Thursday, March 29, 2012
The Blessed Theotokos (God Bearer)
Zeal Not According to Knowledge (Romans 10:2)
Saint John (Maximovitch) of San Francisco
The corruption by the Latins, in the newly invented
dogma of the "Immaculate Conception, " of the true
veneration of the Most Holy Mother of God
and Ever- Virgin Mary.
WHEN THOSE WHO censured the immaculate life of the Most Holy Virgin had been rebuked, as well as those who denied Her Ever-virginity, those who denied Her dignity as the Mother of God, and those who disdained Her icons-then, when the glory of the Mother of God had illuminated the whole universe, there appeared a teaching which seemingly exalted highly the Virgin Mary, but in reality denied all Her virtues.
This teaching is called that of the Immaculate Conception of the Virgin Mary, and it was accepted by the followers of the Papal throne of Rome. The teaching is this- that "the All-blessed Virgin Mary in the first instant of Her Conception, by the special grace of Almighty God and by a special privilege, for the sake of the future merits of Jesus Christ, Saviour of the human race, was preserved exempt from all stain of original sin" (Bull of Pope Pius IX concerning the new dogma). In other words, the Mother of God at Her very conception was preserved from original sin and, by the grace of God, was placed in a state where it was impossible for Her to have personal sins.
Christians had not heard of this before the ninth century, when for the first time the Abbot of Corvey, Paschasius Radbertus, expressed the opinion that the Holy Virgin was conceived without original sin. Beginning, from the 12th century, this idea begins to spread among the clergy and flock of the Western church, which had already fallen away from the Universal Church and thereby lost the grace of the Holy Spirit.
However, by no means all of the members of the Roman church agreed with the new teaching. There was a difference of among the most renowned theologians of the West, the pillars, so to speak, of the Latin church. Thomas Aquinas and Bernard of Clairvaux decisively censured it, while Duns Scotus defended it. From the teachers this division carried over to their disciples: the Latin Dominican monks, after their teacher Thomas Aquinas, preached against the teaching of the Immaculate Conception, while the followers of Duns Scotus, the Franciscans, strove to implant it everywhere. The battle between these two currents continued for the course of several centuries. Both on the one and on the other side there were those who were considered among the Catholics as the greatest authorities.
There was no help in deciding the question in the fact that several people declared that they had had a revelation from above concerning it. The nun Bridget [of Sweden], renowned in the 14th century among the Catholics, spoke in her writings about the appearances to her of the Mother of God, Who Herself told her that She had been conceived immaculately, without original sin. But her contemporary, the yet more renowned ascetic Catherine of Sienna, affirmed that in Her Conception the Holy Virgin participated in original sin, concerning which she had received a revelation from Christ Himself (See the book of Archpriest A. Lebedev, Differences in the Teaching on the Most Holy Mother of God in the Churches of East and West)
Thus, neither on the foundation of theological writings, nor on the foundation of miraculous manifestations that contradicted each other, could the Latin flock distinguish for a long time where the truth was. Roman Popes until Sixtus IV (end of the 15th century) remained apart from these disputes, and only this Pope in 1475 approved a service in which the teaching of the Immaculate Conception was clearly expressed; and several years later he forbade a condemnation of those who believed in the Immaculate Conception. However, even Sixtus IV did not yet decide to affirm that such was the unwavering teaching of the church; and therefore, having forbidden the condemnation of those who believed in the Immaculate Conception, he also did not condemn those who believed otherwise.
Meanwhile, the teaching of the Immaculate Conception obtained more and more partisans among the members of the Roman church. The reason for this was the fact that it seemed more pious and pleasing to the Mother of God to give Her as much glory as possible. The striving of the people to glorify the Heavenly Intercessor, on the one hand, and on the other hand, the deviation of Western theologians into abstract speculations which led only to a seeming truth (Scholasticism), and finally, the patronage of the Roman Popes after Sixtus IV-all this led to the fact that the opinion concerning the Immaculate Conception which had been expressed by Paschasius Radbertus in the 9th century was already the general belief of the Latin church in the 19th century. There remained only to proclaim this definitely as the church's teaching, which was done by the Roman Pope Pius IX during a solemn service on December 8, 1854, when he declared that the Immaculate Conception of the Most Holy Virgin was a dogma of the Roman church. Thus the Roman church added yet another deviation from the teaching which it had confessed while it was a member of the Catholic, Apostolic Church, which faith has been held up to now unaltered and unchanged by the Orthodox Church. The proclamation of the new dogma satisfied the broad masses of people who belonged to the Roman church, who in simplicity of heart thought that the proclamation of the new teaching in the church would serve for the greater glory of the Mother of God, to Whom by this they were making a gift, as it were. There was also satisfied the vainglory of the Western theologians who defended and worked it out. But most of all the proclamation of the new dogma was profitable for the Roman throne itself, since, having proclaimed the new dogma by his own authority, even though he did listen to the opinions of the bishops of the Catholic church, the Roman Pope by this very fact openly appropriated to himself the right to change the teaching of the Roman church and placed his own voice above the testimony of Sacred Scripture and Tradition. A direct deduction from this was the fact that the Roman Popes were infallible in matters of faith, which indeed this very same Pope Pius IX likewise proclaimed as a dogma of the Catholic church in 1870.
Thus was the teaching of the Western church changed after it had fallen away from communion with the True Church. It has introduced into itself newer and newer teachings, thinking by this to glorify the Truth yet more, but in reality distorting it. While the Orthodox Church humbly confesses what it has received from Christ and the Apostles, the Roman church dares to add to it, sometimes from zeal not according to knowledge (cf. Rom. 10:2), and sometimes by deviating into superstitions and into the contradictions of knowledge falsely so called (I Tim. 6:20). It could not be otherwise. That the gates of hell shall not prevail against the Church (Matt. 16:18) is promised only to the True, Universal Church; but upon those who have fallen away from it are fulfilled the words: As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine; so neither can ye, except ye abide in Me (John 15:4).
It is true that in the very definition of the new dogma it is said that a new teaching is not being established, but that there is only being proclaimed as the church's that which always existed in the church and which has been held by many Holy Fathers, excerpts from whose writings are cited. However, all the cited references speak only of the exalted sanctity of the Virgin Mary and of Her immaculateness, and give Her various names which define Her purity and spiritual might; but nowhere is there any word of the immaculateness of Her conception. Meanwhile, these same Holy Fathers in other places say that only Jesus Christ is completely pure of every sin, while all men, being born of Adam, have borne a flesh subject to the law of sin.
None of the ancient Holy Fathers say that God in miraculous fashion purified the Virgin Mary while yet in the womb; and many directly indicate that the Virgin Mary, just as all men, endured a battle with sinfulness, but was victorious over temptations and was saved by Her Divine Son.
Commentators of the Latin confession likewise say that the Virgin Mary was saved by Christ. But they understand this in the sense that Mary was preserved from the taint of original sin in view of the future merits of Christ (Bull on the Dogma of the Immaculate Conception). The Virgin Mary, according to their teaching, received in advance, as it were, the gift which Christ brought to men by His sufferings and death on the Cross. Moreover, speaking of the torments of the Mother of God which She endured standing at the Cross of Her Beloved Son, and in general of the sorrows with which the life of the Mother of God was filled, they consider them an addition to the sufferings of Christ and consider Mary to be our CoRedemptress.
According to the commentary of the Latin theologians, "Mary is an associate with our Redeemer as Co-Redemptress" (see Lebedev, op. cit. p. 273). "In the act of Redemption, She, in a certain way, helped Christ" (Catechism of Dr. Weimar). "The Mother of God," writes Dr. Lentz, "bore the burden of Her martyrdom not merely courageously, but also joyfully, even though with a broken heart" (Mariology of Dr. Lentz). For this reason, She is "a complement of the Holy Trinity," and "just as Her Son is the only Intermediary chosen by God between His offended majesty and sinful men, so also, precisely, -the chief Mediatress placed by Him between His Son and us is the Blessed Virgin." "In three respects-as Daughter, as Mother, and as Spouse of God-the Holy Virgin is exalted to a certain equality with the Father, to a certain superiority over the Son, to a certain nearness to the Holy Spirit" ("The Immaculate Conception," Malou, Bishop of Brouges).
Thus, according to the teaching of the representatives of Latin theology, the Virgin Mary in the work of Redemption is placed side by side with Christ Himself and is exalted to an equality with God. One cannot go farther than this. If all this has not been definitively formulated as a dogma of the Roman church as yet, still the Roman Pope Pius IX, having made the first step in this direction, has shown the direction for the further development of the generally recognized teaching of his church, and has indirectly confirmed the above-cited teaching about the Virgin Mary.
Thus the Roman church, in its strivings to exalt the Most Holy Virgin, is going on the path of complete deification of Her. And if even now its authorities call Mary a complement of the Holy Trinity, one may soon expect that the Virgin will be revered like God.
(text missing) who are building a new theological system having as its foundation the philosophical teaching of Sophia, Wisdom, as a special power binding the Divinity and the creation. Likewise developing the teaching of the dignity of the Mother of God, they wish to see in Her an Essence which is some kind of mid-point between God and man. In some questions they are more moderate than the Latin theologians, but in others, if you please, they have already left them behind. While denying the teaching of the Immaculate Conception and the freedom from original sin, they still teach Her full freedom from any personal sins, seeing in Her an Intermediary between men and God, like Christ: in the person of Christ there has appeared on earth the Second Person of the Holy Trinity, the Pre-eternal Word, the Son of God; while the Holy Spirit is manifest through the Virgin Mary.
In the words of one of the representatives of this tendency, when the Holy Spirit came to dwell in the Virgin Mary, she acquired "a dyadic life, human and divine; that is, She was completely deified, because in Her hypostatic being was manifest the living, creative revelation of the Holy Spirit" (Archpriest Sergei Bulgakov, The Unburnt Bush, 1927, p. 154). "She is a perfect manifestation of the Third Hypostasis" (Ibid., p. 175), CC a creature, but also no longer a creature" (P. 19 1). This striving towards the deification of the Mother of God is to be observed primarily in the West, where at the same time, on the other hand, various sects of a Protestant character are having great success, together with the chief branches of Protestantism, Lutheranism and Calvinism, which in general deny the veneration of the Mother of God and the calling upon Her in prayer.
