Mary of Egypt

The Scripture Readings for Sunday, April 13, 2008: Today's commemorated feasts and saints... FIFTH SUNDAY OF LENT — Tone 5. St. Mary of Egypt. Hieromartyr Artemon, Presbyter, of Laodicea in Syria (303). Martyr Crescens, of Myra in Lycia. Woman Martyr Thomais, of Alexandria (5th c.). Then one of the Pharisees asked Him to eat with him. And He went to the Pharisee's house, and sat down to eat. And behold, a woman in the city who was a sinner, when she knew that Jesus sat at the table in the Pharisee's house, brought an alabaster flask of fragrant oil, and stood at His feet behind Him weeping; and she began to wash His feet with her tears, and wiped them with the hair of her head; and she kissed His feet and anointed them with the fragrant oil. Now when the Pharisee who had invited Him saw this, he spoke to himself, saying, "This Man, if He were a prophet, would know who and what manner of woman this is who is touching Him, for she is a sinner." And Jesus answered and said to him, "Simon, I have something to say to you." So he said, "Teacher, say it." There was a certain creditor who had two debtors. One owed five hundred denarii, and the other fifty. And when they had nothing with which to repay, he freely forgave them both. Tell Me, therefore, which of them will love him more? Simon answered and said, "I suppose the one whom he forgave more." And He said to him, "You have rightly judged." Then He turned to the woman and said to Simon, "Do you see this woman? I entered your house; you gave Me no water for My feet, but she has washed My feet with her tears and wiped them with the hair of her head. You gave Me no kiss, but this woman has not ceased to kiss My feet since the time I came in. You did not anoint My head with oil, but this woman has anointed My feet with fragrant oil. Therefore I say to you, her sins, which are many, are forgiven, for she loved much. But to whom little is forgiven, the same loves little. Then He said to her, "Your sins are forgiven." And those who sat at the table with Him began to say to themselves, "Who is this who even forgives sins?" Then He said to the woman, "Your faith has saved you. Go in peace." (Luke 7:36-50) At the risk of identify myself as ever so "post-modern," there is in the Christian tradition a certain irony surrounding the name "Mary." Let me explain. Looking backwards to the Old Testament, we encounter Miriam, the older sister of Moses. It is Miriam who placed the infant Moses in the basket and floating him down the river to be found and adopted by Pharaoh's daughter and raised as a prince of Egypt. And it is Miriam who, at the request of Pharaoh's daughter, arranges for Moses' own mother to be his wet nurse. Later when they are all adults and newly liberated from slavery, it is Miriam who leads the Hebrew woman in song: Then Miriam the prophetess, the sister of Aaron, took the timbrel in her hand; and all the women went out after her with timbrels and with dances. And Miriam answered them: "Sing to the LORD, For He has triumphed gloriously! The horse and its rider He has thrown into the sea!" (Ex 15:20-21) Biblical, the first "Mary" of salvation history is a warrior, one who even as a child uses the resources at hand to fight against the oppression of her people. And she does so unapologetically. Another "Mary," is Mary of Bethany the sister of Martha. It is she who, according to the words of Jesus, "has chosen the better part." (See Lk 10:41) After being careful to not denigrate the service of either women, in his sermon on this section of the Gospel, St Cyril of Jerusalem tells us that "let those who open to them their house, meet them cheerfully, and with alacrity, and as their fellows: and not so much as those who give, but as those who receive: as those who gain, and not as those who expend." He continues by saying that, those who practice hospitality profit doubly; for in the first place they enjoy the instruction of those whom they hospitably entertain: and secondly, they also win the reward of hospitality. Every way therefore they are profited. When however they receive the brethren into their house, let them not be distracted with much service. Let them not seek anything beyond their means, or more than sufficient. For everywhere and in everything excess is injurious. For often it produces hesitation in those who otherwise would be glad to receive strangers, and causes but few [houses] to be found fit for the purpose: while it proves a cause of annoyance to those who are entertained. For the rich in this world delight in costly banquets; and in many kinds of viands, prepared curiously often with sauces and flavors; a mere sufficiency is utterly scorned, while that which is extravagant is praised, and a profusion beyond all satiety is admired, and crowned with words of flattery. The drinkings and revellings are excessive; and the draining of cups, and courses of wines, the means of intoxication and gluttony. But when holy men are assembled at the house of one who fears God, let the table be plain and temperate, the viands simple, and free from superfluities: but little to eat, and that meager and scant: and a limited sufficiency of drink. In everything a small supply of such necessaries as will allay the bodily appetite with simple fare. So must men receive strangers. So too Abraham by the oak at Mamre, received those three men, and won as the reward of his carefulness, the promise of his beloved son Isaac. So Lot in Sodom honored the angels, and for so doing, was not destroyed by fire with the rest; nor became the prey of the inextinguishable flame. Very great therefore is the virtue of hospitality, and especially worthy of the saints: let us therefore also practice it, for so will the heavenly Teacher lodge and rest in our hearts, even Christ; by Whom and with Whom, to God the Father be praise and dominion, with the Holy Ghost, forever and ever, Amen. For the saint, the service of Martha, the contemplation of Mary, are not opposed but meant to work together (synergia). It is Mary who keeps Martha from being overwhelmed, but it is Martha that allows Mary to receive a double blessing of instruction and of offering hospitality. There is Mary Magdalene, one of the band of women who ministered to Jesus and the woman out of whom Jesus cast seven demons. (Luke 8:2-3) It is this Mary, together with the other women and Joseph of Arimathea who will prepare Jesus' body for burial. Come that first Sunday after the crucifixion it is to this Mary, distraught and mourning that Jesus appears. It is this Mary who is the apostle to the apostles, who announces to the Apostles the joyful message of the resurrection. And of course, there is the most holy Theotokos and ever Virgin Mary who will give birth to Christ our Lord. All of these Mary are in the background when on the fifth Sunday of Great and Holy Lent we commemorate St Mary of Egypt. This former prostitute who becomes a desert dwelling ascetic is in her own way a reflection of the other women named Mary that came before her. Warrior, Contemplative, Hospitable, Handmaiden of Christ, and the one in whom Christ the Word comes to dwell. Reading the story of her life in Lenten Synaxarion, I am struck by the fact that it begins not with her manifold sins, but on the pride of Zosimas the monk who a certain Palestinian monastery on the outskirts of Caesarea. Having dwelt at the monastery since his childhood, he lived there in asceticism until he reached the age of fifty-three. Then he was disturbed by the thought that he had attained perfection, and needed no one to instruct him. "Is there a monk anywhere who can show me some form of asceticism that I have not attained? Is there anyone who has surpassed me in spiritual sobriety and deeds?" As the story unfolds, Zosimas is lead to a monastery where it is the practice for the brothers to spend the Great Fast alone in the desert returning only to the monastery on Palm Sunday. While in the desert Zosimas meets Mary and learns of her life. In quick order he also learns that Mary is not only an ascetic, but a clairvoyant and miracle worker. When he asks her blessing she at first refuses, but then, out of obedience, relents. And then she relates the story of her life. Beginning in Egypt we hear briefly of her life of sin. Then we hear of her journey to Jerusalem and of her conversion to Christ. She tells Zosimas of her life in the desert. The first 17 years are life of constant struggle: "But from that time until the present day, the power of God has guarded my sinful soul and humble body. I was fed and clothed by the all-powerful word of God, since man does not live by bread alone, but by every word proceeding from the mouth of God (Dt 8:3, Mt.4:4, Luke 4:4), and those who have put off the old man (Col 3:9) have no refuge, hiding themselves in the clefts of the rocks (Job 24:8, Heb 11:38). When I remember from what evil and from what sins the Lord delivered me, I have imperishible food for salvation." And from "that time until the present day" when she meets Zosimas is a period of 30 years. For 47 years after her conversion (at about 30 years of age) Mary lives as an ascetic in the desert. During this time she sees no one, she has no books to read. She is taught simply, directly, by the Holy Spirit Who enlivens the Word of God in her heart. Eventually the monk must leave, but before he does Mary asks him to return to her the next year on Holy Thursday and to bring her Holy Communion. A year passes and Zosmias returns to Mary. Like Moses, Mary parts the Jordan for Zosmias to cross over to her and give her Holy Communion. A year later the monk returns again to the desert to speak with Mary but when he finds her she is dead. Preparing her body for burial he discovers a note written by the saint. In the note she tells him that she died soon after receiving Holy Communion. And so the monk, with the help of a friendly lion, digs a grave for Mary and returns to the monastery to tell the story of her life. Like the other Mary's of the Old and New Testament, Mary of Egypt calls in to question our vision of what it means to be not only a Christian, but also a woman and thus a man. But where contemporary anthropological visions tend to be reductionist and subversive, the life of St Mary of Egypt is different; it points beyond itself and directs us to fix our gaze on ourselves but on the Kingdom of God. It is in this way that the life of Mary of Egypt, along with those other Mary's who precede her in salvation history, reveals itself to be truly radical and revolutionary. What this "other" Mary challenges is not simply social and culture structures of power, but the human hearts out of which those structures grow. She is a woman of great obedience who has learned to love much because she was forgiven much. It is easy to look at her life, and the life of the woman in the Gospel read on the Fifth Sunday of the Great Fast and think, "Well, I'm not that bad." And, in one sense, I'm not. But in another sense, and here is the great surprise of this "other" Mary, how much of the sin in her life was made possible by those who weren't all that bad? And without reference to this other Mary, how was it that Jesus was crucified except through the passive collusion of those of us who weren't all that bad? Looking back at the Mary's who proceed Mary of Egypt, which of these women didn't suffer at the hands of those who weren't all that bad, whose sins weren't all that serious, and who were respected by their contemporaries? There is something helpful about the extreme example for my spiritual life. Whether it is an extreme in virtue or vice, reflecting on the extreme can help me see myself a bit more clearly. I am not a great sinner, but neither am I a great saint. I tend to want to be respectable in my vices and my virtues. And whatever else one might say about Mary of Egypt and the other Mary's of salvation history, they challenge me in my respectability. In the final analysis the challenge the issue is this: Will I accept responsibility before Christ for my own life and actions? Or will I rather flee into a "respectability" grounded in fear and my own secret lack of thankfulness of God for the gift of my own life? Like the other Mary's, Mary of Egypt accepted the gift of her own life and allowed nothing to stand in the way of her obedience to what God called her to do with that gift. Can I do any less. In Christ, +Fr Gregory source: http://palamas.blogspot.com/

