O Beloved Orthodoxy!

Our Orthodox faith,

our wealth, and our glory,

our stock, our crown,

our pride.

We will never deny you, O beloved Orthodoxy,

nor lie to you, O time-honoured reverence,

nor walk away from you, O mother piety.

We have been born in you, we live in you,

and we will die in you.

If time asks for it,

we will sacrifice ten thousand times our lives for you.

-Joseph Vriennios (Spiritual Father o f St. Mark of Ephesus)

Russian New-martyrs: “we will sacrifice ten thousand times our lives for you”.

This post is the last in our series Truth of Our Faith – a week of posts honouring the confessors of Orthodoxy who did not, or do not, shy away from preaching the truth and enlightening the darkness of ignorance and pointing out the fruitlessness of heresy. I felt that this beautiful poem was the perfect ending to our Lenten “Sunday of Orthodoxy” week. I hope and pray that I and all of you have the courage to live the words of this poem. And if we don’t have the courage, may we strive to acquire it during this time of prayer and fasting. Tomorrow is another brilliant feast day, our own saint and archbishop of Thessaloniki – St. Gregory Palamas. May we have his blessing!

Read Full Post »

Elder Paisios of Mount Athos Against Ecumenism

Pope Paul VI and Ecumenical Patriarch Athenagoras

(An excerpt from The Life of Elder Paisios of Mount Athos by Hieromonk Isaac, pp. 658-659.)

From what has been related from the elder’s time at Stomio, it is clear that he was a resolute opponent of heresies. In matters of the faith he was exacting and uncompromising. “The Truth is not up for negotiation,” he said. “The Truth is Christ.”

He fought against ecumenism and spoke about the magnificence and uniqueness of Orthodoxy, obtaining his information by divine grace within his heart. His life attested to the superiority of Orthodoxy.

Discerningly, he stated, “There’s no need for us to tell Christians who aren’t Orthodox that they’re going to hell or that they’re antichrists; but we also mustn’t tell them that they’ll be saved, because that’s giving them false reassurances, and we’ll be judged for it. We have to give them a good kind of uneasiness – we have to tell them that they’re in error.”

Orthodoxy was extremely important to him, and this is why he didn’t accept the practices of communion or common prayer with non-Orthodox people. “In order for us to pray together with someone,” he stressed, “we must agree on the faith.” He cut off relationships with and avoided seeing clergy who participated in common prayer with heterodox. He didn’t recognized the “sacraments” of the heterodox and advised that those coming to the Orthodox Church should be well-catechized and then baptized.

Metropolitan Augustinos of Germany at the Day of Eucmenism in Trier, Germany (2012):
Representatives dipped their hand in water and symbolically baptized each other on the forehead with an open hand, saying: “You are baptized in the Name of the Triune God”.
Apparently we need a reminder from King David: “the oil of the sinner, let it not anoint my head” (Psalm 141)

For a time, together with almost the entire Holy Mountain, he ceased commemoration of Patriarch Athenagoras in response to his dangerous overtures toward the Roman Catholics. However, he did it with pain. “I pray,” he once told someone, “for God to take days away from me and give them to Patriarch Athenagoras, so he can fulfill his repentance.”

Read Full Post »

New Heresies: An Article by the Ever-Memorable Bishop Augustine of Florina

“Wolves in the sheepfold!!” A drawing by His Eminence of blessed memory, Augustinos of Florina.

(Source)

New Heresies by +Metropolitan Augoustinos (Kantiotes) of Florina[1]

“We will not deny you, beloved Orthodoxy” – Joseph Vryennios (St. Mark of Ephesus’ spiritual father)

Of late, certain theologians, under the influence of contemporary, world-wide currents, have begun to savour the words “ecumenicity”, “ecumenical spirit”, and “ecumenical movement”, as if they were hard-candy.  Ecumenicity; what a beautiful word!  And yet, behind these words, lay hidden a most fearful danger for Orthodoxy.  What is this danger?  We will show you by means of an example.