But we can say with the words of St. Epiphanius of Cyprus: "There is an equal harm in both these heresies, both when men demean the Virgin and when, on the contrary, they glorify Her beyond what is proper" (Panarion, "Against the Collyridians"). This Holy Father accuses those who give Her an almost divine worship: "Let Mary be in honor, but let worship be given to the Lord" (same source). "Although Mary is a chosen vessel, still she was a woman by nature, not to be distinguished at all from others. Although the history of Mary and Tradition relate that it was said to Her father Joachim in the desert, 'Thy wife hath conceived,' still this was done not without marital union and not without the seed of man" (same source). "One should not revere the saints above what is proper, but should revere their Master. Mary is not God, and did not receive a body from heaven, but from the joining of man and woman; and according to the promise, like Isaac, She was prepared to take part in the Divine Economy. But, on the other hand, let none dare foolishly to offend the Holy Virgin" (St. Epiphanius, "Against the Antidikomarionites").
The Orthodox Church, highly exalting the Mother of God in its hymns of praise, does not dare to ascribe to Her that which has not been communicated about Her by Sacred Scripture or Tradition. "Truth is foreign to all overstatements as well as to all understatements. It gives to everything a fitting measure and fitting place" (Bishop Ignatius Brianchaninov). Glorifying the immaculateness of the Virgin Mary and the manful bearing of sorrows in Her earthly life, the Fathers of the Church, on the other hand, reject the idea that She was an intermediary between God and men in the sense of the joint Redemption by Them of the human race. Speaking of Her preparedness to die together with Her Son and to suffer together with Him for the sake of the salvation of all, the renowned Father of the Western Church, Saint Ambrose, Bishop of Milan, adds: "But the sufferings of Christ did not need any help, as the Lord Himself prophesied concerning this long before: I looked about, and there was none to help; I sought and there was none to give aid. therefore My arm delivered them (Is. 63:5)." (St. Ambrose, "Concerning the Upbringing of the Virgin and the Ever-Virginity of Holy Mary," ch. 7).
This same Holy Father teaches concerning the universality of original sin, from which Christ alone is an exception. "Of all those born of women, there is not a single one who is perfectly holy, apart from the Lord Jesus Christ, Who in a special new way of immaculate birthgiving, did not experience earthly taint" (St. Ambrose, Commentary on Luke, ch. 2). "God alone is without sin. All born in the usual manner of woman and man, that is, of fleshly union, become guilty of sin. Consequently, He Who does not have sin was not conceived in this manner" (St. Ambrose, Ap. Aug. "Concerning Marriage and Concupiscence"). "One Man alone, the Intermediary between God and man, is free from the bonds of sinful birth, because He was born of a Virgin, and because in being born He did not experience the touch of sin" (St. Ambrose, ibid., Book 2: "Against Julianus").
Another renowned teacher of the Church, especially revered in the West, Blessed Augustine, writes: "As for other men, excluding Him Who is the cornerstone, I do not see for them any other means to become temples of God and to be dwellings for God apart from spiritual rebirth, which must absolutely be preceded by fleshly birth. Thus, no matter how much we might think about children who are in the womb of the mother, and even though the word of the holy Evangelist who says of John the Baptist that he leaped for joy in the womb of his mother (which occurred not otherwise than by the action of the Holy Spirit), or the word of the Lord Himself spoken to Jeremiah: I have sanctified thee before thou didst leave the womb of thy mother (Jer. 1:5)- no matter how much these might or might not give us basis for thinking that children in this condition are capable of a certain sanctification, still in any case it cannot be doubted that the sanctification by which all of us together and each of us separately become the temple of God is possible only for those who are reborn, and rebirth always presupposes birth. Only those who have already been born can be united with Christ and be in union with this Divine Body which makes His Church the living temple of the majesty of God" (Blessed Augustine, Letter 187).
The above-cited words of the ancient teachers of the Church testify that in the West itself the teaching which is now spread there was earlier rejected there. Even after the falling away of the Western church, Bernard, who is acknowledged there as a great authority, wrote, " I am frightened now, seeing that certain of you have desired to change the condition of important matters, introducing a new festival unknown to the Church, unapproved by reason, unjustified by ancient tradition. Are we really more learned and more pious than our fathers? You will say, 'One must glorify the Mother of God as much as Possible.' This is true; but the glorification given to the Queen of Heaven demands discernment. This Royal Virgin does not have need of false glorifications, possessing as She does true crowns of glory and signs of dignity. Glorify the purity of Her flesh and the sanctity of Her life. Marvel at the abundance of the gifts of this Virgin; venerate Her Divine Son; exalt Her Who conceived without knowing concupiscence and gave birth without knowing pain. But what does one yet need to add to these dignities? People say that one must revere the conception which preceded the glorious birth-giving; for if the conception had not preceded, the birth-giving also would not have been glorious. But what would one say if anyone for the same reason should demand the same kind of veneration of the father and mother of Holy Mary? One might equally demand the same for Her grandparents and great-grandparents, to infinity. Moreover, how can there not be sin in the place where there was concupiscence? All the more, let one not say that the Holy Virgin was conceived of the Holy Spirit and not of man. I say decisively that the Holy Spirit descended upon Her, but not that He came with Her."
"I say that the Virgin Mary could not be sanctified before Her conception, inasmuch as She did not exist. if, all the more, She could not be sanctified in the moment of Her conception by reason of the sin which is inseparable from conception, then it remains to believe that She was sanctified after She was conceived in the womb of Her mother. This sanctification, if it annihilates sin, makes holy Her birth, but not Her conception. No one is given the right to be conceived in sanctity; only the Lord Christ was conceived of the Holy Spirit, and He alone is holy from His very conception. Excluding Him, it is to all the descendants of Adam that must be referred that which one of them says of himself, both out of a feeling of humility and in acknowledgement of the truth: Behold I was conceived in iniquities (Ps. 50:7). How can one demand that this conception be holy, when it was not the work of the Holy Spirit, not to mention that it came from concupiscence? The Holy Virgin, of course, rejects that glory which, evidently, glorifies sin. She cannot in any way justify a novelty invented in spite of the teaching of the Church, a novelty which is the mother of imprudence, the sister of unbelief, and the daughter of lightmindedness" (Bernard, Epistle 174; cited, as were the references from Blessed Augustine, from Lebedev). The above-cited words clearly reveal both the novelty and the absurdity of the new dogma of the Roman church.
The teaching of the complete sinlessness of the Mother of God (1) does not correspond to Sacred Scripture, where there is repeatedly mentioned the sinlessness of the One Mediator between God and man, the man Jesus Christ (I Tim. 2:5); and in Him is no sin U John 3:5); Who did no sin, neither was guile found in His mouth (I Peter 2:22); One that hath been in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin (Heb. 4:15); Him Who knew no sin, He made to be sin on our behalf (II Cor. 5:2 1). But concerning the rest of men it is said, Who is pure of defilement? No one who has lived a single day of his life on earth (Job 14:4). God commendeth His own love toward us in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us If, while we were enemies, we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, being reconciled, shall we be saved by His life (Rom. 5:8-10).
(2) This teaching contradicts also Sacred Tradition, which is contained in numerous Patristic writings, where there is mentioned the exalted sanctity of the Virgin Mary from Her very birth, as well as Her cleansing by the Holy Spirit at Her conception of Christ, but not at Her own conception by Anna. "There is none without stain before Thee, even though his life be but a day, save Thee alone, Jesus Christ our God, Who didst appear on earth without sin, and through Whom we all trust to obtain mercy and the remission of sins" (St. Basil the Great, Third Prayer of Vespers of Pentecost). "But when Christ came through a pure, virginal, unwedded, God-fearing, undefiled Mother without wedlock and without father, and inasmuch as it befitted Him to be born, He purified the female nature, rejected the bitter Eve and overthrew the laws of the flesh" (St. Gregory the Theologian, "In Praise of Virginity"). However, even then, as Sts. Basil the Great and John Chrysostom speak of this, She was not placed in the state of being unable to sin, but continued to take care for Her salvation and overcame all temptations (St. John Chrysostom, Commentary on John, Homily 85; St. Basil the Great, Epistle 160).
(3) The teaching that the Mother of God was purified before Her birth, so that from Her might be born the Pure Christ, is meaningless; because if the Pure Christ could be born only if the Virgin might be born pure, it would be necessary that Her parents also should be pure of original sin, and they again would have to be born of purified parents, and going further in this way, one would have to come to the conclusion that Christ could not have become incarnate unless all His ancestors in the flesh, right up to Adam inclusive, had been purified beforehand of original sin. But then there would not have been any need for the very Incarnation of Christ, since Christ came down to earth in order to annihilate sin.
(4) The teaching that the Mother of God was preserved from original sin, as likewise the teaching that She was preserved by God's grace from personal sins, makes God unmerciful and unjust; because if God could preserve Mary from sin and purify Her before Her birth, then why does He not purify other men before their birth, but rather leaves them in sin? It follows likewise that God saves men apart from their will, predetermining certain ones before their birth to salvation.
(5) This teaching, which seemingly has the aim of exalting the Mother of God, in reality completely denies all Her virtues. After all, if Mary, even in the womb of Her mother, when She could not even desire anything either good or evil, was preserved by God's grace from every impurity, and then by that grace was preserved from sin even after Her birth, then in what does Her merit consist? If She could have been placed in the state of being unable to sin, and did not sin, then for what did God glorify Her? if She, without any effort, and without having any kind of impulses to sin, remained pure, then why is She crowned more than everyone else? There is no victory without an adversary.
The righteousness and sanctity of the Virgin Mary were manifested in the fact that She, being "human with passions like us," so loved God and gave Herself over to Him, that by Her purity She was exalted high above the rest of the human race. For this, having been foreknown and forechosen, She was vouchsafed to be purified by the Holy Spirit Who came upon Her, and to conceive of Him the very Saviour of the world. The teaching of the grace-given sinlessness of the Virgin Mary denies Her victory over temptations; from a victor who is worthy to be crowned with crowns of glory, this makes Her a blind instrument of God's Providence.
It is not an exaltation and greater glory, but a belittlement of Her, this "gift" which was given Her by Pope Pius IX and all the rest who think they can glorify the Mother of God by seeking out new truths. The Most Holy Mary has been so much glorified by God Himself, so exalted is Her life on earth and Her glory in heaven, that human inventions cannot add anything to Her honor and glory. That which people themselves invent only obscures Her Face from their eyes. Brethren, take heed lest there shall be any one that maketh spoil of you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ, wrote the Apostle Paul by the Holy Spirit (Col. 2:8).