Discourse On the Passion of the Saviour

by Our Venerable Father Ephrem the Syrian INTRODUCTION This sermon on the Passion is one of the metrical texts in Greek attributed to St Ephrem the Syrian, which are discussed briefly in the general introduction to these translations. It is written in heptasyllabics, known in Syriac as the metre of St Ephrem. I have used the text published in Thessaloniki by K.G Phrantzolas in 1988. The Greek editor, not realising that the text is metrical, has from time to time emended to text, usually to improve the Greek. Most of these changes are unmetrical and I have disregarded them. In one or two places I have myself emended that text in order to restore the metre. The text displays a number of interesting linguistic features, including one word that appears to attested nowhere else in Greek. One of the most interesting passages in the poem is that which describes the Holy Spirit as having come forth in the form of a dove and rent the veil of the Temple at the moment of the Lord‘s death. I have never met this idea before and any help on identifying the source will be gratefully received. So far as I am aware this text has never before been translated into English. The Russian Typikon prescribes that a sermon by St Ephrem ‘On the Passion of the Saviour‘ be read be read after the Gospel at Matins on Great Friday. It may be that this is the one it has in mind. …and confessor named Benjamin, when a person who had come to him for confession was talking only about others and criticizing his brothers, would send the “penitent” away until he could correct himself and change his attitude. The most simple Dionysiatan monk, Elder David, would tell his visitors about criticism: “Be careful; do not say one person does this and the other does that. If you do so, you lose Christ’s grace. Even if you see a person acting like an ass, do not criticize. Love your neighbor as you would your own self. This is what Christ tells us to do.” from An Athonite Gerontikon I am afraid to speak and touch with my tongue this fearful narrative concerning the Saviour. For truly it is fearful to narrate all this. Our Lord was given up today into the hands of sinners! For what reason then was one who is holy and without sin given up? For having done no sin he was given up today. Come, let us examine closely why Christ our Saviour was given up. For us, the ungodly, the Master was given up. Who would not marvel? Who would not give glory? When the slaves had sinned the Master was given up. The sons of perdition and the children of darkness went out in the darkness to arrest the sun who had the power to consume them in an instant. But the Master, knowing their effrontery and the force of their anger, with gentleness, by his own authority, gave himself up into the hands of the ungodly. And lawless men, having bound the most pure Master, mocked the one who had bound the strong one with unbreakable bonds, and set us free from the bonds of sins. They plaited a crown of their own thorns, the fruit borne by the vine of the Jews. In mockery they called him ‘King’. The lawless spat in the face of the most pure, at whose glance all the Powers of heaven and the ranks of Angels quake with fear. See, once again grief and tears grip hold of my heart, as I contemplate the Master enduring outrage and insults, scourgings, spitting from slaves, and blows. Come, observe well the abundance of compassion, the forbearance and mercy of our sweet Master. He had a useful slave in the Paradise of delight, and when he sinned he was given to the torturers. But when the Good One saw his weakness of soul he took compassion on the slave and had mercy on him and presented himself to be scourged by him. I wished to remain silent because my mind was utterly amazed; but then again I was afraid lest I reject by my silence my Saviour’s grace. For my bones tremble when I think of it. The fashioner of all things, our Lord himself, was today arraigned before Caiaphas, like one of the condemned; and one of the servants struck him a blow. My heart trembles as I think on these things: the slave is seated, the Master stands, and one full of iniquities passes sentence on the one who is sinless. The heavens trembled, earth’s foundations shuddered; Angels and Archangels all quailed with terror. Gabriel and Michael covered their faces with their wings. The Cherubim at the throne were hidden beneath the wheels; The Seraphim struck their wings one with the other at that moment, when a servant gave a blow to the Master. How did earth’s foundations endure the earthquake and the tremor at that moment, when the Master was outraged? I observe and I tremble and again I am stunned, when I see the long-suffering of the loving Master. For see my inward parts tremble as I speak, because the Creator, who by grace fashioned humanity from dust, he the Fashioner is struck. Let us fear, my brethren and not simply listen. The Saviour endured all these things for us. Wretched servant, tell us why you struck the Master? All servants, when they are set free, receive a blow, that they may obtain freedom that perishes; but you, miserable wretch, unjustly gave a blow to the liberator of all. Did you perhaps expect to receive from Caiaphas a reward for your blow? Had you perhaps not heard, had you perhaps not learned that Jesus is the heavenly Master? You gave a blow to the Master of all things, but became slave of slaves to age on age, a disgrace and abomination, and condemned for ever in unquenchable fire. A great marvel, brethren, it is to see the gentleness of Christ the King! Struck by a slave he answered patiently, with gentleness and all reverence. A servant is indignant, the Master endures; a servant is enraged, the Master is kind. At a time of anger, who could endure rage and disturbance? But our Lord submitted to all this by his goodness. Who can express your long-suffering, Master? You that are longed for and loved by Christ, draw near, with compunction and longing for the Saviour. Come, let us learn what took place today in Sion, David’s city. The longed-for and chosen offspring of Abraham, what did they do today? They gave up to death the most pure Master on this day. Christ our Saviour was unjustly hanged on the tree of the Cross through lawless hands. Come, let us all wash our bodies with tears and groans, because our Lord, the King of glory, for us ungodly people was given up to death. If someone suddenly hears of one truly beloved having died, or again, suddenly sees the beloved himself lying a dead corpse before their eyes, their appearance is altered, and the brightness of their sight is darkened. So, in heaven’s height, when it saw the outrage to the Master on the tree of the Cross, the bright sun’s appearance was altered; it withdrew the rays of its own brightness, and unable to look on the outrage to the Master, clothed itself in grief and darkness. Likewise the Holy Spirit, who is in the Father, when he saw the beloved Son on the tree of the Cross, rending the veil, the temple’s adornment, suddenly came forth in the form of a dove. All creation was in fear and trembling when the King of heaven, the Saviour suffered; while we sinners for whom the only immortal was given up ever treat this with contempt. We laugh each day when we hear of the Saviour’s sufferings and outrage. We enjoy ourselves daily filled with great zeal to deck ourselves in fine clothing. The sun in the sky because of the outrage to its Master changed its radiance into darkness, so that we, when we saw it, might follow its example. The Master on the Cross was outraged for your sake, while you, miserable wretch, ever deck yourself in splendid raiment. Does your heart not tremble, does your mind not quail, when you hear such things? The One who alone is sinless was for you given over to a shameful death, to outrages and revilings, while you hear all this with lofty indifference. The whole rational flock should look intently on its shepherd, and ever long for him and respect him, because for its sake he suffered, he the dispassionate and all pure. Nor should it deck itself in corruptible garments, nor yet indulge in pleasure and worldly nourishment, but should give its Maker pleasure by ascesis and true reverence. Let us not become imitators of the Jews; a people harsh and disobedient and that ever rejects the blessings and benefactions of God. God Most High for the sake of Abraham and his covenant from the beginning bore the stubbornness of the people. From heaven he gave them Manna to eat; but they, the unworthy, longed for garlic, evil-smelling foods. Again, he gave them water from the rock in the desert, while they in place of these gave him vinegar when they hanged him on a Cross. Let us be careful, brethren, not to be found as fellows of the Jews who crucified the Master, their own Creator. Let us always be fearful, keeping before our eyes the Saviour’s sufferings. Let us always keep in mind his sufferings, because it was for us he suffered, the dispassionate Master; for us he was crucified, the only sinless One. What return can we make for all this, brethren? Let us be attentive to ourselves and not despise his sufferings. Draw near all of you, children of the Church, bought with the precious and holy blood of the most pure Master. Come, let us meditate on his sufferings with tears, thinking on fear, meditating with trembling, saying to ourselves, ‘Christ our Saviour for us the impious was given over to death’. Learn well, brother, what it is you hear: God who is without sin, Son of the Most High, for you was given up. Open your heart, learn in detail his sufferings and say to yourself: God who is without sin today was given up, today was mocked, today was abused, today was struck, today was scourged, today wore a crown of thorns, today was crucified, he, the heavenly Lamb. Your heart will tremble, your soul will shudder. Shed tears every day by this meditation on the Master’s sufferings. Tears become sweet, the soul is enlightened that always meditates on Christ’s sufferings. Always meditating thus, shedding tears every day, giving thanks to the Master for the sufferings that he suffered for you, so that in the day of his Coming your tears may become your boast and exaltation before the judgement seat. Endure as you meditate on the loving Master’s sufferings, endure temptations, give thanks from your soul. Blessed is the one who has before his eyes the heavenly Master and his sufferings, and has crucified himself from all the passions and earthly deeds, who has become an imitator of his own Master. This is understanding, this is the attitude of servants who love God, when they become ever imitators of their Master by good works. Shameless man, do you watch the most pure Master hanging on the Cross, while you pass the time that you have to live on earth in pleasure and laughter? Don’t you know, miserable wretch, that the crucified Lord will demand an account of all your disdainful deeds, for which, when you hear of them, you show no concern, and as you take your pleasure you laugh and enjoy yourself with indifference? The day will come, that fearful day, for you to weep unceasingly and cry out in the fire from your pains, and there will be no one at all to answer and have mercy on your soul. I worship you, Master, I bless you, O Good One, I entreat you, O Holy One, I fall down before you, Lover of humankind, and I glorify you, O Christ, because you, only-begotten Master of all, alone without sin, for me the unworthy sinner were given over to death, death on a Cross, that you might free the sinner’s soul from the bonds of sins. And what shall I give you in return for this, Master? Glory to you, Lover of humankind! Glory to you, O Merciful! Glory to you, O Long-suffering! Glory to you, who pardon every fault! Glory to you, who came down to save our souls! Glory to you, incarnate in the Virgin’s womb! Glory to you, who were bound! Glory to you, who were scourged! Glory to you, who were crucified! Glory to you, who were buried! Glory to you, who were raised! Glory to you, who were proclaimed! Glory to you, who were believed! Glory to you, who were taken up! Glory to you, who were enthroned with great glory at the Father’s right hand, and are coming again with the glory of the Father and the holy Angels to judge every soul that has despised your holy sufferings in that dread and fearful hour, when the powers of heaven will be shaken; when Angels, Archangels, Cherubim and Seraphim will come all together with fear and trembling before your glory; when all the foundations of the earth will tremble, and everything that has breath will shudder at your great and unendurable glory. In that hour your hand will hide me under its wings and my soul be delivered from the fearful fire, the gnashing of teeth, the outer darkness and unending weeping, that blessing you, I may say, ‘Glory to the One, who wished to save the sinner through the many acts of pity of his compassion.