Imagine a woman, a woman faithful to her husband, a woman who will allow no third party to enter into their relationship, ever mindful of the promises which she had made before God and before men.  She is a woman of exceptional beauty, drawing the eye of many a man.  On account of her uprightness, however, anyone who dares to touch, or to proposition her, immediately meets with her anger.  Should such a one persist, this honourable woman will deliver a strong slap to his face in order bring him to his senses.

Those men who are learned in this vile business, however, will try another method.  These will try to uncover what it is that this woman likes; does she perhaps love poetry, or philosophy, or art?  By means of these things the secret admirer will trap her.  With great deftness he will begin having innocent conversations with her on those subjects that are beloved to her.  “What a wonderful poem!”; “What a beautiful painting!”; “What a wonderful play!”; “How sweet a piece of music!”  And thus begins the dialogue.  Gradually the unsuspecting woman is lured into longer conversations with the deceiver who, while his tongue speaks of philosophy and art, his heart leaps at the hope of taking the woman for himself.  Finally, after an air of great familiarity and mutual understanding has been achieved through these conversations, the door is opened to the foul deed, the shameful union.  Just as the most-evil serpent succeeded in beguiling Eve by means of a simple conversation, in like manner the seed of shameful union was sown.

Did you catch what we are trying to say, beloved?  We have spoken in a parable.

The woman concerning which we have spoken is our Orthodox Church.  She is this beauty.  She is the woman who, according to the Book of Revelation is “clothed in the Sun”, who wears “upon her head a crown of twelve stars”, and who has “the moon under her feet”.[2]  It is the Orthodox Church which has remained faithful to the Lord, to the eternal bridegroom.  It is she who has kept pure the tradition of the Lord and of the Apostles – both written and unwritten – in accordance with the God-inspired call to, “stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.”[3]  It is she, the Orthodox Church, which for nineteen centuries has fought the hard and bloody battle against various deceptions, against the various heresies which have sought to pollute and corrupt her holiness.  One of the worst of these heresies is Papism, which, on account of its delusions, its authoritarian spirit, and its atrocities, caused the rise of Protestantism and the fracturing of all of Christendom.  Yes, the Papists are heretics.  The enemies of the Orthodox Church, including Papism to be sure, know well that she has persevered in the faith of her Fathers.  Yet, having been persuaded through many examples that they cannot conquer that fortress which is Orthodoxy by means of a frontal attack, these enemies have recently begun trying by other means.  They have begun a new war, a war of peace, a war worse than the Crusades.  Do you not hear the voice of the serpent, seeking to corrupt the minds of Orthodoxy, leading us away from our simplicity?[4]

Here is what the serpent says:  O, Orthodox Church!  Why do you keep your distance?  Why are you afraid of me?  I am no dragon; I am a sweet angel bearing the message of love.  I am not going to hurt you.  Keep your dogmas and your traditions. Leave these things to the theologians…I invite you into my room to discuss other matters.  Let us make a common stand against hunger, against poverty, against atheism, against communism, against war.  Do these matters not move you?  Does this proposition not excite you?  Come then, let us begin our conversation on high, on the level of ecumenicity, on the level of mutual understanding.  You will see just how beautiful our coming together can be!

O, Orthodox Church!  Our suffering mother!  Will you accept this proposition?  Will you enter into dialogue with Papism?  Can you not see the danger inherent in this proposition?  That those who ineptly and unworthily represent you are creating conditions favorable to your enemies to such a fearful degree that you, without even taking notice, will fall into the arms of Papism.  And what will follow then?  A union, a pseudo-union, spiritual adultery, a most vile act; something which ought never to have occurred, and which will require centuries of repentance from those Orthodox who played the role of pimp for the Orthodox Church.  The hour will come when these will sigh and say:  “Let the language which we spouted concerning ‘ecumenicity’ and ‘mutual understanding’ cease; let these feet which ran to bring together Orthodoxy and wolves in sheep’s clothing become leprous; let these hands which signed ecumenical epistles and documents fall off!”

This, my beloved, is the famous ‘theory of ecumenicity’ which our leaders savour!