Such a "vain deceit" is the teaching of the Immaculate Conception by Anna of the Virgin Mary, which at first sight exalts, but in actual fact belittles Her. Like every lie, it is a seed of the "father of lies" (John 8:44), the devil, who has succeeded by it in blaspheme the Virgin Mary. Together with it there should also be rejected all the other teachings which have come from it or are akin to it. The striving to exalt the Most Holy Virgin to an equality with Christ ascribing to Her maternal tortures at the Cross an equal significance with the sufferings of Christ, so that the Redeemer and "Co-Redemptress" suffered equally, according to the teaching of the Papists, or that "the human nature of the Mother of God in heaven together with the God-Man Jesus jointly reveal the full image of man" (Archpriest S. Bulgakov, The Unburnt Bush, p. 141)-is likewise a vain deceit and a seduction of philosophy. In Christ Jesus there is neither male nor female (Gal. 3:28), and Christ has redeemed the whole human race; therefore at His Resurrection equally did "Adam dance for joy and Eve rejoice" (Sunday Kontakia of the First and Third Tones), and by His Ascension did the Lord raise up the whole of human nature.
Likewise, that the Mother of God is a "complement of the Holy Trinity" or a "fourth Hypostasis"; that "the Son and the Mother are a revelation of the Father through the Second and Third Hypostases"; that the Virgin Mary is "a creature, but also no longer a creature"-all this is the fruit of vain, false wisdom which is not satisfied with what the Church has held from the time of the Apostles, but strives to glorify the Holy Virgin more than God has glorified Her.
Thus are the words of St. Epiphanius of Cyprus fulfilled: "Certain senseless ones in their opinion about the Holy EverVirgin have striven and are striving to put Her in place of God" (St. Epiphanius, "Against the Antidikomarionites"). But that which is offered to the Virgin in senselessness, instead of praise of Her, turns out to be blasphemy; and the All-Immaculate One rejects the lie, being the Mother of Truth (John 14:6).
Miracles, Signs, Wonders
____________________
Miracles, Signs, Wonders
& Two Hundred Ninety Eight Other Human Weaknesses
& Two Hundred Ninety Eight Other Human Weaknesses
by Archpriest Symeon Elias. - May, 30th 2002
Mat 7:15 – 23: "But beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves. You will know them by their fruits. Do men gather grape clusters from thorns, or figs from thistles? Thus every good tree produces good fruit, but a rotten tree produces evil fruit. A good tree cannot produce evil fruit, nor can a rotten tree produce good fruit. Every tree not producing good fruit is cut down and cast into the fire. Consequently, by their fruits you shall know them. "Not everyone who says to Me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven. Many will say to Me in that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name we cast out demons, and in Your name we did many mighty works?' "And then I will confess to them, 'I never knew you! Depart from Me, you who work iniquity!'
Shortly after I became Orthodox, I attended a service celebrating a weeping Icon. I was there both to witness the "incardination” of a group, some who were friends, into the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia (ROCOR) and to see the Icon. It became a “wisdom teaching” event. Here is a little context; I was elated at finding Orthodoxy, realizing in it the answers to questions that had plagued me all my life. I had struggled with the dogmatic assertions of each denomination with which I had been associated, some officially, some unofficially. I had become cynical of theology thinking it totally man made and unable to bear the weight and reality of God, as I had come to know him by experience. As I explored the Orthodox Fathers, but more, as I was exposed to the wealth of Orthodox liturgy, prayers and songs, I discovered that indeed this theology deserved the name “sacred” because it did carry the weight and reality of what I had come to know of God by experience. My excitement at that discovery was natural and quite understandable; an experience shared by many American converts of the late 20th century. I could have written tomes about the wonder of it all. For the first time in my memory my guard was down and hoping to imbibe The Faith quickly, feeling like much time had been wasted, (I was middle aged) I was willing to accept anything labeled Orthodox. I had discovered, as to the sacred theology of Orthodoxy, that my skepticism, which had served me well and kept me moving towards a more solid Christianity, as I walked through the swamp of competing western theologies, didn’t serve me well in Orthodoxy. It slowed my progress. In each instance of skepticism, with greater exposure, I discovered the Orthodox teaching was correct. By that time I had taken it as necessity to be humble enough to let my guard down so that I might drink it all in, more quickly. However, with good motives, I assumed too much; what I assumed was that a “church” that could produce and hold the true “Symbol” of the apostolic faith unchanged since The Cross would also hold an expression in the world that was as perfect or at least nearly so. I was about to learn that her earthly expression is anything but perfect and that I had come a very long way to, in some ways, end up exactly where I began.
Here’s what happen that night; during the service I realized that the ROCOR priest who traveled the world "sharing the glory" of this weeping Icon was a charlatan. What I noticed first was an odd movement with his hands and a little ritual of unnecessary movements he used as he handled the Icon and captured myrrh "flowing from it." Looking around the room seeing people with expectant faces, some with eyes rimmed with tears, I was instantly heartsick. I recognized the demonic liar in front of me; and I do not exaggerate. There is nothing more cynical, nothing more heartless than a con man in clergy-clothing. This is not a harsh judgment on my part as we can see from the words of the Apostle Peter to Simon the Magician, when Simon Magus tried to buy the anointing of the Holy Spirit so he could match the wonders he was seeing at the Apostle’s hands. Saint Peter read his heart and said:
Act 8:23 For I see thou art in the gall of bitterness and in the bonds of iniquity.
After the service the magician approached me and asked rhetorically, “Isn’t it glorious?” As he walked by I caught him by the arm, leaned over and said quietly, hoping not to be overheard, “Yes you are very talented, but not as gifted as you may think. Your act won’t hold up for long. If it does, then there is something in Orthodoxy that is robbing I.Q. points from its devotees.” His eyes registered fear and he literally hissed as he tried to speak. Not wanting a scene, I turned and walked away.
Act 13:6- And when they had gone through the whole island, as far as Paphos, they found a certain man, a magician, a false prophet, a Jew, whose name was Bar-Jesu: Who was with the proconsul Sergius Paulus, a prudent man. He, sending for Barnabas and Saul, desired to hear the word of God. But Elymas the magician (for so his name is interpreted) withstood them, seeking to turn away the proconsul from the faith. Then Saul, otherwise Paul, filled with the Holy Ghost, looking upon him, Said: O full of all guile and of all deceit, child of the devil, enemy of all justice, thou ceases not to pervert the right ways of the Lord. And now behold, the hand of the Lord is upon thee: and thou shalt be blind, not seeing the sun for a time. And immediately there fell a mist and darkness upon him: and going about, he sought some one to lead him by the hand. Then the proconsul, when he had seen what was done, believed, admiring at the doctrine of the Lord.
Notice what Paul did not say; he did not ask, “Why do you interfere with the spread of the Gospel?” That is how this story is taken so often, as if Elymas the Magician’s role was to block the Proconsul from hearing the Gospel. That was incidental, at least to Elymas, what was primary to him was to keep the Proconsul under his influence. The same spirit is alive in the Church today where certain hierarchs seek to extend their influence to control smaller local churches. What is the same is the “power seeking” crippling the witness of the Gospel and True Unity in Christ. The Holy Spirit, Himself, spoke to the reality of the situation saying, “O full of all guile and of all deceit, child of the devil, enemy of all justice, thou ceases not to pervert the right ways of the Lord.” Which is exactly what the production of the faux-miraculous is, or any other means to mesmerize or through fear to “Lord Over” and extend worldly power to the detriment of the Gospel; it is a perversion of the right ways of the Lord. Elymas was a Jew, it could be assumed that he had the Proconsul’s ear and attention, exercised influence by providing him with a “perversion” of the true religion of the Jews and that it was a lucrative endeavor. It could be assumed that he cloaked himself in Judaic Mysticism, presenting himself as a spiritually powerful person. As any con man would, he “positioned” himself appropriately for his “mark.” To him Paul and Barnabus were nothing more than competition.
Our magician, on that faithful wisdom teaching night, also cloaked himself appropriately for the consumption of his marks, which happened to be sincere orthodox people. He cloaked himself as a humble priest, a servant who in all humility was given the responsibility of this wonder, this myrrh-streaming Icon. Today there are so-called “super-bishops” trying to use the magic of their position to gather power unto themselves in an imperial model to the destruction of local churches, and it continues to be a lucrative endeavor. This night, the magician’s audience including His Grace, Bishop Gabriel of Manhattan, a house of monks, a who’s who list of ROCOR priests in attendance (a list including at least two well known “experts” and authors on all things Orthodox), that audience was so spiritually blind it was unable to see the thing as it really was. It was a sobering moment for me.
Our magician, on that faithful wisdom teaching night, also cloaked himself appropriately for the consumption of his marks, which happened to be sincere orthodox people. He cloaked himself as a humble priest, a servant who in all humility was given the responsibility of this wonder, this myrrh-streaming Icon. Today there are so-called “super-bishops” trying to use the magic of their position to gather power unto themselves in an imperial model to the destruction of local churches, and it continues to be a lucrative endeavor. This night, the magician’s audience including His Grace, Bishop Gabriel of Manhattan, a house of monks, a who’s who list of ROCOR priests in attendance (a list including at least two well known “experts” and authors on all things Orthodox), that audience was so spiritually blind it was unable to see the thing as it really was. It was a sobering moment for me.
I had attended with Father Nestor, who at the time was assisting me in my prison ministry, at Hays State Prison. As we drove home he asked, “Did you believe that?” He was a generation younger and I didn’t want to shake his faith so I obfuscated saying, “I really don’t know what to think, except that the myrrh smelled sickening, like those Rose-scented hand-lotions old women use.” He held up a cotton swap in a plastic bag and said, “I’m going to keep this and see if it cankers.” I remained silent and then he said, “Didn’t you think the guy handling the Icon acted strange?” By that I knew he grasped the trickery, so then we spoke openly of it.
The scene that night was doubly ironic, since the ROCOR under Bishop Gabriel were touting themselves and certain old calendarist Greeks, in public gatherings and all over the Internet as the last bastion of True Orthodoxy left in the world. I heard this from his own lips as he gave a speech to his clergy about the difference between “official orthodoxy” and “true orthodoxy.” His words were the first words from an Orthodox official I wrote down on my “lie list.” The pretense of “jurisdictional purity” seems to crop up more often these days in Orthodoxy, as certain prelates try to mimic the imperialism of Rome. (And “New Rome” Moscow). Maybe it is a reaction to the political changes in the world and the non-imperial structure of the New World, certainly these things are putting extreme pressure on the “old order” institutional Churches. In the U.S. the Standing Council of Orthodox Bishops in America – who in the beginning were just that have changed their name to The Standing Council of Canonical Orthodox Bishops in America, perverting the meaning of Canonical, trying to set up an imperial order in the U.S., seeking to consolidate power in the hands of a few prelates; more about this later. This weeping-Icon con could not have been more ironic, or a better lesson for me, at the same time. Sometime later the con man was exposed amid sexual scandal, found dead in a homosexual brothel, etc. Then it was admitted that he was a career magician, and not a very good one, who turned keeper of a "miraculous" weeping icon. Sad, sad, sad.
