the need for the divine sacrifice.

3. Why did Christ allow His disciple Judas to betray Him?

Christ many times tried to dissuade him from betrayal. Long before His Passion, Jesus repeatedly (Matt. 12:40; 16:21-28; 17:12; 17:22-23; 20:17-19) prepared His disciples for the Passion. He told them that He would suffer much, would be rejected by the religious leaders, would be killed, and on the third day would rise again.

In one foretelling of His Passion (Matt. 16:21-28), Peter responded and asked that His Passion not take place. Jesus answered Peter: "Get thee behind me Satan,... you do not follow the will of God, but think as men think." He then asked His disciples if they would deny Him and said: "What will it profit a man if he gains the whole world, and loses his own soul." These words were a hard warning to Judas who lost his soul for thirty pieces of silver.

At the Mystical Supper, after the washing of His disciples feet, Christ said: "You are clean, but not all of you" (Jn. 13:10-11). He knew the one who would betray Him. Then, though He was teaching about humility (which is why He washed the disciples feet), He warns Judas again by saying the prophecy of David (Ps. 40:10): "Yea, mine own familiar friend, in whom I trusted, which did eat of my bread, hath lifted up his heel against me." Judas' hypocritical anxiety was shaken due to the loss of his soul by Him clearly stating that someone would betray Him (Jn. 13:21). Judas again did something ignorantly. Christ refers to him implicitly by saying: "The one who has dipped his hand into the bowl with Me will betray Me" (Matt. 26:23). And though Judas continued to hide himself, Christ says in a menacing way: "Woe to the man through whom the Son of Man (the Messiah) will be delivered. It would have been good for him had he not been born" (Matt. 26:24). And while everyone was saying, "Is it me?", Judas, in order not to show himself by his silence, also asked Jesus without shame, "Is it me?" Christ told him: "You have said it", that is, it is as you say.

His bosom disciple says that Christ at Gethsemane knocked Judas and the soldiers backwards when they approached (Jn. 18:5-6). Judas was not moved, but hypocritically greeted Christ, saying "Hail Rabbi!" and kissed Him heartily (Matt. 26:49). Christ did not speak evil of him, but said to him: "Friend, for that which you came to do, do quickly" (Matt. 26:50). Luke (22:48) completes the words of Christ with a question: "You betray the Son of Man with a kiss?" It's as if He said to him: I know why you came, you are a traitor; your warm kiss does not fool me."

Christ tried to warn him. Judas, however, was adamant in his treason.

4. Perhaps Judas betrayed Christ because He was not the liberator from the Romans?

Christ never spoke of a revolution with weapons. His warnings of His Passion never included talks of a possible revolution. If Judas was a zealot, or a revolutionary, he should have waited lest Christ show later His divine power and liberate the people. With his betrayal he led Christ into obscurity. With the death of Christ he gained nothing for the cause of a revolution. If Christ disillusioned Judas, he should have abandoned Him and waited for another liberator Messiah.

Also a revolutionary Judas does not justify being a traitor and hanging himself. When he returned the money, he told the priests: "I handed over innocent blood" (Matt. 27:4). The revolutionary Judas would have had to keep the money for the needs of the expected revolution. His hanging did not change the status of Roman rule.

All the people were waiting for a liberator Messiah. When Christ multiplied the five loaves and the two fish and thousands of people ate, those who ate said: "This really is the expected prophet. Jesus realized they intended to make Him king, so He departed the mountain by Himself" (Jn. 16:14-15).

And the disciples of Christ were awaiting liberation from the Messiah. In fact two of His closest, the brothers James and John together with their mother, asked Christ that when He was soon to be the king in Jerusalem, if He would put them to the left and right of His throne. Christ explained to them that the bitter cup of His Passion awaited Him in Jerusalem (Matt. 20:20-23). They, however, did not betray their teacher.

Judas was not a revolutionary, but fainthearted, selfish and avaricious.

5. Didn't Judas repent when he returned the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and told them that he sinned by handing to them innocent blood?

Real repentance is one thing, simple remorse is another. True repentance is characterized by the attempt to correct the evil, while simple remorse is a change of mind (a shifting) without any attempt to correct the evil. Judas acknowledged his mistake, but he didn't do anything to correct it. If he truly repented, he would have went to find Christ and with tears asked for forgiveness, like Peter.

That he committed suicide shows that his ego now operated towards self-destruction. Obviously also the devil had influence and led him to despair.

If Judas truly repented, he would have been saved.