Rejoice, O Bethany

Rejoice, rejoice, O Bethany! On this day God came to thee, And in Him the dead are made alive, As it is right for He is the Life. When Martha went to receive Him, Grieving loudly with bitter tears, She poured out the sorrow of her heart to Him With great sadness, wailing her lament. She at once cried out unto Him: "My most compassionate Lord, my Lord, At the great loss of my brother Lazarus My heart is broken, help me." Jesus said to her, "Cease your weeping, Cease your grieving and sad lament; For your brother, My most beloved friend, Lazarus, Very soon will live again." Then He, the faithful Redeemer, Made His way unto the tomb, Where he cried unto him who was buried four days, Calling him forth, saying "Lazarus, arise." Come with haste, ye two sisters, And behold a wondrous thing, For your brother from the tomb has returned to life. To the beloved Redeemer now give thanks. To Thee, O Lord of creation, We kneel down in reverence profound, For all we who are dead in sin, In Thee, O Jesus, are made alive. --A Koinonikon for Lazarus Saturday, Composed in Arabic by Metropolitan Athanasios Attallah of Homs, and Translated and arranged by Bishop +BASIL (Essey) Performed by the Boston Byzantine Choir on their CD Thy Passion: Byzantine Chant of Holy Week

Nothing is Impossible

From the Church Fathers There is nothing impossible unto those who believe; lively and unshaken faith can accomplish great miracles in the twinkling of an eye. Besides, even without our sincere and firm faith, miracles are accomplished, such as the miracles of the sacraments; for God's Mystery is always accomplished, even though we were incredulous or unbelieving at the time of its celebration. "Shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect?" (Rom. 3:3). Our wickedness shall not overpower the unspeakable goodness and mercy of God; our dullness shall not overpower God's wisdom, nor our infirmity God's omnipotence. St. John of Kronstadt, My Life in Christ

Sin of Fear of the Other

"The great sin is fear of the other. In a state of fear, everyone seems to be a threat. There are many symptoms of fear among Christians. The real meaning of the English word `gospel' is good news, but one can find those who are more attracted to the Bad News Gospel. You can find religious circles more interested in the anti-Christ than in Christ, more interested in the number 666 than the Holy Trinity. This is a fear-driven, bad news orientation. Where such a mentality thrives, the Christian contribution to society is meager. Where faith, hope and love flourish, transformation occurs. Faith changes life. If life doesn't change, clearly there is no faith. St. John Chrysostom, preaching to perhaps 400 people in Antioch, told them, `If all of you were Christians, there would be no more pagans in the world.' If you want to understand how Christianity spread so rapidly in the early centuries, it was because Christians were Christian. "Sadly, in our time, we have lost the idea of the holy. Pagans at least understood the holy. They had a sense of the sacred. We have lost this capacity. This is our tragedy because more than ever the world needs the light of Christ, the genuine light." Metropolitan John the diocese of Korça in Albania

BISHOP DEMETRIOS: From altar boy to bishop

Rev. Demetri Kantzavelos returns to his childhood parish to be elevated in the hierarchy of the Greek Orthodox church By Manya A. Brachear | Tribune staff reporter December 8, 2006 Wearing a golden miter and vestments custom-made for him in Greece, Rev. Demetri Kantzavelos will kneel before the altar of Assumption Greek Orthodox Church Saturday just as he did more than three decades ago. An altar boy then, Kantzavelos is being elevated to auxiliary bishop, considered a successor of the apostles in Orthodox tradition. At 44, he will be the youngest bishop currently in the 4 million-member Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America. While Kantzavelos traces his clerical calling to adolescence, his mother, Merope, had an inkling when he was 6 that the oldest of her four children would become a priest. With the family sometimes still asleep, young Demetri would pedal his bike to Assumption, 601 S. Central Ave., on Sunday mornings to serve as a junior altar boy. Educated in Lutheran-Missouri Synod schools, Kantzavelos learned early that not all Christians were the same, discussing with classmates why his Easter fell on a different Sunday than theirs or why the Orthodox venerate icons. By high school, where he took an interest in theater, he had received an early promotion to senior altar boy. "I just learned from the theater how to be more in touch with feelings and emotions," he said. "I had a calling to love other people. It really stirred my heart. The only perfect love was Christ's love. That's how I came to that conclusion." As a high school senior, he began working for Metropolitan Iakovos, leader of 250,000 Greek Orthodox faithful in 59 parishes across six states. He also applied to Hellenic College and Holy Cross School of Theology in Brookline, Mass., and announced his intentions to become a priest. In Greek Orthodox tradition, married men can become priests. But it is from the unmarried priests that bishops are chosen. Those unmarried priests often take new names at ordination. When Kantzavelos announced he would stay celibate, a choice that meant no children, his family could not help but have mixed emotions. Merope Kantzavelos pleaded with Iakovos to let her son keep his name. As the oldest son, he had been named for his grandfather. The metropolitan gave his consent. Kantzavelos' father, Christ, died last year. In 1989 Kantzavelos was ordained a deacon. Three years later, he was ordained to the priesthood. That year, a young man with AIDS dialed Chicago's Greek Orthodox headquarters searching for God. Moved by the man's need for ministry, Kantzavelos launched the Bishop's Task Force on AIDS, the first formal Orthodox Christian AIDS ministry to comfort the afflicted and educate clergy. "When people found out they weren't condemning, they were helping," he said. "It's a process of education." In the years to come, Kantzavelos would become an outspoken opponent of the death penalty, an interfaith bridge builder, and chancellor of the Greek Orthodox Metropolis of Chicago, making him second in command. He has built significant bridges with the Roman Catholic community, from which the Orthodox Church broke away in the 9th Century over the primacy of Rome versus Constantinople. Instead of focusing on differences, the local churches have united around values they share, such as opposition to capital punishment and a reverence for the spiritual centers of their faith. In 1998 Kantzavelos took a group of religious leaders to Turkey and Rome to engage in what was called the "Dialogue of Love." "It was his idea that came to fruit," said Rev. Thomas Baima, a Catholic priest and provost of Mundelein Seminary. "By doing this spiritual journey together and sharing with the other church, you're building a deeper awareness at the local level of the communion that already exists between Orthodox and Catholics." That trip prompted Chicago's Roman Catholic archbishop, Cardinal Francis George, and other leaders to join Kantzavelos in his fight to save Andrew Kokoraleis, a man convicted of murder who re-embraced his Orthodox faith in prison. Kokoraleis was the last man executed in Illinois before former Gov. George Ryan issued a moratorium on the death penalty. Baima and Kantzavelos both think it is especially important to include an Orthodox voice at the ecumenical table as the faithful in America learn to accommodate the rise of Islam. "The Orthodox world lived under Islam for 400 years," Kantzavelos said. "I think Orthodoxy has a lot to teach the West." In 2003 Kantzavelos co-founded a local initiative to improve relations between the Turkish and Greek communities. But not all of Chicago's Greek Orthodox faithful support Kantzavelos. His no-nonsense style has rubbed some parish leaders the wrong way. Some accuse him of stalling church projects and failing to discipline clergy for misconduct. They also do not approve of his work in the ecumenical community, saying he should be paying more attention to his own church. "I think we're here to witness the truth of Orthodoxy," Kantzavelos said. "We don't want to compromise the faith. I never want to do that. But I want to be true to the faith and I want to be true to the tradition, and I think I can do that and be extremely relevant to this world." Rev. Angelo Artemas, pastor of Sts. Peter and Paul Church in Glenview, described Kantzavelos as matter-of-fact. "I consider that a virtue," said Artemas. "Compassion is often letting people know where they stand and giving them a straight answer--tough love so to speak." Kantzavelos has presided over the marriage of his brother and baptized nieces and nephews. "It's touching. I always shed a tear," said his mother, whose love for her oldest has grown into a deep respect. "I really think of him as a priest instead of as my son." Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of North America