Here is what I mean by “traveling a long journey to in some ways end-up where I started.” As a boy I was quiet and observant, the wrong attributes to be thrown into the 1950s and 1960s Pentecostal Revival Show Circuit. Luckily that wasn’t my only Christian exposure. My Father was “Holiness” by his understanding of worship and theology; my Mother was “Pentecostal” and sadly all their lives did not understand the difference between the two movements. She took his quiet devotion and service to others as “lukewarm spirituality” and he held the suspicion that her “emotive” demonstrations bordered on mental instability. This was confirmed by a ‘nervous breakdown” in the early 50s and other “disassociative episodes” in the 60s and 70s. It was years before I came to understand the reality of this underlying tension in our house, which colored my childhood.
My Father had huge respect for Dr Paul Barth, the American/German Theologian and Evangelist who founded the Tabernacle Church in the 1920’s on what is now the parking lot of the Atlanta Baseball Stadium near the Georgia State Capital building and Beulah Heights Bible College in 1919, now Beulah Heights University. I was raised on the Beulah Heights College campus and genuinely loved the place, and still do. Oddly, for a period of time, per capita, it produced more Orthodox converts than any other “evangelical” school in the country. Something that wasn’t intentional I’m sure. I never knew Dr. Barth but I have strong memories of his widow; I remember her loving presence, dignity and sense of the sacred very well. She walked faithfully to the light she grasped and was a power for the betterment of many people who crossed her path. But to my mother, she was “dried bones.” I share this to put into context what I am about to share. I had the worshipful services of Barth Memorial (the church attached to the School) and some very, very worshipful chapel services at Beulah Heights and a list of teachers willing to share their faith and teach me, so I wasn’t at the mercy of my mother’s radical Pentecostalism, though I was certainly exposed to it. In that exposure I became very bitter watching the cynical manipulation of the sincere simple people who flocked to those huge circus tents, old theatre buildings and store fronts. It wasn’t all bad, I got to meet Oral Roberts when he was still a young man, became close friends with his first business manager, the Reverend Bill Lee. Unfortunately or fortunately according to ones perspective I also met a who’s who list of pure charlatans. I saw shills planted in the audience to fake miracles. I remember one year the infamous evangelist A.A. Allen ran a six week revival at the old Lakewood Fair Grounds. A couple nights into that revival a woman who had suffered a “spinal injury” was pulled out of her wheelchair and she danced on the platform. While the service continued she literally ran up and down the isles praising God for her miracle. The next month we traveled to Chattanooga and my mother and her friends didn’t seem to notice that it was the same woman, this time delivered from a horrible tumor that had her stomach hugely bloated. (Use of an inflated device, deflated on que.) But I noticed; I wasn’t fooled by the different style of clothes, color of hair nor the theatrical makeup aging her because I had observed her face clearly as she ran the isles of the first revival as I wondered, “is this real?” I didn’t dare mention this, because I learned quickly that such skepticism was met with censure and disdain and even suspicions of demon possession. For my mother, if you didn't buy the Pentecostal hype, something evil was blocking you. The second that I even hinted that this evangelist or this miracle was suspect my mother would launch into her “touch not God’s anointed” speech and she would prophesy doom upon me.
The orthodox magician’s act was near amateur prestidigitation, cloaked in the robes of a priest, surrounded by the sounds of cultured choir, the smell of incense, the light of hundreds of candles, in what would have been otherwise a wonderfully worshipful service. But do not be deceived at its core it was comparable to the circus tricks I witnessed in those revival shows. I find it likely that had I openly challenged the streaming-icon magician that night that the reaction would have been the same censure, disdain and presumption of “demonic” knowledge. Simply stated, religious blindness is religious blindness, regardless of the name of the religion; or better-stated, religious sickness is religious sickness regardless of the nature of the cultic devotion.
The simple people at those revival meetings in decades past (and even today) never questioned why prayer-cards were handed out as people arrived. Nor did they know of the ear piece-receiver worn by the “man of god” as his assistants fed the con man his "spiritual insights" off the prayer cards previously collected. I witnessed slight of hand producing raw meat purported to be "tumors" or the damage of demons. (The Chattanooga incident not the first) Like a child learns a second language when in a multi-language household, I learned to read the signals between the preachers and the “spotters”. The same technique used by auctioneers even today, to ferret out the “suggestible.” I learned to LOVE the sound of a Hammond B3 Organ and Leslie speakers as it was employed to hype-up the crowd, and used like sound track to fill, add emotion and punctuate the “prophetic” words of the preacher. These shows were professional and polished in their garish reality, every moment, every expression, every note, every miracle timed for the best result, timed to loosen the wallet. I learned to discern the hypnotic techniques employed, the manipulation of crowds and individuals by repetition and suggestion. What a Carney show! Yet what a colorful childhood! And I wouldn’t trade it for gold. However, upon entering the blessed and consecrated confines of the Orthodox Church, I really expected something better.
A Roman Catholic friend recently told me that miracles were invitations to faith and how can that not be so and indeed is so for anything that is a genuine miracle. Even if under the hand of a charlatan, a miracle may be genuine, by virtue of the simple, innocent faith of the person who reaches, and indeed such miracles have been blessings that instill greater faith. God is not absent from the heathen and pagan worlds, not absent from the life of the slaves of Islam, nor the natives under the spell of shamans. And so it is my opinion that God uses many, many means to show mercy to both those that know him and those that do not yet know his name. However, miracles are also in the arsenal of the deceiver, are part and parcel of pagan religious practice, voodoo, shamanism, and the like. So let us make something crystal clear, FAITH is NOT the witness, production or experience of miracles. The very term “faith healing” as is commonly understood in this culture, is a misnomer. Faith is an act of volition - the WILL to open oneself to deep and sincere belief in God; and more specifically for the Christian, to open oneself to Life in Christ Jesus, via the guidance of the Holy Spirit. So never confuse the wonder and mystery of the Altar, or any other aspect of genuine Orthodox Christian Worship with a "miracle of any sort." It is simply the experience of the Eternal Moment, the experience of things as they are in that one moment, which we are allowed to share by this means, through "HE who is without corruption."
I've witnessed and experienced many things most would call "miracle" both before and after my conversion to Orthodoxy but my FAITH is not predicated on them. I'm not suggesting that there are no true weeping Icons but the truth is such signs have no meaning for me, literally no meaning. At this point in life I don’t believe I would even walk across the street to see one, if it were not for my concern not to offend a weak believer, since their fragile “belief” can be predicated upon such. I do suggest and even say boldly that from times of old, charlatans have sought to deceive and wrong-minded men with "good" motives have tried to attract "devotees" with trickery. The religion of Simon the Sorcerer and Bar-Jesus the Magician has 'shadowed' the Church from its very first days.
What's with all this sign seeking? Here Saint Paul talks about the spiritual blindness that befell the Pagan world, where they lost their ability to “see God in All Things.”
Rom 1:19-21 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
With this understanding Jesus’ words become clearer, those who have lost the ability to see God as Saint Paul described (being clearly seen and understood by the things that he made) seek “signs” to find him. “But he answered and said unto them, ‘An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given to it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas:’” One very telling barometer of the spiritual state of the average Orthodox "devotee" is the time and money spent scurrying to the reports of weeping icons. Qualitatively this 'seeking after signs and miracles' is no different than Romans flocking to Mary apparitions and statues of Jesus and saints crying or for that matter the Revival Carney Shows. People are so spiritually poverty stricken, (another way to state this is people are so deluded, blinded by sin) that they hunger to see God "break into nature". This is a true degradation of The Faith, since the Faith holds, as cardinal Truth, that God imbues ALL THINGS, is everywhere present, coursing BEING into existence. The Faith holds that He is the One “Enlightening every man coming into the world” (John Chapter One) that the very breath, nerve impulse, and heart beat of the most profane man on earth and even the lowliest of creatures is a "witness" of the presence of God, who holds ALL THINGS yet is contained by none.
Those with hearts that have become pure enough to "see God" (Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God) realize that their very power of "cognition" the ability to see, to hear, to know is by the power of that Divine Spark given to all, even the worst among us. It is the primary Grace and Mercy of BEING, without which NOTHING, that has BEING, can exist. These profound words from the First Chapter of the Gospel of Saint John are there for a purpose, the greatest of which is to keep people of Faith from ever sinking to the level of the Deists,1 and/or those tainted with Dualism2 and/or Gnosticism.3 We are not meant to "wonder" or be "amazed" at a profound healing, or any other means that "appears" to be God manipulating the "natural order of things." Why? Because, if one has eyes to see, one realizes that every moment that exists, every nano-second is a "miracle of God" as he eternally courses BEING into existence. One nano-second that His power were removed, ALL the "universes" would vaporize into nothingness.
I believe that it is much more difficult to have this “vision” of God in modern and urban times. Those whose lives are swallowed up by the artificial, by mass-media, by insulating structures, survival via processed, frozen and canned foods, cultures caught in their own peculiar mythologies. Millions of these people have never experienced the wonder of nature. And sadly because of the purveyance of the philosophy of ultra-materialism some so-called “naturalists” and some whose lives are wrapped up in “nature” cannot experience nature, even though they see it with their own eyes. What I mean by the “experience of nature” as oppose to merely seeing nature is suddenly being dumbstruck by the miracle of it all.
Have you ever had that fearful, awesome, marvelous and wondrous moment, where something sorts of snaps in your mind and you realize the miracle of IT ALL? Where one looks at ones own hands or a leaf moving on a bush, or the light in a person's eye, or the affection of a pet and in that profound moment you realize the strangeness and miracle of IT ALL; a rare moment where all the preconceived ideas are suspended and you question who YOU are in it, what the meaning of IT ALL could be. Most of us are so caught up in the "motion" of life, the cadence and rhythm, the ambitions, prides, lusts, i.e. passions that we never perceive the Eternal Moment of IT ALL. IT ALL is miracle. When one grasps that, then any particular Mercy of healing or "wonder" is accepted with profound thankfulness, as ALL LIFE is accepted with profound thankfulness. (Please realize that by using the word Life, I am not meaning the narrow definition of the materialists, the mere biological function of organisms, though such is "A" manifestation of Life.)