Source: Translated by John Sanidopoulos

Before the New Testament, Was the Divine Liturgy

By Elder Sophrony of Essex

We Orthodox live Christ in the Divine Liturgy, or rather Christ lives within us during the duration of the Divine Liturgy. The Divine Liturgy is the work of God. We say: "It is time for the Lord to act." Among other things, this means that now is the time for the Lord to act. Christ liturgizes, and we live with Christ.

The Divine Liturgy is the way we know God and the way God becomes known to us.

Christ celebrated the Divine Liturgy once and this passed into eternity. His divinized human nature came to the Divine Liturgy. We know Christ specifically in the Divine Liturgy. The Divine Liturgy we celebrate is the same Divine Liturgy which was done by Christ on Great Thursday in the Mystical Supper.

The 14th through the 16th chapters of the Gospel according to John is one Divine Liturgy. So in the Divine Liturgy we understand Holy Scripture.

The early Church lived without a New Testament, but not without the Divine Liturgy. The first records, the written hymns, exist in the Divine Liturgy.

In the Divine Liturgy we live Christ and understand His word.

As Christ cleansed His Disciples with his word and said to them: "You are already clean because of the word which I have spoken to you” (John 15:3) and He washed the feet of His Disciples with water, during the Sacred Washing, so also in the first section of the Divine Liturgy He cleanses us that we might attend later His Table of love. The purpose of the Divine Liturgy is to convey Christ to us.

The Divine Liturgy teaches us an ethos, the ethos of humility. As Christ sacrificed Himself, so also should we sacrifice ourselves. The type of the Divine Liturgy is the type of impoverishment for us. In the Divine Liturgy we try to be humbled, because we have the sense that there is the humble God.

Every Divine Liturgy is a Theophany. The Body of Christ appears. Every member of the Church is an icon of the Kingdom of God.

After the Divine Liturgy we must continue to iconify the Kingdom of God, keeping His commandments. The glory of Christ is to bear His fruit in every member. This explains His word: "Herein is my Father glorified, that ye bear much fruit" (John 15:8).

The Divine Liturgy took place once and forever. It has eternality. Every time the Divine Liturgy is performed, we ascend to its height. If we experience some aspects of the Divine Liturgy, then we will understand its grandeur, as happened with Saint Seraphim of Sarov who saw angels entering the church during the Small Entrance.

We follow the Divine Liturgy because we do not experience it, or until we do experience it.

When one observes the commandments of Christ, they are not just doing obedience, but they become united with Christ and acquire the mind of Christ.

Source: I Knew A Man In Christ: The Life and Conduct of Elder Sophrony, the Hesychast and Theologian (Οίδα άνθρωπον εν Χριστώ: Βίος και πολιτεία του Γέροντος Σωφρονίου του ησυχαστού και θεολόγου) by Metropolitan Hierotheos of Nafpaktos and Agiou Vlasiou. Translation by John Sanidopoulos.

Read also:

Elder Sophrony: The Basics of the Divine Liturgy

The Divine Liturgy is the Greatest Mission of the Church

The Transfiguration Unites the Old and New Testaments

By St. Ephraim the Syrian

The Prophets and the Apostles gathered on the mount were filled with joy; the Prophets rejoiced for they have beheld here His humanity which they did not see before; the Apostles rejoiced for they beheld here the glory of His Divinity which before they had not understood. They stood before the Lord as ministers, and looked at one another, Prophets at Apostles and Apostles at Prophets. There they mutually extended to themselves the sights of the prototypes of the Old and New Covenants. Thus, the mount represents the Church itself because Jesus united in it the two covenants accepted by the Church and has shown that He is the Giver of both.

Why Peter, James and John Were Chosen Witnesses of the Transfiguration

According to the explanation of St. John of Damascus, "the Lord took Peter in order to show that His testimony truly given to him will be affirmed by the testimony of the Father and that one should believe him in His words, that the heavenly Father revealed this testimony to him (Mt. 16:17). He took James as the one who before all the Apostles would die for Christ, to drink His cup and be baptized with His baptism (Acts 12:2). Finally, He took John, as the virgin and purest organ of Theology so that he, after having beheld the eternal glory of the Son of God, has thundered these words: 'In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God' (Jn. 1:1). Besides this on the Mount of Transfiguration, Peter who hadn't yet spread the ideas about the suffering and death of his Teacher and Lord (Mt. 16:22), might mature in the truth of His glory, which forever remains inviolable despite all hostile efforts; James and John, awaiting the opening of the earthly kingdom of the Messiah and pursued the first places in this kingdom (Mk. 10:37), might behold the true majesty of Christ the Savior, surpassing every terrestrial power. The three disciples were under the law (Deut. 19:15) sufficient witnesses of the revelation of the glory of God and, according to the expression of St. Proclus, 'in spirit personally represented all the others'."

