The Deep Foundation of the Church and Arbitrary Traditions

 

By Protopresbyter Thomas Vamvinis

The Deep Foundation of the Church

One of the most misunderstood concepts in our time is the concept of tradition, without putting any definition to it.

It is known that in the Church we do not speak of tradition in general, but we speak of the Holy Tradition, which we distinguish from all other human traditions. Sacred Tradition is not exhausted by, nor is it identified with the church building, iconography or hymnology and the art of chanting. Holy Tradition is something deeper.

What My Grandmother Taught Me

 

By Archimandrite Gregory the Archipelagitis,
Former Abbot of Docheiariou Monastery on Mount Athos

My grandmother taught me with her life and her words the reverence of our forefathers: "Fasting, my child, is the basis of all physical asceticism."

Every Great Lent my grandmother and her entire household went without oil.

She taught me to light an oil lamp, to cense, to light a candle in front of icons, and to pray morning and night.

She taught me to do prostrations as prayers that are accepted by God.

Extreme Positions in Theology and Life

Emeritus Professor of Theology George Mantzaridis offers profound insights on extremist positions in Life as well as in Theology.

The Most Powerful Argument Against Kneeling on Sundays

Those aware of the arguments against kneeling in church on Sundays not only from Pascha to Pentecost but every Sunday know about not only the canonical prohibition against kneeling on Sundays, but also how it was an ancient tradition of the Church kept for centuries until modern times when western devotional practices overrode this ancient tradition in many parishes. Besides these powerful arguments, however, there is still one that is more powerful that I have never personally seen addressed.

Saint Eusebius of Samosata as a Model for our Lives

St. Eusebius of Samosata (Feast Day - June 22)

By Protopresbyter Fr. George Papavarnavas

The Hieromartyr Eusebius, Bishop of Samosata, was an advocate of Orthodox faith and piety. Thus he was by name and deed pious, for this is what the name "Eusebius" means. Saint Gregory the Theologian, in a letter to him, calls him "a pillar and foundation of piety, a luminary of the Church and rule of faith." He lived in the fourth century, when the Church was facing the temptations of the heresy of Arius, who believed that the Son and Word of God, the Second Person of the Holy Trinity, is not perfect God equal to God the Father, but a creation of God created in time. However, if this was true, then salvation would be impossible, for only God has the power to save. Yet we know from Holy Scripture and the living tradition of the Church, that Christ came into the world to save it and to abolish the works of the devil. And His coming as Messiah and Savior was confirmed with miracles which He did and continues to do.

Going Beyond Religious Fanaticism in Light of Orthodox Teaching

By Archimandrite Ephraim,

Abbot of Vatopaidi Monastery

Religious fanaticism is defined as the absolute rule of the holy over the secular, even through violence. Nowadays the term ‘religious fundamentalism’ prevails over the Greek equivalent: ‘religious fanaticism’. Even though religious fanaticism was present from the birth of ancient religions, ‘fundamentalism’ as a term had been established in the beginning of the 20th century and referred to the reaction against the secularization of religion.

Particularly in the middle of the 1860’s two basic principles of fundamentalism were articulated: the expectations of the Adventists and the belief in the divinely-inspired Bible to the letter. The Adventists, mainly English Protestants, advocated that Christ will come again in person to establish His thousand-year rule on earth for the chosen ones. At the same time strong conservative forces were strongly opposing the literary and historical critique of biblical studies and upheld the idea that the Bible was divinely-inspired and was correct to the letter. Eventually ‘fundamentalist’ as a term was established in 1920 and was used to describe ‘those doing battle, loyal to the fundamentals’.

The Church Is Not What We Think It Is

By Archimandrite Vasilios of Iveron

The Church is not what we think it is. They took our babies from the breast of their mother, the Orthodox Church. They taught us other things. They gave us artificial milk to drink. They cut us off from our roots. They separated us from Tradition. They distanced us from our home. They made us foreigners in our own country. They set out to make us unlearn our native language, the language of Orthodoxy, the native language of humanity.

Should Icons Be Blessed or Anointed?

An icon prepared to be blessed.

It is a fairly common practice today for clergy to bless and anoint holy icons. However, this practice is contrary to the tradition of the Church and should cease.

During the Seventh Ecumenical Synod, it was an argument of the Iconoclasts that icons are not sacred because there is no prayer read over them to consecrate them and sanctify them. The Orthodox unanimously argued that icons had no need to be consecrated, because they were sanctified by the fact that they are named. Therefore, if an image bears the name of Christ, the Theotokos or any Saint, it alone is sufficient to make it worthy of honor and veneration.

The Sacred Language of Symbols

By Metropolitan Chrysostomos of Patras

Excerpt from a Homily Delivered on the Sunday of Orthodoxy,

March 20, 2016

Orthodoxy, through the sensible, leads to the spiritual, the incorruptible and the eternal. It has its own secret, internal manner by which it sanctifies the external senses and leads to the cultivation of the internal spiritual world of man. Today we celebrate the restoration of the sacred icons. Within the beautiful, secret and sacred language of symbols we are elevated spiritually. What are the symbols that have been preserved as sacred tradition and a legacy of our Church? The candles, the lamps, the sacred icons and the way the faces of the icons are depicted, and so much more.

Mint, Anise and the Phanouropita

By Fr. Demetrios Bokou

Christ once stigmatized many things of the behavior of the Scribes and Pharisees. Among other things, He mentioned that they dealt diligently and meticulously with totally secondary matters, while they were completely indifferent to the most important and basic matters requested by God.

"Woe to you, Scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! You give a tenth of your spices -- mint, anise and cumin. But you have neglected the weightier matters of the law -- justice, mercy and faithfulness. You should have practiced the latter, without neglecting the former" (Matt. 23:23).

Your whole attention, He says, is given to contributing a tenth (or tithe) of the mint, anise and cumin to the Temple, while to the heavier matters of the law -- justice, love and honesty that makes you trustworthy, you give no interest! However, it is with the latter that you should primarily occupy yourselves, without neglecting of course the minor matters.

When Orthodox Theologians Theologize Like Protestants

Breaking the Unity of Theology

By His Eminence Metropolitan Hierotheos

of Nafpaktos and Agiou Vlasiou

In our days there is much talk about so-called "post-patristic theology". Whatever definition anyone gives to this phenomenon, one thing is certain, that it is a "theology" that alters Orthodox ecclesiastical theology and associates it with so-called "scientific" theology, which in many ways deconstructs all the basic principles of the theology of the Church.