I have seen literally hundreds of what people would classify as "true miracles." So in no way am I minimizing the blessedness of that, rather I am putting it in context. Those who are "swayed" by miracles, signs and wonders are of the least faith, and impure; they do not have eyes to see God's omnipresence, nor humility to accept his omnipotence. In the "sign seeking" God is reduced to the level of the "little fairy floating around just outside of the perceptions of our five senses causing little disruptions in the natural order of things." Sign seeking is a profane act, a profanity shared by the lowest forms of spiritualism and cults. What is Eternal and OF Eternity is REAL, so when Jesus said, "This man was born blind that the Glory of the Father might be revealed" that statement also meant, "so that in healing him you may know what is REAL." "What difference if I say, 'take up thy bed and walk' or 'your sins are forgiven'"? There was (is) no difference since either way he was "revealing what is REAL". Profound implications here if one can grasp it.
I want to encourage you to “action” to become a warrior in your spiritual walk, become the person with “eyes to see and ears to hear.” I hear the call to Chivalry ringing in my mind, “Let us be worthy of great adventures! Let us be worthy of great battles! Let us be worthy of great suffering!” In the Eternal Moment, for the good of all those placed in our sphere to love, we must act as Warriors without sin, to boldly battle the myriad evils of the world and the very evil 'one' himself. This is the call to all true Warriors of the Faith. At the same time as sinful beings we must seek the acceptance (within ourselves) of our own Healing/Salvation. It is only in this context that we can grasp the real meaning of "all that is without Faith is sin." The following two statements mean absolutely the same thing: By Faith - we grasp reality and are healed. By Faith - we grasp reality and are "saved."
1Pe 2:21 For to this you were called, because Christ also suffered for us, leaving behind an example for you, that you should follow in His footsteps, "Who committed no sin, nor was deceit found in His mouth"; who, being verbally abused, did not return verbal insults, when He suffered, He did not threaten, but committed Himself to Him who judges righteously; who Himself bore our sins in His body on the tree, in order that having died to sins, we might live unto righteousness--by whose stripes you were healed. 4 For you were like sheep going astray, but you have turned back now to the Shepherd and Overseer of your souls.
What' s the old saying, "I pray, not to change God or cause Him to act, but to change me." (I think that's a paraphrase of C S Lewis) anyway, do you understand what it means? It has profound implications for anyone seeking a sign, anyone struggling with God to get HIM to act. Healing is what's REAL, HIS intimate Presence in ALL THINGS is what's REAL, and HIS creating and sustaining BEING IN HIMSELF is what's REAL. So then, finding and accepting what is REAL, what already is, what is Eternal produces miracles; for if there is an eternity, by its definition it cannot have had a beginning nor an ending, therefore it is also NOW - and only what is connected to Eternity has reality. This is why in the Western Tradition one affirms, "world without end" and the Eastern form, "now and ever and unto the ages of ages..." that's the "plane" of our prayers, the "reality" of our devotions. "Thy Will be done - on earth as it is in heaven." Another way to say it, "Thy Will be done - in the biologically changing world blinded by sin, as in the un-changeable, un-hampered reality of the eternal moment."
When I think along these lines I always remember one of the great statements of faith recorded outside the Bible in the pre-christian era. Recorded in part of the wisdom literature of the Greeks, which came to be known as ‘gnostic’ in lesser and corrupt forms. We find a story by Hermese Trismigistus (which means “the thrice great Hermese”) about the Shepherd of Mankind. Hermese reports that he was praying for his family, for his children especially fearing the effects the world was having on them, wondering how he was going to pass on to them his experience of “Wisdom”, that is his experience of the reality of God. As he is deeply in prayer the Shepherd of Mankind appeared to him and said basically ‘Your sincere prayers have brought you favor with God, so I am here in answer to your prayers and am willing and able to answer any questions you have.’ Hermese didn’t hesitate he said, “I want to know God and things as they are.” We might say, “Lord, teach me what is real” and if that is our sincere prayer, as we pray that prayer the Lord will begin to expose to us our own illusions. (Illusion - a mistaken perception of reality) But to get to this state where we begin to dismiss the fog of illusions, where we begin to “clear our vision” we have to overcome our “delusional state.” (Delusional state - mistaken and false beliefs that persist despite evidence to the contrary)
Delusions for the most part are part and parcel of our “personal religion” or better stated our “religious sickness”. Our “religious sickness” may not appear as “religion” at all; for instance we may be in lock step with the common culture and appear to society as the most rational non-religious of men. An example would be, a scientist who views himself as a practical man, a pragmatist who refuses to believe anything he cannot effect in the laboratory. Such a one would seem to be anything but “religious” yet in fact such a one, refusing to recognize God in the equation, has inadvertently been deluded by the religion of “extreme materialism.” Or another example would be someone who has adopted the mythology of Darwinism’s Origin of Species, to the exclusion of God in the equation; such a one has been deluded by the religion of “Pure Darwinism.” These are examples of “systematized” philosophies people have purposely or inadvertently adopted. More common are the personal philosophies, adopted on a “gut level” from information grasped inadvertently in development, and in environment, bits and pieces from the pop-culture, and various philosophical saying and a mixture of accidentally gathered or purposely gathered religion knowledge. Usually such bits and piece of “knowledge” are purposely chosen because they feel good at the time, and/or confirm some preconceived notion of childhood or later development. Such “personal philosophies” may be mildly debilitating or grossly warping. Let me give three examples: (1) A person male or female who lives life by rote, moves and acts strictly on ‘received information’ who never critically questions the validity of any aspect of their family mythology, fears anyone who does not conform to their norms, lives in fear of non-acceptance, carefully ‘acting the part’ their family mythology requires no matter how they feel inwardly or what questions may arrive. The opposite of this person, one who mindlessly rebels, is actually just the other side of the same coin. One side of the coin is characterized by a grinding fear of failing, which precludes the person from acting upon any course but the prescribed course. The other side is characterized by the fear of disappearing, making it impossible to conform even when such a course would be to their personal advantage. (2) A sort of middle ground might be demonstrated by the hard drinking red neck, unable to take life very seriously, good natured fun the rule, with an ever increasing cynical edge as he ages, refusing to mature, still partying at 50, mocking any questioning of his life choices, mocking anyone who takes life seriously. (3) The psychopath or psychotic, totally insulated unable to touch life, oblivious to the experience of anything but his own needs. Each example above represents different levels of intrinsic selfishness.
The first time I read Hermese’s request, “I want to know God and things as they are” I was dumbfounded by the wisdom of it and its implication began to work on me. Illusion is false perceptions, delusion is false beliefs; in other words, our perception of what is real in any place or event is predicated upon our core self, how we are formed, what we have chosen to take into ourselves. The more delusional our core being, the more illusory (clouded) is our perception. Saint Paul wrote about the degradation and even disintegration of the mind of the prideful saying:
Rom 1:28 And just as they did not approve to have God in their knowledge, God gave them up to a reprobate mind, to do the things which are not fitting; having been filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, greed, malice; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, maliciousness; they are whisperers, slanderers, hateful to God, insolent men, proud, braggarts, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, without understanding, untrustworthy, unloving, unforgiving, unmerciful; who, having known the righteous judgment of God, that those practicing such things are worthy of death, not only do them, but also approve of those who practice them.
Surely we can recognize in these words “sub-cultures” that exist in our neighborhoods, which we collectively call gangs. At least gangs are honest “do bad” societies. What about the hypocritical “do bad” societies like cults, where any “evil” is acceptable to protect the illusion of goodness the cult wishes to project to the world? In the same vein, politics and corporations at the beginning of the twenty first century in the U.S. have become cultish, where the “corporate culture” or “party line” becomes its theology and any sacrifice (evil) is justified for the good of the corporation or party. No one could rightly deny that terrorist organizations have become “killing cults” and we have seen in history that entire nations can become “killing cults”, where the most despicable anti-human acts are perpetrated in the name of “for human good.” The deluded Al Quada member perpetrates anti-human acts of terror, not because he sees himself as “evil” but because he has become so deluded he thinks he is acting “for human good.” Is he not full of malice, full of envy, an inventor of evil things, without understanding, unloving, unforgiving, unmerciful? How can individuals and societies (gangs, cults, parties, corporations, even nations) become so blindly deluded?
Orthodoxy might state it this way, “The perception of Truth is primarily a matter of purity.” When in impurity we choose also to “deceive” we have come full circle, at the same time we have exposed the “wages of sin” which are progressively: Illusion, Delusion, Deception and finally Death. The which, not incidentally, is the full arsenal of Satan’s power. The story of Satan’s fall is a story of progressive delusion, as he began to fancy himself equal to God. The story of Adam and Eve is a story of Satan’s own delusion exercised in deception, creating illusion, delusion, deception and death. This is why Satan is called, The Liar and The Great Deceiver. When we take that added step “to deceive” which is unavoidable in the economy of humanity as we share our ideas, perceptions, opinions, impressions etc, if they are from a core that is “impure” i.e. deluded, our “natural conversation” becomes in lock step with Satan as our delusions, offered as “truth”, act to deceive. We pass our delusion on to our children:
Exo 20:5-6 Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and forth generation of them that hate me; And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments.
In America for whatever societal/religious reasons we greatly value the “miraculous.” For us it is a particular challenge, the thought that all miracles might not be “for the good.” How could it be that those empowered to create signs and wonders, miracles of healing and casting out devils could stand before the judgment seat and Christ say, “Depart from me, ye workers of iniquity, I never knew you”? Jesus explains it clearly, “Thus every good tree produces good fruit, but a rotten tree produces evil fruit. A good tree cannot produce evil fruit, nor can a rotten tree produce good fruit.” Matt. 7:18. When Jesus was genuinely healing people they accused him saying, “He casts out devils by the Evil One.” Of course Jesus answered saying, “How can one enter into a strong man's house, and spoil his goods, except he first bind the strong man?” Yet in our era, for every real there is a false, and I don’t necessarily mean a “fake”, for just as there is the appearance of Christ and anti-christ, both having the “appearance” of goodness so there are miracles by the Spirit of Christ and by the spirit of anti-christ.
Like a pebble hitting a still pond produces concentric waves in proportion to its weight and velocity, so too our words and actions radiate from us, characterized by the condition of our core, they are healing or destructive, pointing towards truth or filled with deception, an exact mirror of our deepest selves. Is it any wonder then that the early monastic movement taught that the employment of silence and stillness (not absence of labor but absence of willful-action) was the quickest way to get to spiritual purity, or that the pre-christian monks of many philosophies taught basically the same thing?