We repeat: the Ecumenical Movement, under whose umbrella gather all manner of heresies, represents a danger to the Orthodox Church.  It deprecates the importance of the dogmas which, having been miraculously articulated in the brief definitions of the Ecumenical Councils, and which are the skeleton, the backbone without which the body becomes a limp and formless lump.  It deprecates the Holy Canons, which the ecumenists call obsolete, rusty weapons.  To put it concisely, the ecumenists deprecate the Orthodox Church as a whole, saying that it is self-centered, that it is a blasphemy for us to consider her to be the one true Church, possessing the genuine truth of Divine Revelation.  Within this context the dogmas and the moral life, inseparably joined in the Orthodox Church, tend to evaporate, leaving behind nothing but a fraudulent version of love.  The theory of ecumenicity, the theory which calls all different peoples to live together in the name of some tenuous peace, a theory supported within worldly and political circles in our century and which has already been applied to the spiritual sphere where compromise is unacceptable, will ultimately lead to conflict and turmoil, truly, to Babel.

Leaven, if it becomes contaminated, loses its ability to make things rise; Orthodoxy, the most excellent leaven, the leaven of truth, is capable of leavening the whole lump, but only so long as it remains unpolluted by foreign ingredients, so long as it remains pure.  For this reason the followers of this theory of ecumenicity are the enemies of Orthodoxy.  For this reason we do not hesitate to call this movement – the Ecumenical movement – a new heresy, from which the Orthodox Church must be protected.

In conclusion, during these critical moments when the Orthodox Church stands in danger, we call out to the faithful from our own watchtower:  “Orthodox faithful!  Remember that Church, of which you are children.  Remember the rivers of blood our Fathers spilt to keep our Faith unadulterated; not one iota did they permit to be subtracted or added to our Faith.  Remember the rallying cry of the heroes of the Revolution of 1821.  These men – may their memory be eternal – struggled first for the faith, and then for their homeland.  All of these heroes and martyrs – known and unknown – call to us from their graves:  “Stand firm upon the bulwark of Orthodoxy!”

________________________________________

[1]      This article may be found under the title, “Νέα Άιρεσις” in the book, “Πνευματικά Σαλπίσματα Ορθοδόξου Ζωής και  Ομολογίας” (Thessalonki:  2008), 109-114.
[2]      Revelation 12:1-2.
[3]      2 Thessalonians 2:15.
[4]     See 2 Corinthians 11:3.  “But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.”

Read Full Post »

Elder Paisios’ Thoughts on Anti-Chalcedonians and their Supporters

The miracle at St. Euphemia’s tomb:
O Euphemia, Christ’s comely virgin, thou didst fill the Orthodox with gladness and didst cover with shame all the heretics; for at the holy Fourth Council in Chalcedon, thou didst confirm what the Fathers decreed aright. O all-glorious Great Martyr, do thou entreat Christ God that His great mercy may be granted unto us. (Apolytikion of the saint’s miracle celebrated on July 11)

(An excerpt from The Life of Elder Paisios of Mount Athos by Hieromonk Isaac, pp. 659-660)

He considered the Anti-Chalcedonians (that is, the Monophysites)—along with the other heretics and those of other religions—to be creatures of God and our brothers according to the flesh, in terms of our common descent from Adam; but he did not consider them children of God and our brothers according to the spirit, characterizations he believed applied only to Orthodox Christians.[1] Regarding the Monophysites’ sympathizers and their fervent supporters among the Orthodox, he observed, “They don’t say that the Monophysites didn’t understand the holy fathers—they say that the holy fathers didn’t understand them. In other words, they talk as if they’re right, and the fathers misunderstood them.”[2] He considered proposals to erase from the liturgical books statements identifying Dioscorus and Severus as heretics to be a blasphemy against the holy fathers.[3] He said, “So many divinely enlightened holy fathers who were there at the time didn’t understand them, took them the wrong way, and now we come along after so many centuries to correct the holy fathers? And they don’t take the miracle of Saint Euphemia into account? Did she misunderstand the heretics’ tome too?”[4]

Without trying to seem like a confessor of the faith, the elder, in his own way, expressed his opposition regarding various matters, speaking to and writing ecclesiastical figures. “The Church,” he would say, “isn’t the ship of each bishop to do with as he pleases.” These reactions of his were accompanied by much prayer and love, not only for the Church, but also for those who were deviating from the faith; and all was the fruit of dispassion, discernment, and enlightenment from above.