The Pope's Visit: The Orthodox View

In this church, the pope's visit is just a reminder of an ancient schism. Eve Conant Newsweek Web Exclusive Updated: 5:21 PM ET Apr 17, 2008 This past Sunday was my 4-year-old son's first communion at our local Russian Orthodox Cathedral of St. John the Baptist in Washington, D.C. I spent so many Sundays in my childhood doing the same: surrounded by burning candles, icons and incense, my arms crossed against my chest as I sipped the bread and wine of the communion chalice. But here in D.C., like the Orthodox church my family attended in California decades ago, it is in the cafeteria after the service where the real truths come out. In that room this past Sunday two such truths were readily apparent: Easter hadn't yet happened by the Orthodox calendar (painted eggs had just gone on sale; I bought the one my son accidentally broke) and the last thing on anyone's mind was that the pope, who in the centuries leading up to 1054 was considered a fellow leader of this flock, was about to touch down in Washington. "I'm glad a Christian leader is getting the paparazzi treatment, but it's not spiritually significant for us," says churchgoer Maria Sund. "We're obviously not Catholic—you know about the Schism of 1054. The papacy is a well-established machine at this point, I don't think it's going to reunite with us, like some people believe." For her the Catholic Church is too liberal and too historically divided from the Orthodox. "There are just too many issues, and I don't think Pope Benedict can solve them. He'd have to reduce the power of Rome, among other things, and that's not going to happen." A fellow church member, Nicholas Troyan, says that while the Orthodox could never consider a fellow man—pope or not—to be infallible, that he practically viewed Pope John Paul II as holy. He came from Eastern Europe and fought repression. "He did so much to bring down communism, and the Russian Orthodox Church was one of the great beneficiaries of that. When he died I suggested to our deacon that we mention it in the service, and I got a such a diatribe for that!" That animosity is hardly new; in fact, it's had almost 10 centuries to fester. The Eastern Orthodox Church refers to the second largest Christian congregation in the world (after the Roman Catholic Church), and includes churches originating in Eastern Europe, the Balkans, the Mediterranean and the Middle East. It hews more closely than most faiths to its ancient theological roots, which stem from the beginnings of Christianity. But the Orthodox do not consider themselves Catholic, as in Roman Catholic, but rather catholic (as an adjective)—in the sense that the church is the "one, holy, catholic and apostolic church." Included in its communion are the ancient patriarchates of Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch and Jerusalem (and now Moscow). Rome used to be on that list, but that was before 1054, when longstanding disputes between East and West were finally made concrete in what is known as the Great Schism. There were doctrinal issues (Roman Catholics accept an amended version of the Nicene Creed which reads "We believe in the Holy Spirit, who proceeds from the father and the son" whereas the Orthodox vehemently reject that addition), as well as power issues. Because Rome was the capital of the Roman Empire, the bishop of Rome was considered "First among equals" compared with the other four bishops of Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch and Jerusalem. Yet as power shifted to Constantinople, that honorific fell under dispute. "Eventually the Church of Rome insisted that their bishop had not only 'primacy of honor' but also 'primacy of authority'," explains Father Andrew Jarmus, a spokesman for the Orthodox Church in America. As a result, the pope in Rome and the Patriarch of Constantinople mutually excommunicated each other. "The real question was that of the authority of Rome, especially in matters of doctrine and governance," Jarmus says. That question—the primacy and legitimacy of the pope—has yet to be satisfactorily answered as far as the Orthodox are concerned. After the split of 1054, says Jarmus, "East and West had little official dialogue until the 1960s, when the pope and the Patriarch of Constantinople met for the first time in centuries." In the Orthodox retelling of that event, it was a watershed moment, leading to some first real steps towards reconciliation. "In 2001, Pope John Paul II apologized for the Crusaders sacking Constantinople," says Jarmus. "Personally, I felt vindicated. If there is going to be any reconciliation, both sides will have to take ownership of the hurt they have caused." The Vatican, however, seems more prone to play down those differences. As Donald Wuerl, the archbishop of Washington, D.C., told NEWSWEEK: "One of my favorite quotes, and this was from the ecumenical patriarch years ago, was his answer to the question: 'What separates the Orthodox Church from the Catholic Church?" He said "Nothing more than nine centuries'." Wuerl thought it was an excellent answer. "What he was saying was, when you get through all the history and politics and overlay and get down to what's at the heart of our faith, there's very little that separate us. And I think John Paul II made valiant efforts to build those bridges, and I think Pope Benedict XVI is profoundly committed to continuing to build and cross those bridges." Chester Gillis, head of the theology department at Georgetown University, says Pope Benedict is following up with Pope John Paul's dream of uniting the churches. "It pained him greatly that the churches were not united. He always dreamed that the gap would be bridged and that dream is carried on by Benedict." Yet while there has been an effort to reach out, says Gillis, the differences run deep. For example, John Paul II was never able to visit Russia as he had hoped. (As a reporter based in Moscow for much of the '90s, I can remember countless times the Russian wire services reported he was coming, then he wasn't coming, then maybe he was coming again.) Gillis says that's because the Russians wanted him to come on an official state visit, whereas he wished for it to be a church-to-church visit. "He didn't want to come as a head of state. But the Orthodox Church didn't want him to come as a church-to-church exchange because it would mean that they were recognizing his leadership, it would have given him a certain religious cache they couldn't accept." George Weigel, a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center in Washington and a Vatican analyst, maintains that the Orthodox say they don't want to talk about the primacy of the pope, yet their actions tell a different story. "The Vatican has been approached by the Patriarch of Moscow and the ecumenical patriarchate of Constantinople asking if he could help them resolve their longstanding issues. If that is not an example of primacy, what is?" Although relations may not be strong with Moscow, Weigel adds that ties are close with the church in Ukraine, which—like the Catholic Church—voiced support for the democratic "Orange Revolution" of 2004-2005. Also in 2005, meeting with a committee designed to open dialogue between East and West, Benedict called the openness for discussion "a new phase of dialogue" after 15 years of renewed difficulty—this time in part because of the rise of Catholic churches in formerly Soviet territory, which—according to a Vatican statement—"re-opened wounds in Catholic-Orthodox relations that had never healed." In November 2006, Pope Benedict also visited Constantinople, walking alongside Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew in what press releases described as a day of "worship, ecumenical dialogue and fraternal embrace" with the two leaders committed toward "the restoration of Full Communion between the two Churches." The trip's "hope-filled conclusion" was heralded, but the union has yet to happen. Because he is a theologian who has emphasized ancient Christian writings, there is some sense among Orthodox leaders that Benedict might bring new emphasis to reconciliation. But visit a Russian Orthodox Church, and that merely feels like idle speculation. After all, it's been nearly 10 centuries and the churches are still separate. As Russian Orthodox churchgoer Troyan says, "I don't know much about Benedict. To me he doesn't have the fame John Paul did, or maybe he just hasn't been 'propagandized'—to use that infamous word—as much as John Paul II had been. The most I've been hearing about the trip is how many traffic jams it will cause." URL: http://www.newsweek.com/id/132591

Monks May Live Longer

""I consider no other labor as difficult as prayer. When we are ready to pray, our spiritual enemies interfere. They understand it is only by making it difficult for us to pray that they can harm us. Other things will meet with success if we keep at it, but laboring at prayer is a war that will continue until we die." + Abba Agathon Monks may live longer than other men, according to a German study. The Benedictine publication Missionblatter has published the findings of a demographic survey by Marc Luy of Rostock, Germany, who analyzed the age of monks in different monasteries and found that on average, monks live 4 years longer than other men. Professor Luy admitted that he still does not know why monks live longer. His hypothesis is that monks smoke less, have a regular daily routine, and do not cease working at age 65. He also believes that monks' spiritual lives help them to deal with daily stress. The researcher also found that there is no difference between the average life span of monks and consecrated women. The report of the study to hand does not say anything about the longevity of other consecrated men or priests in general.