One of the Orthodox Fathers wrote that if one is filled with sinful temptation and despondency that one should keep ones mouth shut and not spread the disease, but in private continue to confess and to call upon Christ at every moment for deliverance. He wasn’t suggesting that one should “fake it until one makes it” spiritually speaking, but rather he was acknowledging the reality that “sin” is “disease” and expressions of the sinful heart are contaminated with sickness that is contagious.
When one grasps this foundational truth, “One cannot act contrary to the reality of ones own nature” the true and deepest meaning of the Sermon on the Mount comes into view. Those who “think” they act contrary to their own nature, are simply holders of that delusion. There is an old saying, “An honest man cannot be conned.” Why? Because we cannot be conned by another by any means we have not already or are not willing to con ourselves. Apply this to the crowds arriving and “blessing” the Carney Evangelist; apply this also to those arriving to see the priest/magician; apply this to all eager to see ANY sign and wonder; apply this to any unwilling to seek wisdom as to the source and mean of the “miraculous.”
The skilled confidence man knows that the only way that he can get one over on the “mark”(his victim) is through the mark’s own weaknesses, delusions and lusts. The first delusion the con man uses in this culture is the common delusion that “everybody is basically good.” He knows that people will do all sorts of things to affirm to themselves and even to strangers that they are a “basically good person.” Next he finds a way that he can tempt a person to act (usually to act on greed) while telling himself or herself that, “though I may benefit from this action, I am acting because I’m a good person, because I wish to help out.” Many people have been robbed of material wealth by this simple formula.
St. Peter of Damaskos list all the “weaknesses” (passions) of man that he found in scripture. Here is the list:
harshness
trickery
malice
perversity
trickery
malice
perversity
Mindlessness
Licentiousness
Enticement
Dullness
lack of understanding
idleness
sluggishness
stupidity
flattery
silliness
idiocy
madness
derangement
coarseness
rashness
cowardice
lethargy
dearth of good actions
moral errors
greed,
over-frugality
ignorance
folly
spurious knowledge
forgetfulness
lack of discrimination
obduracy
injustice
evil intention
a conscienceless soul
slothfulness
idleness
sluggishness
stupidity
flattery
silliness
idiocy
madness
derangement
coarseness
rashness
cowardice
lethargy
dearth of good actions
moral errors
greed,
over-frugality
ignorance
folly
spurious knowledge
forgetfulness
lack of discrimination
obduracy
injustice
evil intention
a conscienceless soul
slothfulness
idle chatter
breaking of faith,
wrongdoing
wrongdoing
sinfulness
lawlessness
criminality
passion
seduction
assent to evil
mindless coupling
demonic provocation
dallying
bodily comfort beyond what is required
vice
stumbling
sickness of soul
enervation
weakness of intellect
negligence
laziness
a reprehensible despondency
disdain of God
aberration
transgression
unbelief
lack of faith
wrong belief
poverty of faith
heresy
fellowship in heresy
polytheism
idolatry
ignorance of God
impiety
magic
astrology
divination
sorcery
denial of God
the love of idols
dissipation
profligacy
loquacity,
indolence
indolence
self-love
inattentiveness
lack of progress
deceit
delusion
audacity
witchcraft
defilement
the eating of unclean food
inattentiveness
lack of progress
deceit
delusion
audacity
witchcraft
defilement
the eating of unclean food
soft living
dissoluteness
voracity
unchastity
avarice,
anger
anger
dejection
listlessness
self-esteem
listlessness
self-esteem
pride
presumption
presumption
self-elation
boastfulness
infatuation
foulness
satiety,
doltishness
torpor
sensuality
over-eating
gluttony
insatiability
secret eating
hoggishness
solitary eating,
indifference
fickleness
self-will
thoughtlessness
self-satisfaction
love of popularity
ignorance of beauty
uncouthness
gaucherie
light-mindedness
boorishness
boastfulness
infatuation
foulness
satiety,
doltishness
torpor
sensuality
over-eating
gluttony
insatiability
secret eating
hoggishness
solitary eating,
indifference
fickleness
self-will
thoughtlessness
self-satisfaction
love of popularity
ignorance of beauty
uncouthness
gaucherie
light-mindedness
boorishness
rudeness
contentiousness
quarrelsomeness
abusiveness
shouting
brawling
fighting
rage
contentiousness
quarrelsomeness
abusiveness
shouting
brawling
fighting
rage
mindless desire
gall
exasperation
giving offence
enmity
meddlesomeness
chicanery
asperity
slander
censure
calumny
condemnation
accusation
hatred
railing
insolence
dishonor,
ferocity
frenzy
severity
aggressiveness
forswearing oneself
oathtaking
lack of compassion
hatred of one's brothers,
partiality
patricide
matricide
breaking fasts
laxity
acceptance of bribes
theft
rapine
jealousy
strife
envy
indecency
jesting
vilification
mockery
derision
exploitation
oppression
disdain of one's neighbor
flogging
making sport of others
hanging
throttling
heartlessness
implacability
covenant-breaking
bewitchment
harshness
shamelessness
impudence
obfuscation of thoughts
obtuseness
mental blindness
attraction to what is fleeting
impassionedness
frivolity
disobedience
dullwittedness
drowsiness of soul
excessive sleep
fantasy
heavy drinking
drunkenness
uselessness
slackness
mindless enjoyment
self-indulgence
venery
using foul language
effeminacy
unbridled desire
burning lust
masturbation
pimping
adultery
sodomy
bestiality
defilement
wantonness
a stained soul
incest
uncleanliness
pollution
sordidness
feigned affection
laughter
jokes
immodest dancing
clapping
improper songs
revelry
fluteplaying
license of tongue
excessive love of order
insubordination
disorderliness
reprehensible collusion
conspiracy
warfare
killing
brigandry
sacrilege
illicit gains
usury
wiliness
grave-robbing
hardness of heart
obloquy
complaining
blasphemy
fault-finding
ingratitude
malevolence
contemptuousness
pettiness
confusion
lying
verbosity
empty words,
mindless joy
daydreaming
mindless friendship
bad habits
nonsensicality
silly talk
garrulity
niggardliness
depravity
gall
exasperation
giving offence
enmity
meddlesomeness
chicanery
asperity
slander
censure
calumny
condemnation
accusation
hatred
railing
insolence
dishonor,
ferocity
frenzy
severity
aggressiveness
forswearing oneself
oathtaking
lack of compassion
hatred of one's brothers,
partiality
patricide
matricide
breaking fasts
laxity
acceptance of bribes
theft
rapine
jealousy
strife
envy
indecency
jesting
vilification
mockery
derision
exploitation
oppression
disdain of one's neighbor
flogging
making sport of others
hanging
throttling
heartlessness
implacability
covenant-breaking
bewitchment
harshness
shamelessness
impudence
obfuscation of thoughts
obtuseness
mental blindness
attraction to what is fleeting
impassionedness
frivolity
disobedience
dullwittedness
drowsiness of soul
excessive sleep
fantasy
heavy drinking
drunkenness
uselessness
slackness
mindless enjoyment
self-indulgence
venery
using foul language
effeminacy
unbridled desire
burning lust
masturbation
pimping
adultery
sodomy
bestiality
defilement
wantonness
a stained soul
incest
uncleanliness
pollution
sordidness
feigned affection
laughter
jokes
immodest dancing
clapping
improper songs
revelry
fluteplaying
license of tongue
excessive love of order
insubordination
disorderliness
reprehensible collusion
conspiracy
warfare
killing
brigandry
sacrilege
illicit gains
usury
wiliness
grave-robbing
hardness of heart
obloquy
complaining
blasphemy
fault-finding
ingratitude
malevolence
contemptuousness
pettiness
confusion
lying
verbosity
empty words,
mindless joy
daydreaming
mindless friendship
bad habits
nonsensicality
silly talk
garrulity
niggardliness
depravity
intolerance
irritability
affluence
rancor
misuse
irritability
affluence
rancor
misuse
ill-temper
clinging to life
clinging to life
ostentation
affectation
pusillanimity
satanic love
curiosity
contumely
pusillanimity
satanic love
curiosity
contumely
lack of the fear of God
unteachability
unteachability
senselessness
haughtiness
self-vaunting
self-inflation
scorn for one's neighbor
mercilessness
insensitivity
hopelessness
spiritual paralysis
hatred of God
haughtiness
self-vaunting
self-inflation
scorn for one's neighbor
mercilessness
insensitivity
hopelessness
spiritual paralysis
hatred of God
despair
suicide
a falling away from God in all things
utter destruction
suicide
a falling away from God in all things
utter destruction
--Altogether 298 Passions:
"These, then, are the passions which are named in the Holy Scriptures. I have set them down in a single list, as I did at the beginning of my discourse with the various books I have used. I have not tried, and nor would I have been able, to arrange them all in order; this would have been beyond my powers, for the reason given by St. John Climacus: `If you seek understanding among wicked men, you will not find it.' For all that the demons produce is disorderly. In common with the godless and the unjust, the demons have but one purpose: to destroy the souls of those who accept their evil counsel. Yet sometimes they actually help men to attain holiness. In these instances they are conquered by the patience and faith of those who put their trust in the Lord, and who through their good actions and resistance to evil thoughts counteract the demons and bring down curses upon them."
Peter of Damaskos obviously had a lot of time on his hands trying to “systematize” the illusions, delusions and weaknesses of man, from scripture. He used St John Climacus’ words to emphasize that such a task is hopeless, since it is the process of mucking about in a sea of confusion. And really that is the point I want to make with it, to draw a line between “Wisdom” and “Confusion.” Christ’s coming and dying did not nullify the great Wisdom Literature of Holy Scripture. In fact, via the Power of the Holy Spirit available to us today, its “secrets” ought to be easier for us to access and comprehend. Yet, in the name of the Holy Spirit, this great treasure is more and more ignored by Christians of all stripes, and substituted in its place is a sort of “soulish intuition”, an unenlightened ignorance, which carries us about by whims of emotion, purported to be “leading of the Holy Spirit.” Sadly, some have substituted the rambling of preachers, or the sanctity of priests, connection through a purity of jurisdiction, when there is nothing that can substitute for reaching to the True Wisdom of God, that is “to Know God and things as they are.”