---

[1] The Fourth Ecumenical Council was held in Chalcedon in 451. The council taught that Jesus Christ had two natures, divine and human.  Those who rejected this teaching became known as Monophysites, from the Greek words for “single nature.” The council decided in favor of the dogma of two natures in Christ, and it condemned those who rejected its authority and persisted in their errors, expelling them from the Body of Christ. The various communions descended from those who rejected the council have been known by a variety of names, including Monophysites, Non-Chalcedonians, the “Lesser” or “Separated” Eastern Churches, Copts, and Jacobites; and in latter times by other names, including Miaphysites, Henophysites, Pre-Chalcedonians, and Oriental Orthodox. The conclusions of the Fourth Council were affirmed at the Fifth, Sixth, and Seventh Ecumenical Councils, and the fathers of the council are celebrated yearly on the Sunday between July 13 and 19.—Ed.

[2] The elder refers to the claim among supporters of union with the Non-Chalcedonians that the disagreement at the Fourth Ecumenical Council was essentially a tragic misunderstanding, the holy fathers there present failing to consider that people of differing backgrounds sometimes use different words to refer to the same thing.—Ed.

[3] Dioscorus was among the leaders of the anti-Orthodox at the Fourth Council, and Severus was one of the council’s most fervent critics. Both are regarded as saints by Non-Chalcedonians (Monophysites). The Church’s liturgical texts, however, speak of the Fourth Council’s victory over heresy, some specifically identifying Dioscorus and Severus as enemies of the faith. A union of the sort the elder rejected would require all these references to be deleted; and, in general, a rewriting of liturgical texts, saints’ lives, and educational literature touching on the Fourth Council.—Ed.

[4] The church at which the Fourth Council met housed the relics of Saint Euphemia, and, after prolonged discussion failed to produce an agreement, it was decided to place each party’s confession of faith (or “tome”) in her tomb and supplicate God to reveal His will in the matter through His saint. The imperial seal was set on the tomb and a guard appointed, and those present spent days in fasting and prayer. When the tomb was opened in the presence of all, the tome of the Orthodox was found in the saint’s right hand, while that of Dioscorus and his party was at her feet. This miracle is commemorated by the Church on July 11: “O Euphimia,” reads one hymn, “Christ’s comely virgin, thou didst fill the Orthodox with gladness and didst cover with shame all the heretics; for at the holy Fourth Council in Chalcedon, thou didst confirm what the Fathers decreed aright” (Great Horologion, p. 541).—Ed.

Read Full Post »

Metropolitan Hierotheos On Anathemas and Acclamations

(The following is taken from Chapter Nine [The "Synodikon of Orthodoxy"] of Metropolitan Hierotheos of Nafpaktos’ book The Mind of the Orthodox Church)

Anyone who reads the “Synodikon of Orthodoxy” will discover at once that, on the one hand, the heretics are anathematised and on the other hand the holy Fathers and confessors are acclaimed. For the former those present proclaim “anathema” three times, for the latter the people proclaim “eternal memory” three times at each proposal.

Some people are scandalized when they see and hear such action, particularly when they hear “anathema”. They consider it very harsh and say that the spirit of hatred of other doctrines which the Orthodox Church has is being expressed in this way.

But the facts are not interpreted in this way. The anathemas cannot be regarded as philosophical ideas and as states of hatred for other doctrines, but as medical actions. First of all the heretics by the choice which they have made have ended in heresy and in their departing from the teaching of the Church. By using philosophy they have opposed themselves to theology and the Revelation. In this way they demonstrate that they are ill and in reality are cut off from the Church. Then excommunication has the meaning of showing the separation of the heretic from the Church. The holy Fathers by this action of theirs confirm the already existing condition, and besides this, they help the Christians to protect themselves from the heresy-illness.