Holy Prophet Joel as a Model for our Lives

Holy Prophet Joel (Feast Day - October 19)

By Protopresbyter Fr. George Papavarnavas

Joel was the son of Bethuel, of the tribe of Reuben. He lived in the 9th century B.C. and prophesied when the King of the tribe of Judah was Joash. Joel belongs to the category of the so-called twelve lesser Prophets. His prophetic book is small, consisting of only four chapters, but it is classified as most poetic, ornate and a jewel of Hebrew literature.

He preached repentance to the people and their return to the God of their Fathers, saying to them: "'Even now,' declares the Lord, 'return to Me with all your heart, with fasting and weeping and mourning.' Rend your heart and not your garments. Return to the Lord your God, for He is gracious and compassionate, slow to anger and abounding in love, and He relents from sending calamity" (Joel 2:12, 13). He did not fail, however, to voice the gratitude of God for the repentance of the people, as long as it became a reality, as well as His promise to always be with and protect His people: "Then will the Lord be jealous for His land, and pity His people... 'And ye shall know that I am in the midst of Israel, and that I am the Lord your God, and none else; and My people shall never be ashamed'" (Joel 2:18, 27).

He prophesied the coming of the Holy Spirit to the Apostles on the day of Pentecost, which is why he is known as the Prophet of Pentecost: "And it shall come to pass afterward, that I will pour out My spirit upon all flesh; and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your old men shall dream dreams, your young men shall see visions. And also upon the servants and upon the handmaids in those days will I pour out My spirit" (Joel 2:28-30). Furthermore, he prophesied the Incarnation of Christ, the Son and Word of God, as well as His Second Coming.

His life and times give us the opportunity to highlight the following:

First, many of the prophecies of the Old Testament which refer to the Economy of God for the salvation of man, namely the Incarnation of the Word of God, the miracles that He did, His voluntary Passion, His Resurrection and Ascension, and Pentecost - that is, events which took place many centuries after their announcement - are puzzling and difficult to understand. For this reason it is necessary to study the texts of the Holy Fathers, who were God-seers and therefore infallible interpreters of Holy Scripture, as well as the hymnological texts of the Church, which contain, in meter, the whole theology of the Church, since the sacred hymnographers are theologians - God-seers.

In the second chapter of the book of the Prophet Joel, written among other things is the following: "And I will show wonders in the heavens and in the earth, blood, and fire, and pillars of smoke" (Joel 2:30). According to the interpretation of the Holy Fathers, the Prophet refers to the Incarnation of the Second Person of the Holy Trinity, the Son and Word of God, "who for us men and for our salvation" allowed Himself to be incarnated "by the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary". The sacred hymnographer gives this interpretation with wonderful poetic words, in the "Doxastikon" which is chanted in the Holy Churches on the first Sunday after the Nativity of Christ, where he writes: "Blood, and fire, and pillar of smoke, wonders on earth were foreseen by Joel; the blood of the Incarnation, the fire of Divinity, the pillar of smoke is the Holy Spirit, Who by the Virgin created the flesh of the Word, bringing fragrance to the world..." That is, the blood indicates the Incarnation of Christ and the fire reveals His Divinity. This means that Christ is Perfect God and Perfect Man. The pillar of smoke indicates the Holy Spirit, through Whom came about the Incarnation of God the Word, in accordance with the word of the Archangel Gabriel to the Theotokos: "The Spirit of the Lord will come upon you, and the Power of the Most High will overshadow you; for the holy one born will be called the Son of God."

Therefore, when one studies the Holy Bible, one must not attempt to interpret it by himself, through one's reflection, like the Protestants do, because there lurks the danger of delusion. He should consult the patristic teachings and the hymnology of the Church, the study of which will not only provide insights, but nourishes and supports spiritually, as well as arms the spiritual organism with strong spiritual antibodies.

Second, after the coming of the Holy Spirit to the Apostles on the day of Pentecost, the Apostles preached to the people the word of the Lord. The audience consisted of people belonging to different races, with different dialects. That is, they were "Parthians and Medes and Elamites, and the inhabitants of Mesopotamia, Cappadocia, Judah, Pontus and Asia, Phrygia, Pamphylia, Egypt and parts of Libya to Kyrinin ... Romans, Jews and proselytes, Cretans and Arabs", and yet all could hear and understand the word in each ones language. Of course, this does not mean the Apostles, who were Galileans, preached at the same time in various languages, but they preached in one, even their own language. The hearers, however, heard the word in their own language and this is how they understood. This, of course, was done by the Grace of the Holy Spirit. And this paradoxical event, that is, for some people to speak various languages and by the Grace of God to be able to communicate, did not only happen then, on the day of Pentecost, but continued in the life of many saints, ancient and modern. And there are several examples. In contrast, among impassioned people understanding is difficult if not impossible, even if everyone uses the same language. The person who has an inner purity and in whom works the energy of the Holy Spirit, is an inexhaustible source of fragrance, blessing, peace, and comfort for all those who come in contact with them, when, of course, the people are in a position to smell, feel and understand.

Source: Ekklesiastiki Paremvasi, "Προφήτης Ιωήλ", September 2012. Translated by John Sanidopoulos.

Pontian Customs for the Day of the Cross

The Feast of the Exaltation of the Honorable Cross on September 14th was one of the biggest feasts in Pontus, which is why the month of September was called "Stavrites" (month of the Cross).

It was a day of fasting with labor prohibited. The day prior the housewives would prepare the "foods" of the Cross which were fasting foods made without oil, since according to the Orthodox religion the day of the Cross is a fasting day with no oil, unless it fell on a Saturday or Sunday, at which time they did eat oil.

On the day of the feast the entire family went to church. The place was fragrant with basil, which according to tradition was the scent that led to the finding of the Honorable Cross.

At the end of the Liturgy they would take basil from the hand of the priest and brought it home for a blessing. They placed it near the icons and every time they burnt incense they would put a leaf of basil into the censer.

With one strand of basil the housewives would prepare prozimi (sourdough bread without yeast) in order for it to be used for a prosphoron (offering bread).

At noon the entire family gathered at the table where they ate the "foods" of the Cross.