The Dogmatic Tradition of the Orthodox Church

Orthodoxy, a way of life, is known for its experiential approach to faith and doctrine. Rooted in the Bible, its faith and doctrine is enriched by the living commentaries of the lives of the saints of the past and the present. It is enriched by the theological speculations of the Fathers and Teachers of the Church, and by the decrees of the various councils which dealt with doctrinal aberrations (heresies). As an introduction to the Doctrine of the Orthodox Church, we will deal with the Tradition of the Church and the Holy Bible, part of this tradition, as the source of our Christian faith and doctrine. I. SACRED TRADITION AND THE DOCTRINE OF THE ORTHODOX CHURCH The source of the faith and doctrine of the Orthodox Church is called "Sacred Tradition." Unlike Western Christianity, which professes a kind of dichotomy between the Bible, considered to be the revealed word of God, and the tradition of the Church, considered to be: as important as the Bible (Roman Catholic Church) or secondary, and even negligible (Protestantism), Orthodoxy holds the position that the Tradition of the Church includes the Bible, for the Bible is an epiphenomenon, an "outward form" of our Christian Tradition. What is this Tradition? What are its external forms, of which the Bible is one? The Sacred Tradition of the Church ICON OF CHRIST FROM HAGIA SOPHIA The tradition of the Church is nothing else but the life of the Church, a life in the Holy Spirit. From a Christian point of view, the Church is not a mere human society such that we could identify tradition with the history of this society. The Church is the living Body of Christ, with a history as far as its human members are concerned, but also with an internal life that escapes the eye of the historian, and is only seen by the eye of faith. In this sense we distinguish between an inner force which guides that history and a spirit which inspires it, this force and Spirit being the Holy Spirit of God, and the external, human manifestations of the life of the Spirit in the Church. The teachings of the Lord, proclaimed by the Apostles, whether the Twelve or the larger group of Apostles (the Seventy, for example), or the missionary Apostles like Saint Paul, were handed down to the apostolic community. This faith, once handed down to the Saints, continued to live in the Christian community that succeeded apostolic times. The "Living Continuity" There is a living continuity between the apostolic community of the early Church and the community that succeeds it. The same faith, teachings, doctrine, and Christian life continue to be present and perpetuate themselves throughout the history of the Church. In this sense, the Church continues to be apostolic, that is, in living continuity with the early Christian, apostolic Community. Tradition, as the life of the Church, is seen in terms of this living community with our Christian origins. By the end of the first century of our Christian era, the major teachings of Christ and facts regarding His life and saving work were added to the Christian scriptures. They became part of what by the end of the second century was called the Canon of the Bible, containing forty-nine books of the Old and twenty-seven of the New Testament. However, many more of the teachings of the Lord and of His deeds were not included in this Christian Bible (John 21: 24-25). They remained part of the life of the Church, the inheritance of the apostolic community perpetuated through history. Saint Basil the Great speaks of the importance of this inheritance of the "unwritten words" of Christ, and this "light of the Tradition" in which one should see the Holy Scriptures. Without this light, St. Basil says, "the Scripture is reduced to a mere letter." The tradition of the Church is not only the context in which one can understand the Bible; it is its living commentary, clarification and completion of its meaning as well. Tradition, being living continuity with our Christian origins, is not "immobility," or "repetition of sterile formulas." Change is possible within the tradition. There is at the same time continuity with and faithfulness to the origins, but there is also discontinuity. Continuity in the tradition is a creative faithfulness and continuity. The essentials of the Christian faith, doctrine, and life are always the same. The expression of that faith may vary according to the concrete historic circumstances in which this faith is proclaimed. A favorite distinction among theologians is the one between Tradition and traditions. Tradition, with a capital T, is the life of the Spirit of the Church. It is this life that makes the continuity of Truth and Life in the Church, and gives to it its stability, continuity, and unchangeability. While traditions (with a small t) are the concrete and historic manifestations of that Tradition, they may change. As in the Bible one distinguishes between the letter and the spirit, so in the tradition of the Church in general one distinguishes between the context and its expression. One distinguishes various traditions that express the One Tradition of the Church: the scriptural, patristic, doctrinal, canonical, artistic, architectural, and liturgical traditions are specific expressions of the Spirit of the Tradition of the Church. What matters most, in terms of the faith, is the so-called dogmatical, or doctrinal tradition of the Church. However, since all these aspects and these manifestations of the one Tradition of the Church are interwoven, one should consider all the forms that express the spirit of the One Tradition in establishing the context and the very meaning of the Christian faith and doctrine. In order for anyone to understand this Tradition of the Church, it is imperative for him or her to be part of this Tradition. One can only understand the life of the Spirit in the Church, if he lives this life himself. The "come and see" of the Bible (John 1:46) applies to the Christian Tradition in general. "If we live by the Spirit, let us also walk by the Spirit" (Gal. 5: 25): if one lives by the Spirit he should also walk by the Spirit, and vice versa, one cannot walk by the Spirit and understand His promptings and workings, unless he also lives by the Spirit. Tradition, as the life of the Spirit in the Church, is also witness to His presence and His workings in its everyday life. II. FORMS OF THE DOGMATIC TRADITION We have already mentioned the various forms of Tradition, specifically with regard to the faith and doctrine. They are the Bible itself, the doctrine of the Fathers, that of the ecumenical and local councils, the Divine Liturgy, and the architecture and iconography of the Church. a) The Holy Scriptures The Holy Bible (or Scriptures, the Old and New Testaments) is the most authoritative part of the Sacred Tradition of the Church. As with today's laws that govern the life of our modern society, these laws are the product of the life of the community; however, once produced, they are placed above and regulate this life. So it is with the Holy Scripture: once established by the Christian community, led by the Holy Spirit of God, then Scripture is placed above and regulates the life of the Christian community. The Bible is the product and the epiphenomenon of the life of the Church, being also the work of men. But it is also the work of the Holy Spirit of God, working in this life of the Church. This is why the Church is subjected to the authority of the Bible. Much has been said regarding the Divine authorship and inspiration of the Bible (theopneustia). Various theories have been expressed throughout the centuries concerning the way in which the Bible is the work of the Holy Spirit. Philo of Alexandria is the main exponent of the so-called "mechanical theory" of understanding the divine inspiration of the Holy Spirit. According to Philo, the authors of the Bible were in a condition of "possession" by the Spirit of God, who was just using these authors as blind instruments. A better view is the so-called "dynamic view" of the cooperation between man and the Holy Spirit in the case of the Bible. In any case of "synergy" (cooperation) between God and man, God leads, and man follows; God works, and man accepts God's work in him, as God's coworker in subordination to Him. So it is with divine inspiration in the case of the Bible: the Holy Spirit inspires, and the sacred author follows the Holy Spirit's injunctions, utilizing his own human and imperfect ways to express the perfect message and doctrine of the Holy Spirit. In this sense, we can understand possible imperfections in the books of the Bible, since they are the result of the cooperation between the all-perfect and perfecting Divine Author, the Spirit, and the imperfect human author. Biblical textual criticism is completely normal and acceptable by the Orthodox, since they see the Bible in this light. Nothing human is perfect, including the Bible, which is the end product of human cooperation with the divine Spirit. b) The Fathers of the Church The Holy Bible, and more specifically the New Testament, does not contain all the doctrine and teachings of Christ. The Church, which has produced the Bible, does not completely submit itself to only one of the epiphenomena of its life, even if it is the most authoritative one, the Holy Scriptures. An important part of the teachings and doctrine of Christ continues to be present and handed down to the generations of Saints through other means and ways that are also part of the life of the Church, a life in the Holy Spirit. One of these ways and means through which Christ's truth comes to us is the doctrine of the Holy Fathers of the Church. The term Fathers, as we understand it, refers to great people of faith and sanctity of life, great teachers of Christ's truth, staunch supporters of the Church and combatants of the enemies of Christian faith and truth (the "heretics"). These Fathers have always taught the faith in faithfulness and continuity with our Christian origins. On the one hand, they edified the faithful and were feeding the flock of Christ with the truth of the Gospel in its fuller meaning, which was handed down to them in the tradition of the Saints along with the Gospel. On the other hand, these same Fathers followed in the footsteps of the Apostles in opposing "the opponents of the faith" (Tit. 1:9; 1 Tim. 6:4-5; 2 Tim. 4:3-5). A "heretic" (from airoumai, choose) is someone who chooses his own doctrine against the doctrine of the Church, or someone who reduces the doctrine to only one of its aspects; thus heresy means reductionism. The Fathers always stood for the wholeness of truth (catholicity from "truth kata to olon," in its entirety and wholeness). Fathers combating the various heresies throughout the ages were the Apostolic Fathers, who followed the Apostles and fought especially against Arianism (St. Basil the Great, St. Gregory the Theologian, and St. Gregory of Nyssa); the fathers who fought against Nestorianism (St. Cyril of Alexandria), against Monophysitism and Monothelitism (St. Maximos the Confessor), and against Iconoclasm (St. Theodore of Studion, St. John of Damascus). In addition to the "Old Fathers" of the patristic tradition up the to end of the eighth century, our Holy Orthodox Church also acknowledges the so called "Recent Fathers" of the Byzantine era, among whom St. Gregory Palamas (14th century) has a preeminent place. The Church depends on all these Fathers and the insights they have concerning the living faith of the Church, present in living continuity with the early Church in the life of the Church through the ages. c) The Major Councils The doctrine of the Church was best established through its so called "Ecumenical," that is "universal," or "imperial" councils. Two of them, the first, in Nicaea (325) and the second, in Constantinople (381), established the faith in the Holy Trinity; the first established the divinity of Christ, the incarnate Word (Logos) of God; and the second established the divinity of the Holy Spirit against the "Spirit fighters" (Pneumatomachs) . Three Councils established the so called ''Christological dogma,'' the doctrine pertaining to Christ, "true God and true man" - that is, a divine person who assumed a perfect humanity, thus saving and deifying it (uniting it with the divine). These councils were the Council of Ephesus (Third Council, 431), against Nestorianism; the Council of Chalcedon (Fourth Council, 451), against Eutyches and Monophysitism; and the Third Council of Constantinople (Sixth Council, 681), against Monothelitism. In a sense, the other two major (Ecumenical) councils, the Fifth (the second of Constantinople, 553) and the Seventh (the second of Nicaea, 787) are also Christological Councils: the Fifth Council, which condemned the writings of exponents of the School of Antioch, Theodore of Mopsuestia, Theodoret of Cyrus, and Ibas of Edessa, without reversing the decrees of Chalcedon gave an Alexandrian interpretation to its teaching (which were considered to represent the Antiochian School); and the Seventh Council, which defended the doctrine of the icons, may also be considered as a Christological Council, insofar as the doctrine of icons is a consequence of the Christological dogma: the Son of God became man, so He can be depicted in His humanity. d) The Creed of the Church Western Christianity utilizes these Creeds, referred to as "ecumenical": the Apostolic Creed the Athanasian Creed and the Creed of Nicaea/Constantinople In actuality, the first two creeds are not "ecumenical," i.e. "universal." The Apostolic Creed is actually the Creed of the Church of Rome, which reflects the common apostolic faith. The Athanasian Creed is also a Western creed, created in the West (probably in Southern France) around the end of the fifth or beginning of the sixth century. It reflects the developments of the Trinitarian and Christological dogmas up to that time. The only true "ecumenical creed" is the Creed of Nicaea/Constantinople, or, simply the Creed. It was first promulgated by the Council of Nicaea [325]. It was edited and completed by the first Council of Constantinople in 381. Since that time, the Creed is universally accepted as the summary of all the important Christian doctrines, and is used both for catechism and for the worship of the Church. e) Later Councils The Orthodox Church considers itself to be the Church of Christ. From this point of view, any general and major councils even after the separation between Eastern and Western Christianity [1054] may still be considered and called "ecumenical councils." However, in deference to the "ecumenical problem" and as a matter of pastoral prudence and strategy, the Church has not given the name "ecumenical" to Councils that do not represent the "undivided Church" of the Byzantine Empire. Nonetheless, important Councils convened in the East after the separation between Eastern and Western Christianity and are as important in terms of establishing the faith and clearly enunciating its content. Such are the important Councils of 1341 and 1351, which established the Orthodox Christian doctrine concerning divine grace, the divine energies of God and the "uncreated light," according to the doctrine of St. Gregory Palamas. Councils convened during the seventeenth century to counteract Protestant infiltrations in the East and establish the Orthodox doctrine vis-à-vis the Protestant teachings, like the Councils of Jassi [1662] and Jerusalem [1672] are also considered to be councils of relative importance. Documents produced by these Councils, or ratified by them, along with other important documents, such as "confessions of faith" by Orthodox prelates and teachers (St. Photios, Michael Cerularius, Mark of Ephesus, Gennadios of Constantinople, Jeremiah II of Constantinople, Metrophanes Kritopoulos, Peter Moghila, etc.) are given the name of "Symbolic Books" of the Orthodox Church. They are certainly witnesses of the Orthodox faith "once handed down to the saints" and perpetuated in the Orthodox Church. However, their authority is subjected to the authority of the Ecumenical Councils and the ancient Fathers of the Church. f) The Divine Liturgy The Orthodox Church is known for its rich liturgical tradition. The Orthodox liturgy is characterized by its poetry, biblical roots, and its dogmatical accuracy. Anyone who opens the Orthodox liturgical books readily realizes that they are filled with Scriptural quotations and reminiscence. No one has any difficulty calling the Orthodox worship a "Biblical worship," for direct or indirect quotations of both the Old and New Testament abound throughout the Orthodox Liturgy. Moreover, this same Liturgy, which celebrates the mysteries of faith, of which the Resurrection of Christ has a central place, is filled with dogmatical and doctrinal statements, whether from the doctrine of the Councils, or from the doctrine of the Fathers of the Church. The third characteristic of Orthodox worship, which is its poetry, may in some ways be disharmonious with the previous one, that of dogmatical accuracy and precision. Basically, the statement Lex orandi, lex credendi (the rule of prayer is the rule of faith) is always true. However, at times poetry has its own requirements, in order for it to still remain "poetry" (which at times means "poetical license" or imprecision). This characteristic of Orthodox worship is by no means harmful to the faith; to the contrary, it strengthens and enlivens the faith by adding to it an extra dimension, or to use a better phrase, by strengthening the "heart" dimension of the faith. The Divine Liturgy itself, the text and celebrations of the Holy Sacraments, the Liturgical texts of the Church in general are a mine of both precise theology and theological meditation, which can be of great help to anyone who wants to know the faith by praying and worshipping according to the faith. g) The Canons of the Church The abundant canonical legislation of the Orthodox Church is also a mine of information concerning the doctrine of the Church. The canons apply the faith - and the moral principles of Christianity based on the faith - to concrete, local, and historical situations. The canons of the Church are an example of the intent of the Church always to re-express its teaching and readjust its strategy according to contemporary needs. Besides this, many of the canons, especially the so-called "dogmatical" ones, express the doctrine of the Church in a clear, indisputable way, equal to that of the decrees of faith promulgated by the same ecumenical Councils that also produced the canons. These canons are certainly important witnesses of the faith of the Church, and must be utilized as an important expression of the faith. h) Christian Art: Iconography, Architecture CHURCH OF HAGIA SOPHIA Finally, one of the forms with which the doctrinal tradition of the Church may be expressed is the architecture and iconography of the Church. The Byzantine church tradition has developed an important symbolism regarding the church edifice: the narthex is the preparation for the entrance into heaven; the transept of the church, with the dome above it, represents heaven itself; and the sanctuary, the "Holy of Holies," with the altar in its center, represents the "holy dwelling place" of God and God's throne. This symbolism is especially vivid in the celebration of the Divine Liturgy, during which "the Kingdom of God breaks through" to be present in the midst of the congregation. Byzantine iconography is also a means of expressing the faith. The icons, "books of the illiterate," teach most of the faith to one who knows how to read them. Painted according to an austere tradition, in an austere style, after prayer and fasting by the iconographer, the icons become "windows of heaven," revealing to the faithful heavenly mysteries, the mysteries of faith. The icons become a real, sacramental presence of the persons or realities depicted in them, thus leading the faithful to communion with the person or the reality depicted in them. On the basis of the witness obtained through these exponents and expressions of the dogmatical and doctrinal tradition of the Church, one can consequently express the major doctrines of the faith as lived and experienced in the life-context of the Orthodox Church. III. THE DOCTRINE OF THE CHURCH -- ORTHODOX DOGMA AND BELIEF The beliefs, doctrine and dogma of the Orthodox Church are in direct continuity with the doctrine of the Bible and the uninterrupted tradition of the Church of which the Bible is the authoritative exponent. The Orthodox Church may rightly glory in its history, as being a "historical" Church, of which the history has no innovations to present, but rather an absolute faithfulness to the basic Christian message as preserved in the Bible. All the dogmas of the Church are "Biblical," i.e. based on the Bible. The dogmas of the Church are nothing else but an authoritative presentation of the revealed doctrine, both for didactic and also apologetical purposes. Heresy was one of the reasons why the Church established and enunciated its doctrine in a very clear and unequivocal way. However, the dogmas decreed by the Councils that opposed heresy are not the only ones promulgated and taught by the Church. The doctrinal system of the Church contains both these dogmas and all the other doctrines that the Church always proclaimed as being part of the message of salvation that she addresses to the world. The Triune God, the doctrine of creation of angels and man, man's fall, the divine plan of salvation, Christ's person and work, the Church, the Virgin Mary, the Saints, the Sacraments, and Orthodox eschatology (the "last things") are some of the points of doctrine that will be presented here, in a very synoptic manner. a) Triune God In the estimation of the spiritual fathers of the Orthodox Church, knowing God is not just another kind of knowledge: it is a matter of life and death. For there is no third choice between the Holy Trinity and hell. Also, knowing God is not just another intellectual exercise. It is the kind of Knowledge that commits your entire existence, it is an existential, experiential, apophatic, and doxological Knowledge. We know God when we experience His presence as filling and overtaking us, when we feel completely dependent on him, "as infants feel dependent upon their mothers" (St. Basil). We know God not through our concepts and ideas only, but beyond and above them: for our entire existence is united with Him. We know God when we are familiar with Him as "the cattle are familiar with their manger." We know God when "we breath Him," when we feel His presence any place we are or go; we know God when we constantly depend on Him, when our lives belong to Him, when our lives become a constant praise of His Holy Name. We know God as transcendent, as far away; one of the feelings of truly authentic experience of God is that of awe, that of feeling annihilated in His awesome and distant Presence. However, it is also true that the opposite feeling is also part of true and authentic religious experience: that is to feel God as immanent, and intimately close and nearby and present. The theological explanation of the Orthodox tradition regarding both God's immanence and transcendence is simple: God is present to us through His energies (operations, activity) which "descend toward us," whereas He is completely transcendent, far away, unapproachable in His essence (St. Basil, expanded upon by St. Gregory Palamas). Our Christian God, then, is not the "God of Philosophers." He is not a "Supreme Being" similar to other beings, another "essence" among many essences. The Christian God is "super-essential" and "super- existent" only in the sense that He is totally different from created existence. "If everything else is being, God is not a being," said St. Gregory Palamas. Our Christian God is not a "God exiled in heaven," according to the theology of "The Secular City" (Harvey Cox). Our Christian God is very much involved with us and the world, for we are His creation and continue to depend on Him. Our God is also a personal God, a trinity of persons, a fellowship of three sharing the one essence and energies of the one divinity. The divinity existing in the way of a fountainhead is the Person (Hypostasis) of the Father. The divinity existing in the way of Generation from the Father is the person of the Only-Begotten Son of God, the Word (Logos) of God. The divinity existing in the way of Procession from the Father (only), is the Person of the Holy Spirit of God. Each one of the three Persons (hypostases) of the Holy Trinity is the entire divinity. On this basis, the three divine persons dwell in one another (perichoresis) inter-dwelling, co-inherence. Each one of the three acts together with the other two; however, each of them relates to the creation in a personal way: the Father conceives the plan of creation (and of restoration of Creation in His Christ); the Son of God makes the Father's plan of creation (and the salvation of creation) a reality; the Holy Spirit leads God's (the Father's) plan of creation (and restoration of creation in Christ, the incarnate Logos of God) to its perfection. b) Creation The Creed of the faith speaks of "God the Father All-Governing," as "creator of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible." First of all, it is understood that, according to St. Irenaeos, God the Father creates by using "His two hands, the Son and the Holy Spirit." St. Basil is more specific when he says that God the Father is the "Primordial Cause" of Creation; the Son of God is the "Creative Cause" of God's creation (see St. John 1:3: "all things were made through Him, and without Him was not anything made that was made"); and the Holy Spirit is the "Perfecting Cause" of creation. Creation is a Christian concept. It comes from direct revelation (Genesis). No philosopher could have ever discovered the concept of creation as a "call to existence out of nothingness." Time and space are created also by God, for they exist as categories that are connected with creation. The goal and purpose of God's creation is the participation of this creation in God's blessedness: St. John of Damascus speaks of "God's glory and man's theosis"; however, God's glory is man's theosis, for God creates to communicate Himself, His blessedness and glory to the creatures He creates - the entire creation, and in this creation, man in particular. Creation is possible in Christianity only, for only Christianity makes the distinction between the essence and energies of God. God creates through His energies, without communicating His essence. 1) Creation of the World God is the creator of heaven and earth. God creates the world out of goodness. He is interested in His creation, and involved with it. Unlike philosophical systems (deism, secularism) that want God disinvolved, our Christian god is a caring and loving God, the Father in heaven. He creates, keeps things into being, and provides for them as well. Even if His creation turns against Him and rejects Him - that is, the mystery of God the Father's kenosis, self-emptying - God continues to love it and care for it. Man's example confirms this attitude of the Creator: In spite of man's revolt, God continues to love him, and finds a way of bringing him back to Him, "from death to life," for God is Life and the absence of this Life is death. Evil in the world can only be understood as man's invention. The world is affected by man's evil. It can also be redeemed, and participate in man's salvation and glory. This is what the Greek Fathers, on the basis of St. Maximos' theology, refer to as "the cosmic aspects" of salvation in Christ. 2) Angels ARCHANGEL MICHAEL God is not only the creator of heaven and earth; but also of everything both visible and invisible. Our Christian Church believes in the existence of spiritual beings, likewise personal, for they are also created "like man" in the image of God, who preceded the creation of the world itself. They are sexless, their number is great, however not infinite. They are "liturgical ministering spirits, sent forth to serve for the sake of those who are to obtain salvation" (Heb. 1:14). The name given to angels in the Old Testament is that of a messenger, or a minister, a servant of God. The New Testament retains the same meaning for the word "angel." The three names that we know from the canonical books of the Holy Scripture are: Gabriel (man of God), Michael (Who is as God?), and Rafael (God heals). The main purpose of angels is to be God's servants in His creation, and especially man's helpers. Each man is assigned a special guardian angel by God (see Matt. 18:10). The ultimate purpose of the creation of angels is the glorification and praise of God's Holy Name. At this point mention should also be made of the "fallen angels," Lucifer and his companions. It is also the doctrine of the Church that some of the angels, created as good angels by God, revolted against God because of pride, trying to be "gods without God." The result of their revolt is their fall from God's good graces and God's life. They live an inauthentic life away from God, counteracting God and His plan of theosis for man and the world. 3) Man's creation Among the visible things that God created is the crown of His creation, man. In Genesis we read the story of God's creation. We cannot interpret this story to the letter; however, its message is loud and clear: God is the creator of everything that exists; there is order in God's creation, and a development (even "evolution") from lower forms to higher forms of life; God created everything good; man, created in God's image and likeness, has a very special place in God's creation, called to be God's proxy toward His creation. Man is created as a psycho-physical unity: God "uses his hands" to create man, to show special care about man's creation. God takes dust from the earth, fashions man, and breathes into man's nostrils the "breath of life," man's soul, of a spiritual nature. Man becomes the link between the spiritual creation of God - (angels) and the material one (earth), for he partakes of both. This is why "man's mission will be to bring the creation into communion with God" (St. Maximos the Confessor). Man is created in the image of God, with the specific call to become God-like. The Fathers of the Church elaborate on this doctrine of Genesis. Man's being in the image of God means that man has a spiritual soul reflecting God (the Father) as a person. Man is capable of knowing God and being in communion with God. Man belongs to God, for being God's child and image makes him God's relative. Man's soul is endowed with God's energies and life; one of these energies is love. Love, coming from God, is also directed toward God, creating union and bringing communion with God. The Fathers also make a distinction between the image of God in man, and his likeness to God: image is the potential given to man, through which he can obtain the life of theosis (communion with God). Likeness with God is the actualization of this potential; it is becoming more and more what one already is: becoming more and more God's image, more and more God-like. The distinction between image and likeness is, in other words, the distinction between being and becoming. Being in the image of God and called to likeness with God also means for man that God's immortality is reflected in man, insofar as man continues to be in communion with God through God's image in him, and that man is assigned God's creation, to be God's proxy in it, to have dominion over it and keep it in touch with the Creator. St. Maximos the Confessor gives this noble mission to man (to Adam, the first man): man has to overcome all kinds of distinctions within God's creation, before man brings God's creation back to God: man was called to overcome the distinction between male and female, inhabited earth and paradise, heaven and earth, visible and invisible creation, and, finally, the division between created and uncreated, thus unifying God's creation with the Creator. Since man failed to achieve this union (theosis), the "New Adam," Christ, took it upon Himself to fulfill this original call of the first man (Adam). 