There is a characteristic extract from the records of the Fourth congress of the Seventh Ecumenical Council. It says there that the holy Fathers fulfil the word of Christ, in order to set the lamp of divine knowledge “on the lampstand” to shine on all those in the house and not to hide it from them “under a bushel”. In this way those who confess the Lord are helped to travel unimpeded the path of salvation. The holy Fathers “push away every error of heretics, and if the rotten limb is incurable they cut it off; and possessing the shovel, they cleanse the threshing-floor; and the grain, or the nourishing word, that which supports the heart of man, they store up in the warehouse of the Catholic Church, but the chaff of the heretical wrong teaching they throw out and burn in unquenchable fire”.

Thus the heretics are incurably rotten limbs of the Church and are therefore cut off from the Body of the Church. The heretics must be examined in this light. In this way one can see the Church’s love for mankind. For, as we have emphasised elsewhere as well, when someone employs erroneous medical teaching, there are no therapeutic results, one can never achieve the cure. The same is true with the doctrines or the erroneous teaching. An erroneous teaching which is based on a wrong methodology can never lead man to deification.

It is in this light that we must examine the fact that the anathemas as well as the acclamations are referred to particular persons, because these particular persons are the ones who shape these teachings and as a result win adherents. And indeed it is characteristic that dreadful epithets are used for the heretics. We must add that the awful epithets which are used must not be examined in a moral sense, but in a theological sense, for many of the leaders of heresies were “moral” men. In what follows I would like to look at a few such epithets and some very indicative characterizations.

The iconoclasts who inveighed against the holy icons are called in the “Synodikon of Orthodoxy” “damaging” to the glory of God, “ventures against the icon and insolent, cowardly and fleeing”. Those who started the heresy of iconoclasm, in the time of the Isaurians were called “sacrilegious and leaders of perdition”. The Gerontios is anathematised for “the poison of its abominable heresy… with its perverse dogmas”. Heresy is an illness and the heretical dogmatic belief is perverse, because it twists the truth of the revelation of the Church. Anathema is given to “the raging gathering against the venerable Icons”.

As we said, all the heretics are mentioned in the “Synodikon of Orthodoxy”. By this it seems, on the one hand, that all the heretics used the same method and in essence coincide with one another, and on the other hand, that both the Seventh Ecumenical Council and what is taken to be the Ninth Ecumenical Council regard themselves as expressing the Church and as a continuation of the earlier Ecumenical Councils. Arios is called a fighter against God and ringleader of the heresies, Peter the Purifier is called mad. The same characterization “mad” is used of many heretics. Of course they are called mad not in a biological sense, but first and foremost in the theological sense. Barlaam, Akindynos, leaders of the anti-hesychastic teachings and all their followers are called an evil gang. By contrast, for the defenders of the orthodox teachings such adjectives as devout, most holy, and unforgettable are used.

And again I must point out that heresy reverses the true way of man’s cure for reaching deification. If we think that purification of the heart, illumination of the nous is therapy in order for man to take the path to deification, then we understand that heresy reverses this way and leaves man permanently without a cure, without hope of cure and salvation.

Read Full Post »

“Good War” and “Bad Peace”: Love According to the Church

(A translated excerpt from the second chapter of Protopresbyter Theodore Zisis’ book Inter-religious Gatherings: A Denial of the Gospel and an Insult to the Holy Martyrs)

Ecumenistic and Syncretistic attempts to define the love which we ought to have for others demonstrate a lack of discernment and confuse that which is clear – that is to say, the unanimous view of the Holy Scriptures and the Holy Fathers.  It is certainly true that God is Love and that He shows this love to all, both the righteous and the sinful, and it is also certainly true that this universal, all-embracing love ought to be manifested in our lives since this is the chief mark of a Christian.  This love, however, must not contradict truth and piety – it must be united to the truth – for any other love is false and hypocritical.  It must embrace its neighbour not solely as a bodily, biological being, but as a spiritual entity; it must embrace him with a view to eternity, and must be concerned above all for eternal things and not for worldly and transient things.  This love must, then, concern itself with the salvation of the other.