Source: Translated by John Sanidopoulos.

Christians Should Study and Be Cultivated

By Archimandrite Hierotheos Argyris

Many enemies of the Church wish to leave it because it is without educated Clergy and Fathers, making it easy to oppose and denigrate it. It is very characteristic of what Julian the Apostate did. One of his first measures against the Christians was to deny them an education. He knew what results such a scheme would bring. But of course the Lord did not allow that provision and other such harsh prosecutorial manipulations of that man.

The opinion of the ancient Fathers was that Christians should study and be cultivated. This position dominated within the life of Fr. Epiphanios (Theodoropoulos). He strongly promoted education, both for himself and for his spiritual children who had the opportunity to educate and cultivate themselves.

According to his opinion, study and education offer the ability to be recipients of the depth of the Holy Bible and the Patristic writings. The lack of a proper knowledge leads the Christian to interpret the Holy Texts incorrectly or improperly and sometimes they end up with completely ridiculous interpretations.

Many times our Elder presented hilarious examples of people with true zeal, but did not have the necessary educational infrastructure. They expressed fanatical views and presented, due to a lack of education, their own nonsense as Patristic or Scriptural interpretations.

Someone who was an uneducated yet zealous type, the Elder recalled, called the Sacred Pedalion (The Rudder) as Vedalion: "The Vedalion says...", he would say, and he expressed irrelevant opinions supposedly contained within this book of which he didn't even know the name.

The same man would interpret some relatively obscure words according to how he felt he heard them. For example, a "mystagogue" (μυσταγωγός) is someone who keeps secrets (μύστακα)!

These things he would often recall, not because he wanted to offend our brothers that for some objective reasons were not educated. No, for God's sake! But he tried to push those who were less educated to study; those who simply had some degree, but they abandoned their studies at the lifelong university of continuous study.

Finally, the Elder urged our acquisition of prudent humilty, so we could seek answers to the thorny issues from the educated brethren and Fathers.

Source: From the book ΜΑΘΗΤΕΙΑ ΣΤΙΣ ΠΗΓΕΣ του π. Επιφάνιου. Translated by John Sanidopoulos.

The Debate on Clerical Attire in Greece

Does the Cassock Make the Priest?

Priests and Metropolitans speak out concerning the attire of the clergy

April 4, 2013

Dogma.gr

We have become accustomed in Greece to seeing our priests move among us wearing cassocks (rasa, rason). To some the attire invites respect while for others it invites problems. How easy is it for a young man who loves the Church, to join its ranks, when he knows he must move around everywhere with this black costume? How easy is it for a woman to follow him in life and become a "priest's wife"? This issue has been addressed at times, not only by ordinary priests but also by hierarchs.

Th glorious Metropolitan Alexandros of Peristeri (+ 1978) wrote in the epilogue of his book The Outer Garb of Orthodox Clergy (Η εξωτερική Περιβολή του Ορθοδόξου Κληρικού): "Married parish clergy should not be prevented from making free use of the cassock and costume outside of clerical tasks. Such a solution is imperative. In this way the complaints of oppression and the excuses of those who want to become priests will disappear by not obligating the wearing of the cassock everywhere and always, something which is difficult to reconcile with a family man/parish priest."

Metropolitan Theoklitos of Ioannina, however, who is the only Metropolitan to make an appearance with a suit, speaking with the Typo in 2002, made clear that the priest is not only characterized by the cassock he wears: "At this time our Church has forgotten one thing: the independence of man, and it tries to win the priest and the faithful over with his allegiance to some human wishes. I think anyone who wears a cassock or a suit can be a priest. But it is superfluous to talk about the appearance of the clergy."

As for the difficulties faced by clergy to move around, he ascribed it to the general climate of pietism:

"The cassock is to blame for young girls not marrying priests, or perhaps all of us because we do not allow a priest to take his wife by the arm and go for a stroll. Herein is the problem of pietism which results from mixing with Protestantism. We have falsely made the priest a saint and not allowed God to make him a saint."

This matter has concerned, in recent years, Metropolitan Anthimos of Alexandroupolis. He has "dared" to raise the issue of simplifying the appearance of clergy and the hierarchs of the Hierarchy, like the late Archbishop Christodoulos, causing an uproar, mainly from his spiritual father, Metropolitan Anthimos of Thessaloniki. But he seems to even now argue the same views.* He believes the garb of the clergy should be changed. Vestments should be simplified and gradually phased out.

"In our country there is still a numbness regarding this. They want our priests to wear something that distinguishes them," say the Metropolitan of Alexandroupolis. He further notes: "I agree the attire of clergy today are a heavy burden especially for married clergy. We have boys ready to become priests, but they can't find a wife easily. Already our younger priests take off their kalymavkion, they do not wear the outer cassock with the sleeves, and in the summer they are more comfortable, and they go to the beach with their wife and children together with the people. If our attire continues, and our words and our ways are a continuity of our rich ancient language, if the Byzantine tradition is not moved to today, then it is doomed to become relics for a museum."

The brocaded vestments, the mitres adorned with precious stones, the staffs of precious metals, provoke most believers. Especially nowadays when more and more people are facing serious survival problems. Vestments however have a liturgical role in the church and are not used for gimmicky reasons, explains Metropolitan Paul of Sisaniou:

"If someone goes to Mount Athos they will see all day monks moving around with holes in their cassocks, holes in their shoes, and often with dirty cassocks. However, when they see them liturgizing then they will see them dressed brilliantly. And the question is simple: what are they trying to do? Who are they trying to impress? Other monks? Some pilgrims? But they always wear these, depending on the day. There is a certain symbolism. Vestments show that what is happening at this time, the Divine Liturgy or the Sacrament, belongs to the realm of another world that enters within our own world. It is therefore symbolic."

Especially in recent years, he says, hierarchs are increasingly choosing a more simple appearance, not because of cost, but so as not to offend their flock. Yet the pious, he says, are not scandalized.

But what do the ordinary clergy say about this matter?

In 1997 the glorious Evangelos Skordas wrote: "The abolition of the current attire of clergy will not be easy to do suddenly. The Greek people need to be seriously enlightened. Perhaps the cassock could, with a clear understanding of the subject by the Holy Synod, remain as a formal dress of the clergy on major feasts and official appearances. The current inner cassock (anteri) can be modified to become the current everyday dress, at least for the married parish priests. Hieromonks can keep the cassock. Besides, it is exclusively theirs, since it is from them it came from. This will stop the perseverance of some parish clergy from wearing the cassock everywhere and always even in 40 degree celcius heat, which causes them to persevere the joking of the people and adverse comments."