Peter of Damaskos’ list comes to us translated from one language to another, from one culture to another, from a perspective of monastic living to the realities of modern life, yet many, many . . . too many of the passions he names may be seen as “universal.” In the confusing array, some are aspects of another and some may not be “passions” at all. I don’t understand for instance why, David’s harp playing, cymbal crashing, drum beating is not “passion” but flute playisn is, and clapping is. These are obviously cultural things, not properly translating out of the culture in which they were observed. But in any event look at how the others apply to our actions springing from the reality of our core. Look at how many apply to us going through life inattentive to the state of our mind and heart, acting or not-acting based upon illusion and delusion, paralyzed as it were by confusion.
I noticed that “mindless joy” was listed. I was a little taken aback since Joy is a fruit of the Holy Spirit. But then upon a little reflection I’ve witnessed people who were poor deluded creatures (to quote Batman) and filled with joy. Many cultists find this false or “mindless joy” in their religious sickness. I’m sure the Jihadists fanatics find joy in their conspiratorial “fellowship” just as the old KKK rallies were rollicking good times and the camaraderie of NAZI Brown Shirts was warm and uplifting. In each case it is nothing more than the esprit de corps of pagans and barbarians, i.e. mindless joy.
This list of “weaknesses” from scripture may or may not be a complete list of the means we have to fool ourselves; it may or may not be a complete list of the weaknesses a con man may used to deceive us; it may or may not be a complete list of the tools Satan may own in us for our own destruction. But one has to acknowledge the diabolical genius of the Evil One, creating unique webs of delusion where even the appearance of good may be evil, where even the most sacred is mimicked, where even the healing power of the stripes of our Lord is aped.
A heart filled with the passions cannot perceive truth. A heart filled with the passions cannot discriminate between true miracle and charlatanism. A heart filled with the passions is stymied in all good works. Regardless of the good motives, the appearance of philanthropy and sweat of brow, “the loving kindness of the wicked is cruelty.” Likewise the rebuke of a righteous man is “kindness.”
Pro 12:10 A righteous man regardeth the life of his beast: but the tender mercies of the wicked are cruel.
The bold prayer of Hermese, “I want to know God, and things as they are” is so important in its purely Christian parallels. One cannot come to know “things as they are” without first gaining knowledge of God. We stand in a spiritual stupor when our knowledge of things as they are is a product of our “common culture” which in the first decade of the twenty-first century has proven itself to be insane. Name any aspect of the culture and one with eyes to see can point out the delusions, that is, “the common beliefs held, despite ample demonstrable/contradictory facts.” Just to quickly name one: The mythology that Global Warming is the result of human action. There most certainly is Global Warming and it is quite severe, causing drastic melting of the polar ice caps . . . on Mars! Yes, on Mars. The atmosphere on Mars, more susceptible to the variations of the radiance of the Sun has been in a period of warming, many times greater than the mere .6 degree in average yearly temperature the earth’s atmosphere has experienced, since the time scientists began keeping such records. The ample demonstrable/contradictory facts are clear since there are no humans on Mars and we share the same Sun, and independently, scientists have also measured an increase in the Sun’s radiance on earth. Yet these two pivotal facts have not been applied to the “mythology” that Global Warming is caused by human action. Even the Ecumenical Patriarch has thrown in with the radical and blind ecologists. He convened an international symposium on Global Warming a few years ago, giving yet another platform to these radicals. Nothing explains this other than societal/cultural insanity. In fact when NASA published its report about the Global Warming on Mars, the clamor that humans cause Global Warming increased exponentially. NASA’s report was relegated to their own web-pages, the back pages of newspapers and not covered by the National Electronic Media at all. Please understand that what I’m saying is not “radical theory” it is instead “knowable, provable scientific data” published by no less than NASA (The National Aeronautics and Space Administration) and NOAA (the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration) parent of the National Weather Service.
Of course we ought to be good stewards of our beautiful home, our earth; of course we ought to treat it with respect and do all in our power to leave it in better shape than the generation before us. But this “good stewardship” has nothing to do with false mythologies. It has instead to do with Wisdom of God, which produces in the human psyche “thankfulness and respect” for all God’s creatures and all God’s creation. And with the Wisdom of God comes the realization that “creation moans and groans for the renewal of all things, that will accompany the revelation of the sons of God.” The single most powerful thing we can do for the ecology of our planet is take our prayer life seriously, praying for our own healing/salvation, that we may both be good stewards of the earth and that we may hasten the revelation of the Sons of God.
Rom 8:19 For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God. For the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected the same in hope, Because the creature itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God. For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now. And not only they, but ourselves also, which have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body.
All this to bring us back to that truth written by C.S. Lewis. "I pray not to change God or cause Him to act, but to change me." We could paraphrase, “I pray, not to gain power over others, but love in my own heart.” “I pray, not to cause an effect in the world, but to heal the defects in me.” “I pray, not from knowledge but by Faith, that I might learn how to pray ‘genuinely.’” “I pray, not for wealth but for wisdom.” “I pray, not for signs and wonders, but for healing/salvation.” “I pray, not to become special and holy, but to become real.” “I pray, to be released from prison, to gain the freedom neither Satan nor death can hinder.” “I pray to gain a mind and heart in which Satan with his web of deceit owns NOTHING.”
It is only with this understanding that the words of Jesus ring clear: we should not seek
miracles or signs or wonders, but the kingdom of God, wherein is our healing, and
completion.
Mat 6:33 "But be seeking first the kingdom of God and His righteousness, and all these [things] will be added to you.”
All these?? In this context, literally what we will eat, what we will drink, what we will
wear, and since he says that this is what even the pagans seek, he means for our focus
to be “more.” Not more of the same, heaping wealth upon ourselves as the prosperity
gospel heresy suggests, but “More” as in everything that leads to true health, true
wealth, and real-everlasting - LIFE . I can hear him say, “While you seek what is REAL,
I’ll protect you, that you may find it.” “While you case after what is false, you remain the
slave of the father of lies.”
A Serious Caution for Sincere Orthodox Believers
Is it possible that the Veneration of Icons could ever degenerate to the Worship of Idols? This question in no way questions the validity of the findings of The Seventh Ecumenical Council, which took place in Nicaea in 787 AD, and is also known as the Second Council of Nicaea. This Council rightly restored the use of Icons in Christian worship and rightly stood against the prevalent “iconoclast heresy” of the day. History clearly shows that the battle with the iconoclast heresy of that day was yet another round fought against Gnosticism or at least the influence of certain Gnostic concepts. Bottom-line, it was an attempt by Satan himself to exclusively own the visual means of human communication and to permanently block the communication of the Gospel and depiction of the sacred via visual means. Amazing trick if he could have pulled it off! And in a web of diabolical genius the iconoclast heresy was couched in language that seemed to protect the Gospel and Christian worship from “pagan influence” and a huge portion of The Church was fooled by this deceit. Using Icons as symbols of Holiness and Sanctity in the communication of the Gospel and the work of the worship of God is what the Seventh Council affirmed. Knowing now what a powerful influence “visual media” is, can you imagine it as the sole property of Satan? Yet this would have been the result of the heresy. But that larger picture and debate aside, might an Icon become an Idol? This question is a companion question to: Can religion become a sickness? And of course the answer to both is, in the hands of the deceiver, in the hands of the magician, yes it certainly can. There is no more enthusiastic teacher of “all things God” than Satan himself, cunningly choking off the “revelation of the real” substituting the false creatively.
Any iconoclast Protestant fundamentalist were they to look upon a true relic of the Cross of Christ would intrinsically know that it was something very special, though it were mere wood. Instinctively they would wish to protect it, not to harm it, not to be the person that lost it to history, certainly not the person to destroy it. Were we Orthodox to venerate a sliver of wood, purported to be a scrap of the True Cross of Christ, a sliver of wood sold to the unsuspecting in times past by a charlatan, no more a part of the true cross than a splinter of wood from my desk, would that be an idolatrous act? No, for the sliver of wood has become a true symbol, a true Icon of the true cross, a material connection via “symbol” to something especially sacred and grace filled. However, were we to expect that sliver of wood to turn crimson, or radiate especial light, or put on some other “show for us” and were some magician through his trickery to create this illusion for us, THEN it would be idolatry.
The writer of the Letter to the Hebrews starts the Eleventh Chapter with this profound
statement:
Heb 11:1 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. For by it the elders obtained witness. By faith we understand that time itself was framed by a command of God, so that the things which are seen were not made of things which are visible.
And after a chapter recalling a few of the great “faithful ones” and their acts of faith he continues the Twelfth Chapter saying:
Heb 12:1 So therefore we also, since we are surrounded
by so great a cloud of witnesses, let us lay aside every impediment, and the sin which so easily ensnares us, and let us run with endurance the race that is set before us, looking unto Jesus, the Author and Perfecter of our faith . . .
The “cloud of witnesses” has grown exponentially in the last two thousand years. When we venerate an Iconographic Symbol of a “Witness”, we literally greet that saint by means of the symbol of the Icon and acknowledge that person’s presence with us in the wonder of their sanctification. The Icon physically presents this “witness” to our eyes and to our touch, a means of communing with that person, in the Eternal Moment of their Blessedness. Icons also depict pivotal events, events set in both “time” and “the eternal moment” having an “eternal effect” upon time. When we venerate those Icons, we connect to those pivotal events, in the Eternal Moment of their Blessedness. It is not the wood and pigment of the Icon that is the object of our veneration, but the literal communion with the sanctity it represents. When we cease to celebrate the wonder of the sanctification of the person, or the eternity of the event and instead seek the ‘thrill of a sign’ we’ve turned the sacred symbol into magic object. At this point, in the hands of a magician, the object itself has become profane. Who can deny that it has become an anti-christian object, holding an image of the good in cynical profanity and falsehood? A symbol of Good pointing in a wrong direction. Again, such an illusion comes from a person who is “full of all guile and of all deceit, a child of the devil, an enemy of all justice, who ceases not to pervert the right ways of the Lord.”
No one would doubt that devotion to the “words” of Saint Paul or Saint Peter having been twisted into heresy constitutes something less than sacred worship. That participation in such heresy is indeed a sickness harming both the person having twisted the True Gospel as well as the person accepting the gospel-substitute. I posit that it is no less a sickness when the perfect symbols of the faith are twisted into magic object. How did Saint Peter say it addressing Bar-Jesu? “When will you stop perverting the Right Ways of the Lord?”