Since salvation cannot be achieved when one is found in delusion and heresy (and particularly if one remains there egotistically), the Church, following the example of Christ and the Apostles and acting out of love, not hatred, prohibits communion with those in heresy, thereby pedagogically leading them to a consciousness of their delusion while at the same time protecting others.  It is, then, out of love for those who have fallen into heresy that we deride heresy and delusion, which are impersonal, while we manifest this derision with pain of soul.   The sweet and gentle Jesus Himself – the friend of harlots and tax collectors, the Prince of Peace and love – took a whip and drove from the temple those who had changed it into a profiteering venture, just as the Pope has twisted the spiritual character of the Church, changing it into a worldly, economic power…

Let us stop hiding other agendas behind the word ‘love’ – agendas which cannot be reconciled with the word itself.  A wide variety of ways exist for us to exercise our love. We can feed those who hunger, clothe the naked, give hospitality to foreigners, and visit those in prison and the sick.[1]  We will not change the Gospel and the Holy Canons which teach us not to associate with heretics.  Are we the ones who are to teach Christ and the saints what love is?  The saints are the ones who know how to define these things: we are the ones who confuse them.  And this, the highest of all virtues!  On the basis of this virtue, then, the Church teaches that a “good war” exists, when it is waged against the impious, heretics and blasphemers.

Similarly, “bad peace” exists when it comes from an indifference and contempt of faith and piety.  This “good war” for virtue and piety was taught by Christ Himself when he declared that the Gospel will divide and distinguish men.  Those who follow Him must be ready to confront hostility even within one’s own family.  We must not deny Christ, the Truth, simply to avoid conflict which in this case is feigned and false since it does not include the agreement on the most important issues, that is, of spiritual things.  In what other way are we to interpret Christ’s saying:  “Never think that I came to cast peace on earth; I came not to cast peace, but a sword.  For I came to divide in two a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; and a man’s enemies shall be those of his own household”?[2]

Saint John Chrysostom says that peace and harmony are not always good when these are directed against God, fostering vice and sin.  For true peace to prevail the diseased portion must be cut off, that which rebels must be set apart.  God wants the harmony of all with piety as the foundation.  When men are irreverent, they provoke war:  “Since the physician too in this way preserves the rest of the body, when he amputates the incurable part; and the General, when he has brought to a separation them that were agreed in mischief. Thus it came to pass also in the case of that famous tower [Babel]; for their evil peace was ended by their good discord, and peace made thereby.”[3]  Saint Gregory the Theologian praises the clear and brazen “good war” even against clergy when it comes to matters of the faith.  He numbers himself among the combatants and he summarizes this with his well-known saying concerning “good war” and “bad peace”:  “Yea! Would that I were one of those who contend and incur hatred for the truth’s sake: or rather, I can boast of being one of them. For better is a laudable war than a peace which severs a man from God.”[4]  Therefore, love without piety and truth is false, pseudo-love.

---

[1]               Matthew 25:34-36.

[2]               Matthew 10:34-36.

[3]               [T.N.]  Chrysostom. Homilies on Matthew. 35.[1].

[4]               Gregory the Theologian.  Oration 2. [2].

Read Full Post »

Sunday of Orthodoxy and A Week of Posts Celebrating the Truth of our Faith

Romania

Today, the first Sunday of Great Lent, we celebrate the Sunday of Orthodoxy – often called the Victory of Orthodoxy – in which we commemorate the re-installment of holy icons after 100 years of the heresy of iconoclasm. Today we celebrate the victory of truth over falsehood.

The Church prescribes anathemas to be read out today in Orthodox parishes and monasteries against many and various false teachings (heresies) concerning Christ, the Church, the Godhead, the Mother of God, etc. These anathemas are said not out of hatred, but love. All persons and teachings that preach falsehood and turn others away from the Truth fight not only against truth but against love. And so, the Church in her great wisdom, announces the names and heresies of those who have turned away from Christ, His truth and His love, those who have separated themselves from God.

Unfortunately in our modern climate of syncriticism, such traditions, practices and teachings are swept under the rug. These days we have somehow gotten the idea that we have more love than the Fathers of the Church, than Christ Himself who said: “I have not come to bring peace but a sword.” Christ, the true Light came to enlighten “every man that cometh into the world.”  But unfortunately “the light shineth in darkness” and the darkness comprehends it not.