The Orthodox Clergy Association of Greece seems to have a different view. The issue was even discussed at a recent general meeting. Fr. George Vamvakidis, a spokesman for the association, says:

"The response and the decision of the general meeting, with the absolute majority we can say - a vast great majority with few exceptions - is that the outer appearance of the clergy should remain as is, without modification, without simplification, without the abolition of the sacred cassock, which our Church has entrusted. It is to be understood that the decision of the general meeting is my personal opinion as well. We firmly believe that the non-arrival of young, capable clergy to the ranks of the clergy, is not related so much to the external attire as the mentality that prevails in the ranks of our Church."

According to Fr. George, young people have a misconception about the clergy and their lifestyle today, as if they remain in older times. He says:

"They have a misconception about the lifestyle of the clergy. They think that the cleric is isolated and cut off from the body of society, while it is quite the opposite. The clergyman is absolutely synonymous and united with the body of society. The view that the cleric is aloof has simply remained. They even have in mind that the clerics of olden times would not go out, did not socialize in public places, places frequented by young people, where they could be searched for and found. But such a thing no longer exists, because the presence of a cleric, we can say, is a positive presence in every place, even in those places that do not comply with the status of the clergy, such as the infamous nightclubs, which do not bring something beneficial to the soul but we think they bring devastating consequences for the human soul."

Regarding finding women who are willing to become presvyteres, he believes that not even there does the cassock cause a problem.

"My personal experience, and I am not a clergyman that was ordained yesterday but I have been a cleric for over twenty years, and within the position of church administration and as a spiritual father, I can judge and conclude that it is not so much the problem that it appears and is advertised that women are not becoming presvyteres due to the sacred cassock. It is primarily the life, the attention, the vigilance, and the care the cleric should have. Women now cannot coexist with such a lifestyle such as the holy spiritual life of a cleric."

The majority of hierarchs support the maintenance of the cassock

The cassock is a garment of Orthodox clergy formed by tradition and is his distinctive recognition, says Metropolitan Hierotheos of Nafpaktos:

"It has a history connected with sacrifices, struggles, tears and blood. As you know, many functions in society have some sort of distinctive clothing, such as doctors, nurses, pharmacists, etc. To clergy the cassock reminds them that they are spiritual physicians and not just social workers. The life of the cleric is sacrificial, an ongoing offering that requires the coming out of ones self to offer himself to others. This is connected with the struggles, the sacrifices, the patience in slanders and the criticisms of the people. Ultimately I believe that the cassock does not make the work of the clergy more difficult, but rather it is the high mission of the Priesthood that is difficult. For someone to don a cassock is the smallest sacrifice they can do."

According to Mr. Hierotheos neither the Church nor the Greek community is ready to accept such a big change.

"The Church moves slowly with changes as is the same in every culture, so as not to simultaneously eliminate the deeper aspects of its tradition. Any change should be handled with care to ensure the essence of ecclesiastical life. The Church should not easily alter to any new thing, because there lurks the danger of alienation. I also think that society is not ready to accept the elimination of the cassocks from the clergy. There are some who want the priest without the cassock, but most want their clergy to respect tradition, to express what they represent and are sincere in their mission."

The Metropolitan of Sisaniou does not seem positive about a change of clerical clothing outside the church area:

"Among our people there is a tradition, a tradition that wants a priest with a certain physiognomy, especially with his cassock. And it seems that our people, with this tradition it has, would not be able to tolerate this. It bothers them, and this is seen when sometimes they meet a priest from abroad who circulates in regular clothes. A priest who becomes a priest knows what he is becoming and that he exists in our land. Accordingly, it is not unknown to the priest himself how he is to be as a priest, and on the other hand, neither is the believer ready or mature enough to see something different. Of course, our people do say that the cassock does not make the priest, and this is true. On the other hand, it seems that the cassock has a multicomponent element of how the priest is to be in this land."

Metropolitan Dorotheos of Syros is against a comprehensive decision that will simplify or abolish priestly attire:

"A young man today who makes the decision to lift the heavy cross of the priesthood, the least thing he should worry about is his attire, because there are other things for which he will have to give an account before God, and there are other things which the faithful expect from the cleric. The thing today a cleric should occupy himself most with is that his conscience remain clean, that his witness be holy, that his work be worthy of his mission, which is the priesthood he bears, and that he could truly be considered worthy of his high ministry undertaken through the priesthood. These should be his main goal, and not if he will wear a cassock and kalimavkion."

According to the Metropolitans, the Church has shown in recent years a tolerance regarding the appearance of the clergy. Things, they say, have been simplified enough for young clerics and a discussion on the abolition of the cassock should not be considered at this time.

* The statement of the Metropolitan of Alexandroupolis was published in the newspaper National Herald on 01/16/2003.

Translated by John Sanidopoulos

An Atheist's First Easter

By Niko Ago

Coincidentally, the first time I came to Greece in 1992, it was the week after Easter. It must have been Thursday. The "odyssey" of my trip was about to end, and Kalambaka was a temporary stop before Thessaloniki, initially, with a final destination in Drama. Arriving at the foot of Meteora, and after a week hiking with a backpack, there were left only memories of food and an empty Coke bottle. Hunger, fatigue and insomnia claimed equally the total dedication of my mind, with final triumph being the first.

Bravely and with the little Greek I knew, like an "old" immigrant, my older brother and I approached the first house we encountered. Soon we emerged with two bags of Easter dishes. It would be inaccurate if I did not speak of the great surprise that I tasted. Even if that hunger did not provide the luxury of a traditional and historical approach to food, some things left you anything other than indifferent. The colored eggs, however, were a special surprise. It was at such a level, that at one point I wondered if the chickens on this side of the border laid them completely red. The vision of the pears and other summer fruits in the heart of Spring, were both majestic and hearty. If you think about the fact that in the village we waited till August to try them, being without the importing of "capitalist products", there is no explanation.