4) Man's Fall and its Consequence Unlike St. Augustine's doctrine of "original justice," which attributes to the first man several excessive perfections, perfect knowledge of God and God's creation, for example, that make the fall impossible, the doctrine of the Greek Fathers of the image of God in man as a potential to be actualized, allows the possibility of a deterioration, as well. St. Irenaeos speaks of the first man (Adam) as an infant (nepios), who had to grow up to adulthood. Instead, man failed himself, by not "passing the test" of maturity given to him by God. In spite of God's prohibition, man chose to eat from the tree of knowledge of good and evil (Genesis). Being "good by nature" man had to also become "good by choice." Unfortunately, it did not happen that way. Following the "snake's" advice (the devil's, that is), man also tried to do what the fallen angels did: to "become a god without God." Man's imperfection and innocence, or, better, naiveté, and his relative pride, cultivated by the "accuser," became the cause of man's fall from God's communion, due to his disobedience and rejection of God. Man put his purpose in himself, instead of putting it in God. Man's free will is responsible for his own decline. The consequences of this revolt against God, which the West calls "original" and the East "ancestral" (propatorikon) sin, are that man lost his original innocence; the image of God in him was tarnished, and even became distorted; man's reason was obscured, his will weakened, the desires and passions of the flesh grew wild; man suffered separation from God, the author and source of life. He put himself in an inauthentic kind of existence, close to death. The Fathers speak of "spiritual death" which is the cause of the physical one, and which may lead to the "eschatological," eternal death: for "the wages of sin is death" (Romans 6: 23). This state of fall, of inauthentic life close to death, this status of "spiritual death" continues to be transmitted to all of man's progeny, even those who are born of Christian parents. The personal guilt of the first man belongs to him exclusively. However, the results of his sin are transmitted to the entire human race. A personal commitment through an engagement of one's personal free will is required, in order for things to turn around. Christ, who requires this personal commitment, made this change possible through His coming and His work upon earth. 5) The case of Mary, the Mother of God Does the Mother of God, Virgin Mary, participate in the "ancestral sin?" The question does not make much sense for the Orthodox, for it is obvious that Mary, being part of the common human race issued of the first man (Adam), automatically participates in the fallen status and in the "spiritual death" introduced by the sin of the first man. The Fathers of the Church speculate on Luke 1:35, concluding that Mary was purified by the Holy Spirit the day of Annunciation, in order for her to become the "worthy Mother of God." However, even after she gave birth to the Son of God, Mary was not exempted of less serious ("venial") sins. St. John Chrysostom attributes to Mary the sin of vanity, in the context of the first miracle of Christ in Cana of Galilee. Mary was also saved by her Son, for God is her Savior (Luke 1: 47) as well. It is unfortunate that the Roman Catholic Church promulgated the doctrine of the so-called "Immaculate Conception" in 1854, which contradicts the traditional doctrine of the Church concerning Mary. IV. THE DIVINE PLAN OF SALVATION Man failed God and failed himself through his revolt against God. However, God did not abandon him. God kept following man with His loving care and providence. God prepared man's salvation in the same eternal Logos of God, through whom we are created, so that even after our fall we may return to immortality (St. Athanasios). The plan of God for man's salvation is called the plan of "divine economy," i.e. divine dispensation. God the Father conceives the plan, the Son executes it, the Holy Spirit fulfills it and leads it to perfection and finalization. God the Father acts out of love for man, in sending His own Son for the salvation of the world (John 3:16). When the time was ripe, after a series of purifications throughout the Old Testament that led to the Virgin Mary who could respond to God, accepting man's salvation on behalf of humankind, God sent forth His only-begotten Son, "born of woman, born under the law, to redeem those who were under the law, so that we might receive adoption to sonship" (Gal. 4: 4-5). a) Christ's Incarnation and the Mystery of Salvation Christ saved humankind through what He is, and through what He did for us. Beginning with St. Irenaeos, the Greek Fathers continually reiterate the statement that the Incarnate Son of God "became what we are (a human being) so that we may be deified," says St. Athanasios. By assuming our human nature, the Incarnate Logos, a divine person, brought this humanity to the heights of God. Everything that Christ did throughout His earthly life was based on the presupposition that humanity was already saved and deified, from the very moment of His conception in the womb of Mary, through the operation of the Holy Spirit. b) Jesus the Christ, the God-Man ICON OF THE NATIVITY Anointed by the Holy Spirit of God since its conception, Christ's humanity is the humanity of the Messiah (the Anointed one) since the beginning of its existence. Christ is at the same time the son of the Virgin, but also the natural Son of God, by His very nature. His humanity is a real humanity, with a body and soul, which suffered hunger and thirst, which suffered humiliation and the Cross. The Church condemned such heresies as that of the Docetists, who said that Christ's humanity was not real, Arios who taught that there was no soul in Jesus, and Apollinarios of Laodicea who taught that there was no reason in Jesus. The Church also defended the divinity of Jesus against the Ebionites, who denied Christ's divinity, the Monarchian heresy which subordinated the Son to the Father, and Arianism, which also denied the divinity of the Logos of God. Against all these heretics the Church upheld the doctrine that Christ, a divine person, is "true God of true God," for He is the only begotten Son of God, not in a metaphorical, but a natural sense. He has the divine properties of omniscience and preexistence in terms of God's creation. He is the only one without sin: He operates miracles through His divinity, accepts divine honor and worship due to the divinity, and accepts faith in Him. Humanity and divinity are hypostatically united together: the two natures exist in the one person of the Word who became flesh, a divine person (or hypostasis). Christ exists "in two natures," without being of two natures; the two natures exist united together "without confusion, without change, without division, without separation." (Council of Chalcedon). The first two adverbs are addressed against the heresy of Eutyches and the monophysites who confused the natures and the last two against the Nestorians, who separated and divided humanity and divinity in Christ. Consequently, Christ has two wills also and two operations, one human and one divine; the two work together "to achieve man's salvation"; however, the human will and operation is always subjected to the divine (Third Council of Constantinople, the Sixth Ecumenical, against Monothelitism). The consequences of this hypostatic union of the two natures in Christ are the "coinherence" of human and divine nature, the communicatio idiomatum, the natural sonship of Christ's humanity, one worship of the two natures in Christ, deification of Christ's human nature, Christ's double knowledge and power (however, attributed to one person), Christ's absolute unsinfulness, and the Mother of God being truly Theotokos and Virgin before, during, and after she gave birth to the only-begotten Son of God. c) Jesus the Prophet, the Priest, and the King ICON OF THE CRUCIFIXION FROM THE MUSEUM OF THE ICONS IN VENICE, ITALY (USED WITH PERMISSION) Jesus had the following obstacles to overcome in order for Him to accomplish the work for which He came (theosis): the obstacle of nature, the obstacle of sin, the obstacle of death, and the dominion of the devil. The obstacle of nature was overcome with His Incarnation; the obstacle of sin and death was overcome by the Cross and the Resurrection of Jesus. The dominion of the devil was overcome by Christ's descent into Hades (Hell). According to Eusebius of Caesaria and the patristic tradition of the Church, the mission of Christ (continued by the Church) is threefold: Prophet, Priest, and King. As a Prophet, Jesus taught humankind the truth of God, being Himself the Incarnate Truth, the Way and Life. Christ's teaching is characterized by clarity and lucidity, simplicity and completeness. Christ is the teacher who backs His teaching with His life. As a Priest, Christ offers Himself as a victim "for the life of the world." Through His sacrifice on the Cross, Christ "redeems us from the curse of the law, by His precious blood," bestowing "immortality upon humankind" (Troparion of the Crucifixion). The blood shed upon the cross washes away our sin; as it fell upon Adam (man's) skull and dry bones (according to a pious tradition Adam's tomb lay under the place of crucifixion on Golgotha) they were made alive again; man's poisonous blood was replaced with the life-giving blood of God (Troparion of the Feast of the Exaltation of the Cross). Through Christ's death upon the Cross, man was restored to life. Christ is King throughout His earthly life, for He came to establish and to announce the Kingdom of God (see Matt. 4:17). However, the highlights of His Royal Ministry are the Cross itself (for, according to St. John Chrysostom, Christ dies as the King who offers His life for His subjects); the descent into Hades to announce salvation to "those who were asleep there from all ages" (Troparion of Holy Friday); the Resurrection, through which Christ "tramples down death by death, bestowing everlasting life to the dead" (Resurrection hymn); Christ's Ascension into heaven, through which He reenters into the Father's glory; and Christ's glorious coming again. d) The Mission of the Holy Spirit The last part of the plan of salvation (divine economy) is fulfilled by the Holy Spirit of God (economy of the Holy Spirit). The Spirit of God prepares for the coming of Christ in the Old Testament period, becomes the ointment of Christ's flesh the day of the Annunciation, accompanies Christ throughout His mission on earth, and applies Christ's work, both saving and deifying, to each Christian individually, through the sacramental life of the Church. Christ has achieved our salvation and deification in an objective way, in our nature. The Spirit applies salvation and deification in a subjective way, to our persons. Divine grace, the Church, and the sacraments are the working of the Holy Spirit. e) Divine Grace By divine grace we understand the saving and deifying energy of God, made available through Christ's work, and distributed by the Holy Spirit, the source of grace and sanctification. Divine grace, the work of the Holy Spirit, is a free gift, necessary for our salvation, non-coercive, which requires our cooperation (synergy). Our response to the grace of God is our works of love, which are the fruits of God's grace working in us. We are justified by God's grace. However, this justification is not real, unless it produces the "works of righteousness." f) The Church of Christ ICON OF ST. GEORGE FROM THE MUSEUM OF THE ICONS IN VENICE, ITALY (USED WITH PERMISSION) The place where the saving and deifying grace of the Holy Spirit is at work is the Church of Christ. The Church is at the same time the image of the Holy Trinity, the people of God, the Body of Christ, and the Temple of the Holy Spirit. All these aspects are necessary for a complete image of the Church. The Church is the great sacrament of salvation that Christ has instituted in the world. It is the Ark of salvation, and the inaugurated Kingdom of God. Its unity is not affected by schism and heresy; its holiness is not affected by sin; its catholicity and truth is not affected by partiality and falsehood. Founded upon the Apostles, she continues the apostolic mission and ministry in the world, being the "pillar of truth," never failing in accomplishing her mission. g) The Communion of Saints The Church thus conceived is not just another human organization; it is a gathering of people who profoundly share the life of faith, the new life in Christ, the life in the Holy Spirit, the life of God. The Church can best be characterized as a "communion of saints." For all its members are called to holiness, through their rite of incorporation into the Holy Body of Christ, the Temple of the Holy Spirit, the People of God. Militant on earth and triumphant in heaven, the Church is only one family, sharing in the same means of grace, the holy sacraments. V. ORTHODOX ESCHATOLOGY The Holy Spirit of God, working through the Church and its sacramental life, leads the plan of salvation in Christ to completion and final fulfillment. The final battle with evil that operates in the world will occur just before the coming again of the Lord. In the meantime, the struggle against evil and dark forces in the world continues, with some victories on behalf of the Church, and with some failures on behalf of some of its members. This is the normal condition of the life of the Church, which is the inaugurated Kingdom of God, and which, however, has not yet come fully. Two distinct stages are to be recognized, in terms of Christian Orthodox eschatology: that of a "partial judgment," of a "partial" or "realized" eschatology, and that of a "final judgment," at the coming again of the Lord, which will come at the end of time. a) Partial judgment - the hour of our death Our physical death, a consequence of the first man's sin that we still suffer, can be seen in two ways: negatively, as a kind of catastrophe, especially for those who do not believe in Christ and life everlasting in Him; and positively, as the end of a maturation process, which leads us to the encounter with our Maker. Christ has destroyed the power of the "last enemy," death (1 Cor. 18:26). A Christian worthy of the name is not afraid of this physical death insofar as it is not accompanied by a spiritual or eternal (eschatological) death. A partial judgment is instituted immediately after our physical death, which places us in an intermediate condition of partial blessedness (for the righteous), or partial suffering (for the unrighteous). Disavowing a belief in the Western "Purgatory," our Church believes that a change is possible during this intermediate state and stage. The Church, militant and triumphant, is still one, which means that we can still influence one another with our prayers and our saintly (or ungodly) life. This is the reason why we pray for our dead. Also, almsgiving on behalf of the dead may be of some help to them, without implying, of course, that those who provide the alms are in some fashion "buying" anybody's salvation. b) General Judgment - the Coming Again of Christ The early Church lived in expectation of the "day of the Lord," the day of His coming again. The Church later realized that its time is known but to God; still, some signs of Christ's second coming were expected: The Gospel will be preached everywhere in the world (Matt. 24: 14; Luke 18:8; John 10: 16); The Jews will be converted to Christ (Rom. 11:25-26; cf. Hosea 3:5); Elijah, or even Enoch, will return (Mark 9:11); The Antichrist will appear with numerous false prophets accompanying him (1 John 2:10; 2 Thes. 2:3; Matt. 24:5); Physical phenomena, upheavals, wars, sufferings will occur (Matt. 24:6; Mark 13:26; Luke 21:25); and, The world will be destroyed by fire (ekpyrosis; see 2 Peter 3:5). All these signs are expected to be given in due time; without them, the end-time will not come. The resurrection of the dead is a miracle that will happen at the second coming of the Lord. According to the Creed: "I await the resurrection of the dead." This resurrection will be a new creation. However, our physical bodies as we know them now will be restored, in a spiritualized existence like that of the Lord after His Resurrection. The final judgment will follow the resurrection of all. Some will rise to the resurrection of life, and some to the resurrection of judgment and condemnation. Christ will be our Judge on the basis of our deeds, our works of love or our acts of wickedness. The end-time will follow, with a permanent separation between good and evil, between those who will be awarded etemal life of happiness and bliss in heaven, and those who will be condemned to the fire of eternal damnation, to the eternal remorse of their conscience for having rejected God and authentic life in Him and having joined the inauthentic life invented by the devil and his servants. A new heaven and new earth will be established, inhabited by righteousness (2 Peter 3:13). The Kingdom of God will be fully established; the Church will cease to exist. Finally, the Son of God will turn the Kingdom over to God the Father, "that God may be everything to everyone" (1 Cor. 15:28). Rt. Rev. Maximos Aghiorgoussis, Th.D., Bishop of Pittsburgh www.goarch.org