Some, however, do indeed comprehend the Light and work to share it with us, to help enlighten us and draw us out of the darkness of unbelief and false doctrine. And since the Church also prescribes the reading and remembrance of a long list of confessors of the Faith today I want to take this week to honour such ones. Everyday this week I will post an excerpt from an article or book concerning false teachings and the Church’s victory over heresy. These posts are meant to honour the Orthodox faith, explain some difficult or uncomfortable views on heresy, and to be a sort of proverbial “voice in the wilderness” proclaiming  “as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God”.

Abba Agathon being virtuous.

It is said concerning Abba Agathon that some monks came to find him, having heard tell of his great discernment. Wanting to see if he would lose his temper, they said to him, “Aren’t you that Agathon who is said to be a fornicator and a proud man?” “Yes, it is very true,” he answered. They resumed, “Aren’t you that Agathon who is always talking nonsense?” “I am.” Again they said, “Aren’t you Agathon the heretic?” But at that he replied, “I am not a heretic.” So they asked him, “Tell us why you accepted everything we cast at you, but repudiated this last insult.” He replied, “The first accusations I take to myself, for that is good for my soul. But heresy is separation from God. Now I have no wish to be separated from God.” At this saying they were astonished at his discernment and returned, edified.

(From The Sayings of the Desert Fathers, translated by Benedicta Ward, SLG, Cistercian Publications, 1984).

Read Full Post »

I’d Rather be Saved by Christ

…than Superman!

(Image and bold text from MSN)

Is it a bird? Is it a plane? No, it’s Super-Priest! Catholic padre Humberto Alvarez of Saltillo, Mexico, is getting plenty of online love because of these images showing him wearing robes covered in superhero images when he celebrates children’s Mass. Not many members of the clergy would sport pictures of Superman, Batman and Spiderman on their holy vestments, but Alvarez clearly knows something about keeping kids’ attention. He also peps up the service by using a water gun to bless the congregation with holy water. 

How about we teach children that Jesus Christ is the One, the Only, the True superhero, the only Person in which we can and should put our trust, our hope?

When the symbol of the Cross – the Christian symbol of victory over death and sin – is replaced with such inappropriate imagery I think we can honestly say that it is blasphemy. And not only blasphemy but a shame, a scheme. Why entice children with fairy tales and comic book characters when we can entice them with true heros – Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, His marytrs, confessors, ascetics and theologians, as well as true tales of herosim and virtue – the Gospel and the lives of the saints?

This photo, and the positive hype it has received, is yet another testimony that the world has not yet fully encountered true Christianity which would never subvert Christ for Superman not even for the sake of gathering a large crowd of children. And that crowd of children will be scattered in a matter of time because spiritual junk food, although enticing, cannot nourish the human soul.

And why are Roman priests permitted to do such things in Catholic parishes?

Read Full Post »

Beauty is the Convincing Power of Truth

(Originally posted on OCN’s The Sounding)

There are many angles a person could take when speaking about Truth, especially about Orthodoxy as the Truth. Elaborate lectures on the history of the Christian Church might be a place to start. But today I want to speak about something more basic than that. I want to speak about something that all human beings can agree exists and is praiseworthy – beauty. No, I don’t mean vanity which sometimes is called beauty. I mean Beauty.

Beauty is the convincing power of Truth, and that is perhaps the greatest proof that Orthodoxy is true. It tends to the needs of the whole human person, it is not merely for the mind, or the body, the emotions, or even for the spirit. It recognizes who man is – body and soul – and it offers something to each aspect of our person. It offers us beauty.

In every way, Orthodoxy is made up of and offers beauty. What poetry can compare to the hymnology of the Church? Or, what art can compare to the art of iconography? What about the structure of the services? What form, what order!

The order, the liturgical movement, the readings, and the hymns fill the mind with beauty. The icons, vestments, wood-carvings, and architecture fill the soul with beauty. The music, the bells, the melodic recitation of prayers fill the ears with beauty. The candle light, the incense, and the sweetness of the wine fill all the senses with beauty. In every way the human person encounters beauty.