From 1969, when Enver Hoxha proclaimed Albania an atheistic land, tearing down religious churches as "medieval ruins", and imprisoning or humiliating religious workers of all faiths, as "instruments of the enemies of the revolution" - by implication he abolished religious celebrations and abolished traditions. The few who insisted on remembering them did so silently, risking imprisonment even if "the party" found shells of colored eggs in the garbage. Others were convinced by Marxism that "religion is the opium of the people". For a better understanding, even Hoxha stated that "if there is a God, let him come down and punish me". And since nothing happened in the hall, he became believable to many.

Even though no one spoke to us about the religious custom, and it was hunger that "introduced" us to her, this can be described as the first Easter of an atheist, who would later learn that faith for people is a fundamental right. It is an expression of freedom and must be recognized for everyone, regardless of ideology, origin, or color.

Niko Ago is an Albanian and has worked for many years as a journalist in Greece. He now lives in Sweden.

Source: Translated by John Sanidopoulos

Easter: The Psychological Dimension of Its Customs and Traditions

By Dr. Liza Varvogli

The great feast of Easter (Pascha) brings joyous associations to mind, with the solemnity of Holy Week, the candles of the faithful, the Resurrectional fireworks, the joyous bells, the Paschal lamb and the red eggs, as well as the completely green and flowery beauty of nature. Greek Easter, like most holidays, is characterized by a number of customs and traditions which lead to the the great feast.

Beyond the manners and customs of a place, which we often find diversified in different areas of Greece, every family creates its own rituals and are characterized by their own special traditions.

What are family rituals?

Family rituals are a symbolic way of communication because of the pleasure family members derive from their repetition, and they are established and systematically repeated in time.

Through their particular importance and recurring nature, the rituals have a significant role in establishing and maintaining a sense of a team bond between family members, which is called "family identity".

The family identity is one that offers a stamp of uniqueness and helps in strengthening the relations between family members, as well as maintaining their uniqueness and defines the borders with the other families within the family, with friends, or with the broader social environment.

The sense of family identity is often concentrated in a single phrase "this is how we do it at home", which people use at times when they are faced with new requirements for simple questions, from how to cook a meal to more complex issues such as how to celebrate a particular feast.

Therefore, rituals stabilize the family identity throughout the entire life of the family, clarifying anticipated roles, setting boundaries within as well as outside the family, and establish rules that all family members know as "this is how our family is".

Modern life and traditional customs and traditions

Maybe at first glance it seems like a stark contrast, on the one hand having the demands and pace of modern technologically advanced life, and on the other you have traditional customs and traditions which recall earlier times and different social structures. In reality, however, there can be a highly successful "marriage" with the differing needs of people today.

Family traditions are important for every age group and, indeed, have a different meaning and help in individual psychological functions depending on the age of the family member.

In childhood, family traditions and rituals are particularly important because they contribute to the sense of security, continuity and consistency, which is so crucial for the psychological balance of a child.

These rituals can start from something very simple, such as, for example, a parent reading a book to their child before they fall asleep, to including some ritual much more complex which may take place annually, such as those associated with a great feast, like Easter.

For teenagers, family traditions are a continuity with their childhood on the road to adulthood. The presence of family traditions helps the teenager rekindle their relationships with their family and with their relatives.

Through this psychosocial process, certain expectations for the teenager are set, such as moving from childhood to adulthood, but also creating the conditions to show what is the meaning of family life and of the obligations it entails.

The holiday season and family traditions help the teenager - even the one going through some difficulties and is going through a rebellion - to reunite with their parents and relatives, to once again feel the warmth of family and remember the joys of childhood years, along with the promises they pose, that they can be recreated in other phases of life.

For adults, the existence of rituals and traditions that are kept within the family gives an emotional dimension to the process, since the adult retains what they learned in their childhood home and they carry them into their own home and family.

On the other hand, as adults they do variations and adjustments to family traditions they inherited from the previous generation, somehow putting their own stamp on what they deliver to the next generation, that is, their children.

In this way, family life and tradition continues and the identity of family members is maintained.

For the elderly, the existence of family traditions are an opportunity to reach out to the younger generation, their grandchildren, and to impart some of their wisdom and experience they have gained over the years and in this way to contribute to strengthen family relationships and linkages.

In short, the existence of family traditions are important for the psychological continuation of a family and connecting the generations. Establishing these relationships and traditions that emphasize the importance of belonging to ones family and their obligations to it creates a source of love, personal pride, and a sense of belonging, things that make life in a troubled world more beautiful.

Dr. Liza Varvogli, Ph.D, Psychologist-Psychotherapist is a Research Fellow of the Medical School of Athens University and Harvard University in the U.S.A.

Source: Translated by John Sanidopoulos

Fundamentalism and Tradition

By Metropolitan Hierotheos of Nafpaktos

The term "fundamentalism", which in the Greek language is rendered θεμελιοκρατία, and is more known as conservatism or zealotism, was created in the West and is primarily attributed to Islamic movements that try to read the Koran in the context it was written, while rejecting all hermeneutic traditions that have overloaded and distorted it. Protestant fundamentalism was created with the same perspective, seeking to read Holy Scripture outside the hermeneutic tradition of the Church.

Understanding these conditions for so-called fundamentalism, I was puzzled when I read the text of a Professor of Theology who, among others, characterizes as a fundamentalist movement those who undertake the publication and study of the works of St. Gregory Palamas. I was puzzled, because after so many studies, both doctoral and non, I was hoping for a better reception of this hesychastic tradition, which is the essence of Orthodox teaching and life. But I would like to emphasize three points, that I would expect this retired Professor of Theology to know.

First, that St. Gregory Palamas, according to the conscience of the Church, synodal documents, the worship of the Church, and the Synodikon of Orthodoxy, is a saint and teacher who is regarded as the quintessence of Orthodox Tradition. At the same time, it is written in the Synodal Tome of 1347 that if there emerges someone who thinks, speaks or writes against St. Gregory Palamas "and the monks with him, or rather against the holy theologians and this Church, we vote also against him and put him under the same condemnation [excommunication or expulsion], whether he be a member of the clergy or a layman." Of course, such a renunciation is not fundamentalist, but a formalization to effect a measure.

Second, the clear distinction and differentiation between East and West was emphasized primarily by the slavophile theologians after the reforms of Peter the Great and cultivated mainly by the Russian emigre. In Greece the first time this was ever discussed was in 1936 in the first meeting of Orthodox Theological Schools in Athens with the presence of the great Russian theologian Fr. George Florovsky. I expected this fact to be emphasized by the retired Professor of Theology.