The Reformation and the Rejection of Monasticism

By Fr. George Florovsky

The writings by or attributed to St. Paul form a critical point in the entire great divide between the churches of the Reformation and the Orthodox and Roman Catholic Church. The Epistle to the Romans is one of the most important references of this controversy. This epistle and the Epistle to the Galatians formed the base from which Luther developed his doctrine of faith and justification, a doctrine that he himself characterized in his preface to his Latin writings as a totally new understanding of Scripture. These two works continue to be the main reference points for contemporary theologians from the tradition of the Reformation. It was this new understanding of the Scriptures that the rejection of monasticism obtained in the Reformation. In general it is not an exaggeration to claim that this thought considers St. Paul as the only one who understood the Christian message. Moreover, it is not St. Paul by himself nor St. Paul from the entire corpus of his works, but rather Luther’s understanding of St. Paul. From this perspective the authentic interpreters of our Lord’s teaching and redemptive work are St. Paul, as understood by Luther, then Marcion, then St. Augustine, and then Luther. Marcion was condemned by the entire early Church. St. Augustine indeed does anticipate Luther in certain views but not at all on the doctrine of justification and Luther’s specific understanding of faith. It is more St. Augustine’s doctrine of predestination, irresistible grace, and his doctrine of the total depravity of man contained in his "novel" - to quote St. Vincent of Lerins — doctrine of original sin that influenced Luther, who himself was an Augustinian monk.

The rejection of monasticism ultimately followed from the emphasis placed upon salvation as a free gift of God. Such a position is completely accurate but its specific understanding was entirely contrary to that of the early Church. That salvation was the free gift of God and that man was justified by faith was never a problem for early Christianity. But from Luther’s perspective and emphasis any type of "works," especially that of the monks in their ascetical struggle, was considered to contradict the free nature of grace and the free gift of salvation. If one was indeed justified by faith, then — so went the line of Luther’s thought — man is not justified by "works." For Luther "justification by faith" meant an extrinsic justification, a justification totally independent from any inner change within the depths of the spiritual life of a person. For Luther "to justify" — dikaion — meant to declare one righteous or just, not "to make" righteous or just* — it is an appeal to an extrinsic justice which in reality is a spiritual fiction. Luther has created a legalism far more serious than the legalism he detected in the Roman Catholic thought and practice of his time. Morever, Luther’s legalistic doctrine of extrinsic justification is spiritually serious, for it is a legal transaction which in reality does not and can not exist. Nowhere was the emphasis on "works" so strong, thought Luther, as in monasticism. Hence, monasticism had to be rejected and rejected it was. But Luther read too much into St. Paul’s emphasis on faith, on justification by faith, and on the free gift of the grace of salvation. St. Paul is directly in controversy with Judaism, especially in his Epistle to the Romans. It is the "works of the law," the law as defined by and interpreted by and practiced by Judaism in the time of St. Paul. Our Lord has the same reaction to the externalization and mechanical understanding of the "law." Indeed, the very text of the Epistle to the Romans revels in every passage that St. Paul is comparing the external law of Judaism with the newness of the spiritual understanding of law, with the newness of the revelation of God in Jesus Christ through the Incarnation, Death, and Resurrection of our Lord. God has become Man. God has entered human history and indeed the newness is radical. But to misunderstand St. Paul’s critique of "works," to think that St. Paul is speaking of the "works" commanded by our Lord rather than the Judaic understanding of the works of the "law" is a misreading of a fundamental nature. It is true, however, that Luther had a point in considering the specific direction in which the Roman Catholic merit-system had gone as a reference point similar to the Judaic legal system. As a result of Luther’s background, as a result of his theological milieu, whenever he read anything in St. Paul about "works," he immediately thought of his own experience as a monk and the system of merit and indulgences in which he had been raised.