How do we know Orthodoxy is true? We know it is true because it is for the whole person. It doesn’t compartmentalize. Body and soul are fed. And, hungry of body and soul, we seek succour from the Church because it draws us up out of the mire of our sins through our natural desire for beauty.

Orthodoxy gives us the Truth in external forms, and perhaps this above all else testifies to its claim to be the Apostolic Church.

To fill your senses with more beauty than can be contained in the above photos see here.

Read Full Post »

Is There Love Without Christ?

(Originally posted on OCN’s The Sounding)

Love. It’s a popular topic; a word thrown around here and there. We love our mothers and fathers from birth; we love our siblings, our friends, and even co-workers. We “fall in love” and many times vow to love one person for the rest of our lives.

So what kind of loves are these: familial, “love of one’s own”? In what way do we love those around us naturally? I use “naturally” because I think we’d all agree that to a certain extent we are naturally inclined towards loving. But the nature of this love, the root, where is it to be found? What is the goal of this love? Why do we love: for what purpose, for what benefit? What makes this “natural” love of ours binding? What unites us to those that we love?

I suppose it’s easy to think that all or any kind of love is good and of God, but is this true?

I don’t propose to know the answers to the above questions. In fact, I don’t even plan on trying to answer them here. Each in its own right could be expounded upon in its own article. I simply would like to talk about the relationship love has with Christ and if indeed Christ is the binding element of love.

The Scriptures tell us “We can do nothing without Christ”, and, “Except the Lord build the house, in vain do they labour that build it.” So, this brings us to the heart of the matter: Can love that is not mediated by Christ be called, or be in essence, love?

Here is a small, but powerful excerpt from a letter St. Nektarios wrote to one of the nuns under his spiritual care: “Be careful in the development of the feeling of love. It is endangered when the heart is not supported by honest prayer, and can then become carnal, unnatural, and can darken and burn the heart. I hope that this doesn’t happen. Love each other like holy sisters and let only the common love you share for the Lord unite you.”

According to this great theologian and miracle-worker, loves exist that are not good, are not “natural”, are not of God and in the end will only harm us, “darken and burn the heart” even.

I do not know how to discern which love is “carnal” and which is not, which is “spiritual” and which is based solely on selfishness. The only thing I know is that the Scriptures seem to suggest, just as St. Nektarios’ letter does, that love is of a very particular nature and can only be shared, understood, felt, and given with Christ as our conscious mediator. Again I will quote a letter written by St. Nektarios to a nun who (I’m assuming unknowingly and unintentionally) allowed her love for him to turn into something other than that which is mediated through love of Christ:

“My soul has become cold towards Syncletici so much that I have become indifferent towards her because of her state of mind. I love all of you, my dear girls, not because you love me but because you love our Lord Jesus Christ. It is a common love that we have for the Lord and it is that love which makes my heart love you, and it is what binds us. When one of you takes the love in your heart away from the Lord and offers it to the vanity of the world and the passion of the soul, then my love towards you will diminish because you have taken Christ out of your heart and have thus broken the bond of love between us, because, of course, the link that binds us is the common love of Christ.”

I must admit when I first read this I felt guilty. Have I too taken the love in my heart away from the Lord? Am I guilty of offering the love in my heart to the “vanity of the world”? The saint’s words seemed so sharp they cut me like a knife; I can’t imagine how they made Sr. Syncletici feel. Despite how she initially felt on reading her elder’s letter, I think they most likely helped her see her error.

How often do we fall into the same or similar error with our friends, co-workers, classmates, siblings, and/or parents? Perhaps not in a way that can turn into lust, but in a way that is merely human and devoid of Christ.

Can there be ANY love without Christ? I don’t think so. I don’t know what this means about the world and the supposed love non-Christians have for one another. It seems to me that St. Nektarios is clear: we cannot even love without Christ.

The most Holy Theologian and Evangelist John writes: “Do not love the world, nor the things of the world, if anyone loves the world the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the boastful pride of life is not from the Father but is from the world. And the world is passing away…”

All other “loves” (if they can in fact rightly be called love) will pass away. The love that is founded and mediated by Christ, however, will never pass away.

Read Full Post »