Third, fundamentalism was expressed in the Protestant world with the view that the Bible must be interpreted independently of patristic literature, and some "Orthodox theologians" maintain that this Protestant hermeneutical biblical tradition transferred to the Orthodox East. This being the case, it is advisable to not see the fundamentalist consciousness in the Orthodox Tradition as expressed by St. Gregory Palamas and his interpreters, but rather in the transfer of the Protestant hermeneutical view which alters not only the Bible but also patristic literature, the worship of the Church, and the decisions of the Ecumenical Synods.

We must come to understand that the criterion of Orthodox theology and the ecclesiastical mindset are the saints, who preserved the Orthodox teaching and the true way of life that leads man to the original purpose of his creation. Outside of this, all the isms - moralism, academicism, and rationalism - miss their target.

Source: Translated by John Sanidopoulos

What Are "Offerings" and "Vows"? (On Tamata)

By Fr. Athanasios Giousmas

Believers often place images of eyes or other body parts on icons of the Theotokos or the Saints, wanting in this way to express to them their gratitude, or in other cases to "coax" or "compel" them to obey their request.

"Votive Offerings" (τάματα or tamata; tama) are an ancient custom of believers throughout the world and throughout time even until today. Christians perform this action in the same way a person would offer a gift to someone who did for them some significant work. It is an ancient custom. It was a custom for the ancient Greeks to offer tributes to their gods, which either had low value, such as an animal, or valuable objects, such as gold or ivory. From those times they would lay their offering, which could be an effigy of the sufferers body part, and lay them before the sacred statue, which is something we also find today.

In the Battle of Marathon, Athenians made a "promise" or "vowed" (τάξει or taxei) to the goddess Artemis that they would sacrifice as many goats as enemies they slaughtered. Because they killed so many of the enemy they were unable to fulfill their obligation, so they changed their vow to 500 animals every year. The phenomenon of sacrificing a tribute to a god is found also in Roman times. Votive offerings, both material and spiritual, are mentioned also in the Old Testament. When Jacob fled Mesopotamia, he vowed to God to establish a sacred place of prayer. Hannah also promised to dedicate her child, if she could obtain one, to the service of God.

All that is usually vowed (τάζουν or tazoun) by the faithful and dedicated to something sacred in a church is called a "dedication" (αναθήματα or anathemata). The word comes from the verb ανατίθημι, which means to entrust or dedicate an offering (αναθέτω). Usually votive offerings are offers or counteroffers. That is, a believer supplicates a Saint to fulfill a wish, promising in return to offer them an object. Vows can be something simple, such as giving the child the name of a Saint, or to fast for a certain period of time, or to wear all black for the first fifteen days of August in honor of the Dormition of the Theotokos, etc.

Unfortunately, vows in their deepest sense are seen by the uncatechized faithful as an agreement or transaction between them and a holy person.

Christianity, as a "religion" par excellence of the spirit and of freedom does not insist on dedications, particularly material ones. That which is accepted are spiritual dedications or votive offerings. What do I mean by this? We must realize as believers that we cannot achieve redemption or salvation by placing a dedication or votive offering to a Saint when we do not live according to the principles of Christianity. In this case the votive offering would be literally useless. They have also contributed to the enrichment of some cunning sinner or have served to help the Church financially during struggles, such as in 1821 or in 1940 when votive offerings by the faithful were used to the service of the Greek nation.

The best dedication for our Orthodoxy is our own dedication to Christ, that is, to live to the best of our ability and strength, as Christ has called us, and not be rebellious, intimidated or enslaved by our weaknesses. This is the greatest "offering" that we could offer to our God, our Panagia, and our Saints, if we want to gain our spiritual redemption and salvation.

Source: Εφημερίδα Εμπρός, 6 Σεπτεμβρίου 2006. Translated by John Sanidopoulos.

By Metropolitan Germanos Paraskevopoulos of Ileias

It is very common in the lives of Christians to make vows, that is, to make an offering to God or the Theotokos or to some Saint, as an expression of reverence or thanksgiving. A vow is a pious and beneficial religious event that can be found among the ancient Greeks and Hebrews. In the Bible we find mention of many offerings (Gen. 28:20-22; Deut. 23:22-24; Judges 11:30-40; Ecclesiastes 5:4; Acts 18:18 and 21:18-24), and this practice was maintained in Christianity.

Yet in this issue also there are many misconceptions by Christians and fallacies prevail, which remove us from the true meaning of the votive offering, and instead of being beneficial they bring harm to whoever uses them. I will mention a few of these.

1. Some think that God or the Saints will do something for us only if we vow something to them. So in difficult circumstances you will hear someone say to someone who is suffering or in danger: "Make a vow, make a vow, to the Panagia or Saint..." This is wrong. The Saints don't need our material goods, nor do they seek our vows for them to hear our prayers. "Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you. For everyone who asks receives; the one who seeks finds; and to the one who knocks, the door will be opened" (Matt. 7:7-8). It is enough to have fervent faith, a clean heart, and a Christian life to request something for our spiritual interest.

2. Others think that their votive offerings will make the Saints their helpers, even in committing evil. It was written in the newspapers that the famous bandit Vernardos, before embarking on robbing a bank, traveled to Aegina and made a vow to St. Nektarios to ensure his success! Another robber in 1977 hid his stolen money in a chapel dedicated to St. John and vowed to the Saint that he would help renovate his chapel if he prevented the robbers arrest. Another supplicated St. Nicholas to help him win a card game on New Years and in return would offer him "pure gold". Another Christian woman vowed to St. Nicholas with a tall candle, if he helped in return to prevent the safe return of a certain sailor and cause his demise, who had dishonored her daughter and she didn't want them to marry. These votive offerings are contrary to our Christian faith.

3. Many votive offerings are also made in the following way: "My Saint Paraskevi, make me well and I will offer you a golden oil lamp." Or "My God, help me in my exams and I will bring you a ...." Such votive offerings are ways to make a bargain with God, as if He can be bargained with. We basically say to Him "Give me and I will give You in return". In this way we abase God and our humanity. At the same time it reveals our lack of faith.