It must be strongly emphasized that Luther does indeed protect one aspect of salvation, the very cause and source of redemption and grace. But he neglects the other side, the aspect of man’s participation in this free gift of Divine initiative and grace. Luther fears any resurgence of the Roman Catholic system of merit and indulgences, he fears any tendency which will constitute a truly Pelagian attitude, any tendency that will allow man to believe that man is the cause, the source, or the main spring of salvation. And here Luther is correct. Nygren’s Agape-Eros distinction is correct in this context, for any spirituality that omits Agape and concentrates only on Eros, on man’s striving to win God’s influence, is fundamentally non-Christian. But the issue is not that simple. Both extremes are false. God has freely willed a synergistic path-of-redemption in which man must spiritually participate. God is the actor, the cause, the initiator, the one who completes all redemptive activity. But man is the one who must spiritually respond to the free gift of grace. And in this response there is an authentic place for the spirituality of monasticism and asceticism, one which has absolutely nothing to do with the "works of the law," or with the system of merit and indulgences.

* For a primary source treatment of the Patristic concept that the grace of God makes one righteous, see On the Incarnation of the Word of God by St. Athanasius the Great. (Note by Fr. John Romanides)

From THE ASCETIC IDEAL AND THE NEW TESTAMENT: Reflections on the Critique of the Theology of the Reformation.

The Eucharist as a 'Continuous' Sacrifice in the New Testament

The King James Version of Hebrews 10:12 and 10:14 reads as follows:

"But He, when He had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down on the right hand of God."

"For by one offering He had perfected forever them that are sanctified."

The Greek word here translated in the KJV as well as other English versions of the Bible as "forever" is the word "διηνεκες", which denotes something to be "continuous" or "perpetual". In fact, never does the word διηνεκες mean "forever". Hence, the passages above are mistranslated in English versions of the New Testament, including Roman Catholic translations.

Protestant translators mistranslate this text to fit their soteriology. They believe that the one sacrifice of Christ on the Cross is sufficient without need of partaking of the Eucharist, which many believe to be a mere remembrance of the crucifixion without any real transformation taking place. However, Orthodox Christians believe what Holy Scripture truly teaches, that the sacrifice offered once on the Cross by the Lamb of God is continuously repeated on the sacrificial altars of Orthodox churches through the mysterious transformation of the bread and wine into the very Body and Blood of Christ, through the invocation of the Holy Spirit by the priest sacrificing. That Christ Himself affirms that this sacrifice ought to be done continuously, we read in John 6:53: "Verily verily I say unto you, except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink His blood, ye have no life in you." In the Greek this sentence implies a continuous action. This illuminates Hebrews 10:14 as well, which should say: "For by one offering He hath perfected them continuously that are sanctified." In other words, the sanctification due to the sacrifice on the Cross is continued by the repeated sacrifice that takes place through the sacrament of the Eucharist.

Read also: The Lord's Supper as Sacrifice in the New Testament

The Lord's Supper as Sacrifice in the New Testament

Bible-loving Protestants often bring up the idea that nowhere in the New Testament does it speak of the Lord's Supper being a sacrifice. Orthodox Christians not only point to the long Patristic tradition that the Lord's Supper is indeed a sacrifice, but also point out a few biblical passages that clearly connect the Lord's Supper with a sacrifice.

In Hebrews 13:10 the Apostle Paul writes: "We have an altar whereof they have no right to eat who serve the tabernacle." In this passage the Apostle is comparing the altar of the Jews and the altar of the Christians and pointing out the resemblance and the difference between the two altars and two sacrifices. However, those who aren't familiar with the original Greek may assume that "altar" and "sacrifice" are independent of each other. Yet, the Greek word translated in English Bibles as "altar" implies both together. The word "θυσιαστηριον" is not simply an altar, but specifically a "sacrificial altar".

1 Corinthians 10:15-21 makes this connection even clearer. Here the Apostle Paul writes the following:

I speak as to wise men; judge for yourselves what I say. The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ? For we, though many, are one bread and one body; for we all partake of that one bread.

Observe Israel after the flesh: Are not those who eat of the sacrifices partakers of the sacrificial altar? What am I saying then? That an idol is anything, or what is offered to idols is anything? Rather, that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice they sacrifice to demons and not to God, and I do not want you to have fellowship with demons. You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons; you cannot partake of the Lord’s table and of the table of demons.

Here the Apostle Paul clearly connects the altar with the sacrifice of the altar, and compares the sacrifices of Israel as well as the sacrifices of the Gentiles with the sacrifice of the Christians in the Lord's Supper. He forbids those who partake of the Lord's sacrifice to partake of the sacrifice of the Gentiles when he speaks of "the Lord’s table" and "the table of demons". This table is the "sacrificial altar".

Read also: The Eucharist as a 'Continuous' Sacrifice in the New Testament