A View of QuinSext (Fifth Sixth) 'Ecumenical' Council

The writer states, "There was no such thing as the "Fifth-Sixth" or "Quinsext" Council. The Synod of Trullo was a local synod, and was not ratified (or even mentioned) by the Sixth Council. "In fact, at the time, Trullo was not highly thought of. Among its "canons" was an anathema against serving Holy Communion in a spoon. There was a lot of other antic stuff as well. "In fact, every "canon" of Trullo that was exclusive to Trullo, and not an affirmation of earlier canons, was rejected, except for the requirement that bishops must be "monastic." "This didn't raise too many eyebrows at the time, because: "a. Many bishops at the time were church-planting evangelists,. and the monasteries trained and supported the evangelists; "b. Many bishops were also abbots. Many of these abbots were in fact what we would, today, call "oblates," and were married with families. "c. Whether married or single, most bishops already were monastics. "So, the only "canon" of this synod not dismissed out of hand was one that didn't make any difference to anything, and didn't exclude married men, anyway. And even then, the custom of only consecrating monks didn't catch on until the twelve-hundreds. "So, the "Quinsext Council" is a myth--something dreamed up in recent years to give some sort of legitimacy to a practice which, when it finally became regarded as mandatory, did violence to both Scripture and Tradition--and even to the circumstances of the original edict, itself!" The conclusions of this writer are hard to argue about and I find myself agreeing with this position more and more, which is why, immediately after Bright Week, I will be doing the limited release of Vladika Ioan's paper on Human Sexuality. +SYMEON

Memorial Litia for the Newly Departed Archbishop Gregory (Afonsky)

Memorial Litia for the Newly Departed Archbishop Gregory (Afonsky) On Wednesday, April 16, 2008 following the Liturgy of the Presanctified Gifts which was concelebrated by Archimandrite Zacchaeus, Dean and Priest Vadim Leonov, Cleric of St. Catherine the Great Martyr Church [Moscow] a memorial litya was served for the newly departed Archbishop Gregory (Afonsky), formerly of Sitka and Alaska, who fell asleep in the Lord on Tuesday evening, April 15. Information about the departed hierarch: His Eminence the Most Reverend Archbishop Gregory (Afonsky) of Sitka was Bishop of Sitka and Alaska from 1973 until his retirement in 1995. He was instrumental in the establishment and early achievements of St. Herman Pastoral School in Kodiak, Alaska. George Afonsky was born on April 17 , 1925, in Kiev, Ukraine (which at that time was part of the former USSR). Both his father and a grandfather were priests. During World War II, his family ended up in Germany, where he labored in German work camps. In 1949, he emigrated to the United States after graduating from the Real Gymnasium. In the United States he served as a choir director for the next fifteen years at various Orthodox churches in New Jersey and Connecticut. He began classes at St. Vladimir's Theological Seminary in Crestwood, New York after graduating from the University of Connecticut. Graduating from St. Vladimir's Seminary in 1965, he was ordained to the priesthood during the same year and was assigned to St. Sergius Chapel at Syosett, New York. While assigned to Syosett, Fr. George continued his education, receiving a Master of Arts degree from Hofstra University and a Master of Theology degree from St. Vladimir's Seminary. In November 1971, Fr. George was assigned to St. Nicholas Church in Portland, Oregon. While at St. Nicholas Church, Fr. George took monastic vows at St. Tikhon's Monastery, receiving the name Gregory. In March 1973, Fr. Gregory was elected bishop of Sitka and Alaska, and on May 13,1973 he was consecrated in St. Michael¢s Cathedral in Sitka. In addition to being active in overseeing his diocese, Bp. Gregory was active in developing the St. Herman's Pastoral School, which had opened its doors near Kenai, Alaska in February 1973. The following year the school moved to Kodiak, Alaska. By 1975, the school had developed such that the Holy Synod of Bishop accepted it into the OCA seminary system and, in 1977, re-named the school St. Herman's Orthodox Theological Seminary. On March 23, 1995, Bp. Gregory was elevated to the rank of archbishop by the Holy Synod. After twenty-two years of episcopal service, Abp. Gregory submitted a request for retirement due to poor health, which was approved on July 20, 1995. Currently, Abp. Gregory lives in retirement in Jackson, New Jersey.

Tainted charity

I didn't see this coming. Today, when I walked past the library at the corner where I live, Larry was lying passed out on the grass. "Boxcar Larry," they call him around here, or "Wolfman," for his hairy face. Sometimes, Larry walks around talking to himself, gesticulating wildly. Other times, he can be fairly lucid. Somebody in our neighborhood has a really sick sense of humor: every time Larry passes out on the library lawn, this person pulls the hose over from the library, leaves it next to him, then turns it on and runs. Larry wakes up soaked. Some welcome wagon. "Welcome to the neighborhood. Now get the hell out." I stopped for a minute to talk to Milton, sitting in his wheelchair outside the library, and while we were talking, Larry woke up, soaked, the hose lying next to him. He coughed for a long time, then lay back down in the wet grass. I went over to ask him if he was OK. He asked if I had any money, and I said no, and then he asked if I had some food. I said I'd go up to my apartment and see what was cooking. The she-guerilla was making heirloom tomato spaghetti. Mmm, mmm. I took some out to Larry, and we got to talking. He's very intelligent, studied history in college. We talked about the war in Iraq. He said he thinks Tony Blair was behind the bombings in London. I said I didn't really think so, but there is no question he will benefit in terms of political capital. We got to talking whether Alex Haley's biography of Malcolm X or Spike Lee's movie was the more accurate portrayal of his life. Then things went south. In a big way. I asked about Larry's cough, and he told me that he has an infection and needs to get a prescription filled for penicillin; he has prescription waiting at a drugstore downtown. He's on some kind of assistance program, so the drugs only cost a five-dollar copayment. I told him I didn't have any money to give him, but that maybe we could go to the drugstore across the street (another franchise in the same chain) and try to get the prescription transferred, and I'd buy it with my credit card. Larry kind of stiffened. He said that if I didn't trust him with the money, I should just come right out and say so. He told me that the only thing a homeless person really has is independence. I started explaining again that I didn't have any cash, but he cut me off. "You know, I really don't think I like this conversation. I don't like it at all. I don't need your charity. This is all about you trying to feel better about yourself, isn't it? I probably shouldn't be eating this food. I shouldn't eat it at all. It's contaminated. Tainted with your, your... charity." And he threw the spaghetti, the bread, the fruit, the coffee, all of it into the street. He was really agitated at this point. Told me to get away from him, jumped up, grabbed the sweatshirt he had been lying on, swung it around violently, narrowly missing my face, and stalked away, yelling "It's all a game to you isn't it? Just a big game!" Milton wheeled over and started yelling at him to calm down, but Larry continued past him up the street, screaming at the top of his lungs. Meanwhile, the birds swooped in and started eating up the spaghetti. So it didn't go to waste, at least. I suppose, in the long run, nothing ever does. Milton came back and apologized for Larry. "He should show some respect," he said. I pondered that for a minute, and all I could think of to say was, "Nobody respects him, so why should he respect anybody?" Now I am sitting here, still working it over. The clinical part of my brain says that Larry is most likely displaying the symptoms of mental illness. He has many of the classic signs of paranoid schizophrenia: "flat" aspect, neglect of personal hygiene, speaking to unseen personages, suspicion that other people are out to get him. But there is another side of this. Part of me knows that Larry nailed me, and that's why I'm still stuck on it. The reality is that there is a selfish motivation that underlies all my seeming altruism: the desire to be in control. This is the eternal problem with the charity model: rather than remedying the disparity of power between giver and receiver, it actually reinforces it. What does it say about me that I gravitate to relationships with people who are down and out, and have all my life? That I like being powerful? That I'm insecure and need to feel in control? In my relationships with "the poor," I hold all the power. I can walk out of the relationship at any time, and lose absolutely nothing. But those on the other side have much more to lose. So they are careful not to argue with me, cheerfully agreeing with almost anything I say. And they are careful to show their gratitude. If I happen to be feeling good that day, I take time to share, to listen, to care. If I'm feeling bad, I stay home. They have to take what they can get, when I want to give it. Larry was right. It is a game for me, and I hold all the cards. So now I am trying to sit with this lesson, trying to hear deeply what Larry said to me today. I am sitting here with the taste of tainted charity in my mouth.