4. Many votive offerings also bring to people difficulties and psychological trauma, because they are made without consideration and a lack of spirituality. In this way a Christian will vow to help ten villages towards a sacred purpose if she begins a fundraiser. When her vow is in process, however, the police stop her, because fundraisers are illegal without a license. Another vows a large amount of money, which she then struggles to acquire. A young man vows to enter a monastery, but before leaving he falls in love with a woman and desires to marry her. Another vows to the patron of Zakynthos that her child would be born healthy and in return she would name him Dionysios. When the time comes however, there are arguments in the house because the father-in-law insists the child be named after him, which is John.

For these reasons our votive offerings and dedications and vows require much care. Our offerings must be primarily spiritual. Offerings that will help us in the purification of our souls and in the sanctification of our lives. Because "God is spirit, and those who worship Him must do so in spirit and truth" (John 4:24). St. John Chrysostom says characteristically: "For the Church is not a gold foundry nor a workshop for silver, but an assembly of angels. Wherefore it is souls which we require, since in fact God accepts these golden vessels for the souls' sake.... God has no need at all of golden vessels, but of golden souls" (Homily 50 on Matthew).

Source: Translated by John Sanidopoulos

Pure Orthodoxy: A Question for Our Times

Upon his timely and historic visit to the United States, Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew eloquently expounded on the relationship between Orthodox Tradition and culture in an address which he presented at his convocation and conferral of the Doctor of Divinity degree on the occasion of the 60th anniversary of Holy Cross School of Theology in Brookline, Massachusetts on October 30, 1997. His message, titled “Pure Orthodoxy: A Question for Our Times,” addressed many crucial issues relevant to the situation of our Church in America. Below is this speech given to the students and faculty of Hellenic College/Holy Cross School of Theology.

This gathering in mutual honor gives to our Modesty an opportunity to address, in love, a few fatherly words about the need to preserve the pure truth of Orthodoxy in this country and in our contemporary age. In America, just as in a great melting-pot, cultures and religions blend in the search for a new synthesis and faith, manufactured by man, and wrongly hope that it will unite all people around it, and will set us free from religious divisions and opposition.

First of all, we ought to assuage our fellow man, who might think that our message is one of disunity, for such is not the case. The Orthodox Church feels and lives Her catholicity as a salvific embrace of openness to all, not only for those who belong to Her or who are kindly disposed to Her, but even to Her enemies and persecutors. What is more, the Church clearly forbids Her members from every fanatical and divisive tendency. As the Church accepts all of creation as very good (the body and soul of man, the material and spiritual world), so does She accept every person, “Jew and Greek, male and female, bond and free.” Indifferent to these and all the other distinctions, She accepts all people as children of God and brethren of Her faithful members. And even if She worships God in a special and unique way, excluding the non-Orthodox from Her worship, according to the example of our Lord Jesus Christ, Who gave to us the lofty and sacred Mysteries in the “Mystical” Supper, in all the rest of the life of the faithful, She does not divide them from the rest of humanity. As the author from among the first Christians characteristically wrote to Diogenetes, Christians “follow customs not belonging to the world in their raiment and way of life and living ... they believe in certain laws ... they uphold the world.”

Orthodoxy is a lived and continuously living truth. It is not a truth which is comprehended intellectually and received through some cold-hearted belief. It is truth, which is revealed to us by the incarnate Son and Logos of God, and from that time is confirmed experientially through the heart’s assurance by divine grace. It invites change in the whole mentality of the believer, which change confers substantial transformations in his inner condition as regards the world, his fellow man and his God, as in the sanctification of his behavior by grace. These changes of his condition and his life does not lead to isolation and quarrels with his fellow man, but to an abundance of joy, enthusiasm, peace, love toward all and, to employ the words of the Apostle Paul, lead to the fulfillment of his Christian vocation through the fruits of the Holy Spirit, which are “love, joy, peace, long-suffering, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, meekness, self-control.”

As we have said, Orthodoxy is a lived truth. This means that it is lived dogma. The Brother of God, Iakovos, writes about this in his Catholic Epistle, when he says “show me your faith by your deeds.” That is, deeds reveal belief, not as an abstract concept, but as genuine content. For of one sort are the deeds of a believing Orthodox, of another sort are the deeds in the example of Hinduism. Consequently, the deeds of Orthodox Christians reveal the careful observation which is the content of our faith. We are not speaking about sins and failings, to which we incline out of weakness; we are speaking about works in accordance with our attempts to do what is right. For example, the way of chanting in the Holy Churches reveals eloquently if the faithful give a greater significance to contrition or to aesthetic enjoyment. Likewise, the manner of iconography reveals if greater importance is given to the natural light, or to the uncreated light which illumines the saints from within; to the natural condition and natural comeliness, or to the supernatural beauty, for which we are reaching. The manner in which we arrange seating in Church manifests our right worship, or our excessive concern for comfort, and so on.

Because of this, the Orthodox Church, aside from Her basic teaching, which contains the Symbol of Faith [Creed] and the sacred Catechism, does not demand from the faithful a hair-splitting concern with Her dogmatic teaching. Rather, the Church dissuades the majority from doing so because of the danger of misinterpretation and error. However, the Church preserves the dogmatic teaching unalloyed with great care, and calls that teaching to mind, when She sees an erroneous way of life being followed, which reveals a faulty understanding about the truth, that is, a faulty understanding about the realities such as our Lord Jesus Christ, Who is Himself the Truth, or the Church, which is the Body of Christ. In these circumstances, the Church reveals by the Holy Spirit the correct dogma, the correct truth, so that She might teach the correct life and give peace to troubled souls.

Orthodox Christians who live in a country where full religious freedom reigns and where adherents of various religions live side by side, the country of the United States of America which has been so hospitable to us, constantly see various ways of living and are in danger of being beguiled by certain of them, without examining if their way of life is consonant with the Orthodox Faith. Constant vigilance and constant watchfulness are needed, especially by the shepherds, who are particularly responsible for the protection of the Orthodox inheritance of the faith. Already, many of the old and new Orthodox, who with zeal are deepening their understanding and living of the Orthodox truth, are stressing a continually expanding tendency of secularization, that is, a tendency of judging ecclesiastical subjects and problems by worldly criteria, with a debasement of ecclesiastical criteria. They are also stressing, from ignorance, a substitution of specific and general Orthodox dogmatic positions and understandings, with Protestant and Roman Catholic ones, as in the case of an overvaluation of personal opinion, indifference to dogma, and recrimination at the expense of character or practical virtue. They also stress many extraneous liturgical customs out of an ignorance of the rich symbolism of each liturgical action and its deeper meaning, with the result that they become, in certain instances, arbitrary and altered.