When does the sacred become the profane? When the keeping of the “symbol” for instance, the calendar year of Orthodoxy becomes an object unto itself, capable of overpowering the message it is meant to convey. When the old calendar and the new calendar become competing object unto themselves, a tool of war, a hateful means of division. When figuring the cycles of the moon and the correct date of Easter becomes an object unto itself and cause of hateful division. When the Rudder (Canonical “law”) becomes an object unto itself and as a dead-letter-legal-document is used as a hateful means of division and condemnation. When the beautiful symbol of unity in the world; the Canonical status of True Bishops, (true Pastors of Christ Church) is destroyed for the collection of power and wealth and the Church itself turns cannibalistic, devouring and destroying smaller, weaker jurisdictions in the name of “unity.” Do not think that because The Church has managed to this date to hold a wonderful and complete “symbol” of the Gospel and the Apostolic Tradition, that forces are NOT at work in her to “pervert” every True and Good thing, to by cunning and creative means tear her apart. Like those blind to the eternal significance of Icons, with “good motive” tried to deprive the Church of all visual symbols, to protect her against idolatry!
Chasing after illusions and delusions is the very definition of “The Vanity of Idols.” When the idol is grasped the devotee says, “Look here at the power of my object”, a profane boast of pagans. This can be true of the Church itself, when one says, “look here at the ‘institution of the Church’ and the power it possesses.” This can be true of the Church itself or any aspect of her when “something – anything” is substituted for the Faith, which is imbued with the Holy Spirit of Christ. For the “institution” of the Church is mere Icon of the True Body of Christ, reflects that Body in part and imperfectly in its worldly presence. Its “institutional worldly” actions are flawed, weighted as it is with imperfect humanity. And just as each Believer acts imperfectly, impeded by sin, yet is tied by Grace to Divine Perfection, so too the worldly church acts imperfectly, impeded by the sinful men who inhabit her, yet is tied by Grace to Divine Perfection. At the beginning I mentioned SCOBA, the Standing Council of Orthodox Bishops in America. With the same understanding just stated, SCOBA has become an Idol, so too jurisdictions participating in her are clouding their own “iconographic” nature. SCOBA itself is a false assembly, making false claims of “especial” Canonical status. By implication denying the “Iconographic” nature of the smaller and weaker jurisdiction she wishes to co-opt or destroy. The same situation exist with those who believe that “recognition” by the Ecumenical Patriarch – the new “Pope” of Orthodoxy is required for genuine canonical status. Again, an Idol offered in place of an Icon.
I want to leave you with food for thought as to how we are to live this Christian life. Are we called to live a systematized, prescribed “religious” life, or are we called to live a creative life engaged in the work of everyday, never set apart in the worldly physical sense, but powerful in influence being set apart in a spiritual sense? Too many with deep soul sickness, seek to substitute the “culture” of Orthodoxy, the prescribed systematized religious life, for the reality of Christ’s creative presence. And in effect, in so doing turn the Icon to Idol. There is a place for the prescribed systematized religious life – it corresponds to the state of society in this way. Just as a child needs the discipline and blessing of systematized education, but once mature, must exercise that education freely in many disciplines, and only a few are called to turn back and run the schools of systematized education, so too the young in the Lord need the systematized religious life, but when mature must exercise that spiritual maturity freely, creatively in many disciplines. So too, like in society when maturity fails to arrive, as a last resort grown men are caused to again enter a very systematized life, called prison. So too, like in society, some with the great skills of the warrior are called to enter another form of systematized life, called military service. Monasticism has some of the two latter aspects about it. In each the point is the “discipline to come to maturity.”
A child thinks in such a way that the palmed quarter really does magically appear from behind the ear, the body really is cut in half by the magician’s saw, the girl really does vaporize into thin air inside the magician’s closet.
1Co 13:11 When I was a child, I spoke as a child, I thought as a child, I reasoned as a child; but when I became a man, I put away the things of the child. For now we see through a mirror by reflection, but then face to face. Now I know in part, but then I shall know just as I also am known. And now abide faith, hope, love, these three; but the greatest of these is love.
An early Christian writer, Mathetes, writing around 130AD, to the tutor of Marcus Aurelius, describes himself saying, “I do not speak of things strange to me, nor do I aim at anything inconsistent with right reason; but having been a disciple of the Apostles, I am become a teacher of the Gentiles.” There are lessons for us to learn in his description of “religion” vs living the faith filled life.
He describes the Christian life thusly:
For the Christians are distinguished from other men neither by country, nor language, nor the customs which they observe. For they neither inhabit cities of their own, nor employ a peculiar form of speech, nor lead a life which is marked out by any singularity. The course of conduct which they follow has not been devised by any speculation or deliberation of inquisitive men; nor do they, like some, proclaim themselves the advocates of any merely human doctrines. But, inhabiting Greek as well as barbarian cities, according as the lot of each of them has determined, and following the customs of the natives in respect to clothing, food, and the rest of their ordinary conduct, they display to us their wonderful and confessedly striking17 method of life. They dwell in their own countries, but simply as sojourners. As citizens, they share in all things with others, and yet endure all things as if foreigners. Every foreign land is to them as their native country, and every land of their birth as a land of strangers. They marry, as do all [others]; they beget children; but they do not destroy their offspring.18 They 27 have a common table, but not a common bed.19 They are in the flesh, but they do not live after the flesh. (Comp. 2Co_10:3) They pass their days on earth, but they are citizens of heaven. (Comp. Phi_3:20) They obey the prescribed laws, and at the same time surpass the laws by their lives. They love all men, and are persecuted by all. They are unknown and condemned; they are put to death, and restored to life. (Comp. 2Co_6:9) They are poor, yet make many rich; (Comp. 2Co_6:10) they are in lack of all things, and yet abound in all; they are dishonoured, and yet in their very dishonour are glorified. They are evil spoken of, and yet are justified; they are reviled, and bless; (Comp. 2Co_4:12) they are insulted, and repay the insult with honour; they do good, yet are punished as evil-doers. When punished, they rejoice as if quickened into life; they are assailed by the Jews as foreigners, and are persecuted by the Greeks; yet those who hate them are unable to assign any reason for their hatred.
He described the religious life of the Jews thusly:
But as to their scrupulosity concerning meats, and their superstition as respects the Sabbaths, and their boasting about circumcision, and their fancies about fasting and the new moons, which are utterly ridiculous and unworthy of notice, — I do not12 think that you require to learn anything from me. For, to accept some of those things which have been formed by God for the use of men as properly formed, and to reject others as useless and redundant, — how can this be lawful? And to speak falsely of God, as if He forbade us to do what is good on the Sabbath-days, — how is not this impious? And to glory in the circumcision13 of the flesh as a proof of election, and as if, on account of it, they were specially beloved by God, — how is it not a subject of ridicule? And as to their observing months and days, (Comp. Gal_4:10) as if waiting upon14 the stars and the moon, and their distributing,15 according to their own tendencies, the appointments of God, and the vicissitudes of the seasons, some for festivities,16 and others for mourning, — who would deem this a part of divine worship, and not much rather a manifestation of folly? I suppose, then, you are sufficiently convinced that the Christians properly abstain from the vanity and error common [to both Jews and Gentiles], and from the busy-body spirit and vain boasting of the Jews; but you must not hope to learn the mystery of their peculiar mode of worshipping God from any mortal.
How then is he supposed to learn it? The answer was then, as it is today, by experience of it, by experience of Life, Communion, and Relationship with Christ, which is the True Life of Christ’s Church.
The Relation of Christians to the World.
To sum up all in one word — what the soul is in the body, that are Christians in the world. The soul is dispersed through all the members of the body, and Christians are scattered through all the cities of the world. The soul dwells in the body, yet is not of the body; and Christians dwell in the world, yet are not of the world. (Joh_17:11, Joh_17:14, Joh_17:16) The invisible soul is guarded by the visible body, and Christians are known indeed to be in the world, but their godliness remains invisible. The flesh hates the soul, and wars against it, (Comp. 1Pe_2:11) though itself suffering no injury, because it is prevented from enjoying pleasures; the world also hates the Christians, though in nowise injured, because they abjure pleasures. The soul loves the flesh that hates it, and [loves also] the members; Christians likewise love those that hate them. The soul is imprisoned in the body, yet preserves20 that very body; and Christians are confined in the world as in a prison, and yet they are the preservers20 of the world. The immortal soul dwells in a mortal tabernacle; and Christians dwell as sojourners in corruptible [bodies], looking for an incorruptible dwelling21 in the heavens. The soul, when but ill-provided with food and drink, becomes better; in like manner, the Christians, though subjected day by day to punishment, increase the more in number.22 God has assigned them this illustrious position, which it were unlawful for them to forsake.
Are Christians precluded from systematize worship, from Seasonal Liturgies, prayers and songs? Certainly not, but in every instance, the Iconographic nature of these things must be grasped and they are NEVER to become the focus and object unto themselves.
+++
1 Deism
The belief that God exists but is not involved in the world. It maintains that God created all things and set the universe in motion and is no longer involved in its operation. (Compare to Atheism, Agnosticism, and Theism.)
The belief that God exists but is not involved in the world. It maintains that God created all things and set the universe in motion and is no longer involved in its operation. (Compare to Atheism, Agnosticism, and Theism.)
2 Dualism
In theology, the concept that the world is controlled maybe even created by opposing forces, i.e., good and bad, God and Satan. In Philosophy the idea that the world consists of two main components: thought and matter. In Christian Dualism that there is a huge opposition between what is Spirit and what is matter.
In theology, the concept that the world is controlled maybe even created by opposing forces, i.e., good and bad, God and Satan. In Philosophy the idea that the world consists of two main components: thought and matter. In Christian Dualism that there is a huge opposition between what is Spirit and what is matter.
3 Gnosticism
A theological view prevalent around the time of Christ. Generally speaking, Gnosticism taught that salvation is achieved through special knowledge (gnosis). This knowledge usually dealt with the individual's relationship to the transcendent Being. It denies the incarnation of God as the Son. In so doing, it denies the true efficacy of the atonement since, if Jesus is not God, He could not atone for all of humanity and we would still be lost in our sins. Gnostics believed creation was “an attack on God” so matter had no meaning, only the “spiritual” had value, an even greater chasm between God and Matter. This is of course the very opposite of what Saint Paul taught.
A theological view prevalent around the time of Christ. Generally speaking, Gnosticism taught that salvation is achieved through special knowledge (gnosis). This knowledge usually dealt with the individual's relationship to the transcendent Being. It denies the incarnation of God as the Son. In so doing, it denies the true efficacy of the atonement since, if Jesus is not God, He could not atone for all of humanity and we would still be lost in our sins. Gnostics believed creation was “an attack on God” so matter had no meaning, only the “spiritual” had value, an even greater chasm between God and Matter. This is of course the very opposite of what Saint Paul taught.
4 ἰάομαι
iaomai – which literally means, “to become cured” - by his stripes we have the power to become cured!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)