The subject of the quality and faithfulness of the translations of ecclesiastical and liturgical texts into English that are being used requires special attention. Already one can note that in many instances, not only are these inferior, but they are seen unconsciously introducing wrong beliefs and even heretical notions into Orthodox worship. The conveyance of subtle and precise meanings of sacred texts and of the poetical hymnology of the Orthodox Church into another language is a most difficult task. Even the best knowledge of both languages is not enough. It demands holiness of life, for only then does the translator enter into the depths of divine meanings and is able to convey them faithfully into another language. It is sufficient to observe that only Saint John Chrysostom abbreviated the Divine Liturgy of Saint Basil the Great, that Saints Cyril and Methodios successfully translated sacred texts into the Slavic language, and after them, holy persons successfully translated other texts into other languages. Many of the Saints translated into new languages hitherto untranslated ecclesiastical terminology and thus enriched these languages with thousands of new foreign words from the Greek language.

The ecclesiastical language of the prototypes is poetic, lofty, rich, deep and draws those who hear it to spiritual ascents, to a place where the sacred and wondrous mystery is perfected, where the Most High Triune God is worshipped. It is not fitting that this worship be rendered prosaically into the usual everyday language, but through a subtle and exalted clarity, be rendered in such a way that the hearer is transported to another reality, to another higher world. Besides, the whole performance of liturgy aims at this mystagogical elevation to the Throne of God, before Whom the Trisagion Hymn is sung with the Cherubim. The amazement at the sacred vestments, the contrite psalmody, the fragrance of the incense, the environment of the Church decorated with sacred figures, the unique quality of the architecture - all these things transport us to the other reality, [which is] the Church. Within all this sanctity, we ought not use everyday language, which brings us down once again to earth.

We know that many will say that the meanings of the prayers, the troparia, the readings and the rest of the liturgical texts must be understood. In principle, this is correct, but that which hinders understanding is not so much the form of the language, as much as it is the lack of familiarity on the part of the hearers with the meanings of our faith. Not a single text is comprehensible without familiarity by the reader and the hearer of its content. Impoverishment not capable beyond only certain limits, will little support the understanding of a musical or medical book. That which is required for the unfamiliar is a simplified expression. In the Orthodox Church this ought to be done through preaching, through study and through similar means, and not through the enfeebling popularization of sacred texts, for its own sake. Besides, as we said, these texts call us and ought to remain invitations to ascend.

Through all of this, we do not take sides against translations. Rather, the Orthodox Church has always recommended that the people be taught the faith and worship God in their own language. We draw your attention, however, to concern over quality, dogmatic exactitude and a loftier language for translations.

Another subject, in which special attention is required, is the subject of the mixture, sometimes, of different local traditions with Orthodox Tradition. As is well known, the Orthodox Church came to America through immigrants, who brought to America at the same time their Orthodox Faith and their local or ethnic traditions. We respect these traditions and we congratulate those who make an effort to preserve them. However, we must distinguish them from the Orthodox Tradition. This has a special significance for those coming to Orthodoxy from other Confessions, who do not relate with the country of provenance of the community in which they are enrolled, for they have no obligation to follow the local traditions of the national provenance of the community, but only those of Orthodoxy. This certainly does not mean that the other members of the community are deterred in any way, rather we encourage them to preserve the traditions of their people. As regards, however, to our people we encourage them to keep the beautiful traditions of our race. This simply means that whatever traditions do not relate to Orthodoxy, but to other parts of our life, ought not to be imposed on the newcomers as a so-called part of Orthodoxy. For example, ethnic choirs of different Christian peoples ought not to be imposed as an obligation on our brethren committed to Orthodoxy of another nationality.

The offering [of this example] of our brothers and sisters brings us to another serious spiritual problem, which we ought to face. It is the problem of the suitable reception and instruction of those coming to Orthodoxy from another dogma or religion. As is known, Orthodox ecclesiastical communities were established by groups of immigrants of a certain ancestry, with the purpose of serving them and their descendants. The Orthodox Church is open to all, however, for it has pleased the Lord in these latter days that the seed of truth should bear much fruit in the hearts of many non-Orthodox, who are returning to the Mother Church. We must prepare how we are to receive them suitably. The fitting manner of their reception has many wrinkles, from problems of language to their meeting in love, from the knowledge of their peculiarities, the remains of their former beliefs and mentality, and adapting to their needs for catechism and preaching, to their correct living out of the practical consequences of being Orthodox. This issue is serious and large and will be faced henceforth more frequently. For this reason and without setting forth solutions at this time, we propose that this occupy you seriously and that it occupy you continuously.

The aforementioned do not mean that these problems exist in all the parishes, or that they have impact everywhere. However, they do comprise a cautionary note for all of us to be vigilant about. This vigilance is the command of the Lord. The Lord said “watch and pray that you enter not into temptation,” meaning surely temptations as regards the truth, which temptation is significantly more insidious. For usually, all of us notice the temptation to sin, and perchance we fall, we repent, are confessed and are restored. But if we fall into the temptation of error as regards the faith, with great difficulty can we discern it, and sometimes we remain in our error, rejecting the suggestion that we return to the correct path.

There is, therefore, a great need in these critical times, that we watch, so not to fall into the temptation of error concerning the faith, or a further course away from our faith. In this matter, the responsibility of the professors and students of this Theological School is even greater. For they have the necessary means and are able to note the stealthy insinuations which find their way into Orthodox teachings and life these days, even that which is written from a non-Orthodox perspective. It is not right for our newly-enlightened brethren, full of zeal, to point out such issues, before we have done so ourselves.

We hope that it will be a joint effort on all our parts to remove every inimical and worldly effect from our Orthodox Faith, and that the Orthodox Faith may be preserved pure and unalloyed in America. We close our talk with our heartfelt paternal and Patriarchal prayer that we see our faith be true to itself and untainted, and that those who labor in this work may have the blessing of our Lord Jesus Christ.

May His grace, and the infinite mercy of the Father, and the illumination of the Holy Spirit be with you all. Amen.