Publisher: St Nectarios Press, Seattle: Washington (1992).
A rather interesting three volume collection of hagiographical accounts of saints which due to their era have often been forgotten, overlooked or not widely known. There is more literature available about the evangelists and early saints of England, as well as the ecclesial circumstances of their time.
Yet as the detailed and ecclesially grounded hagiographical accounts which Vladimir Moss provides, is an excellent effort to rectify this problem. However in some accounts the language is somewhat muddled or unclear, and so one sees the narrative jumping from one situation to another without warning. This is the only problem with this series of books, and I would attribute it to the primary sources which Vladimir had to work with, since as we said it is part of Church history that is not known. Nevertheless, Vladimir provides a scholarly explanation for our present day ignorance citing that the Orthodoxy of English Christianity was placed under successive and sporadic pressures from 780AD onwards by an ever-growing papacy gaining power.
The Great Schism of 1054 had no immediate impact upon England until the Pope gave his blessing to the Normans, led by William the Conqueror, to invade England in 1066. For it was 1066 that the Norman “Crusade” helped impose finally and firmly Rome’s control over English Christianity. Many churches and monasteries were burnt, holy sites and relics desecrated, while clergy and laity who refused to tow the Papal line were killed, condemned as heretics, imprisoned and so forth. Those who were able to escape, fled to Byzantium, many men finding employment within the Varangian Guard (possibly in the hope to fight Papists).
It is thus fair to say that 1066 was a prelude to the Crusades to which Byzantium endured and suffered. Therefore I encourage people to learn of the lives of saints who not only withstood the pagan invasions of the Vikings, but endeavoured to keep the Faith and its own particular English cultural expression.
Author: Dr. Guy Freeland (Lecturer in Liturgical Studies and Hermeneutics at St Andrew’s Theological College Sydney).
Source: The Greek Orthodox Youth of Australia in Dialogue 2 (1986): 98-105.
The word “tradition” (paradosis) has acquired a bewildering diversity of meanings within common usage. In the present paper, however, I am concerned with only one meaning of the word, that is the fundamental meaning it has within Orthodox theology and spirituality. As far as this special meaning is concerned, and unlike all other usages, the word should always be qualified by “Holy” and the first letters of both simple definition of the kind one finds in dictionaries. To some extent at least, we need to proceed negatively, that is apophatically, by excluding meanings of “tradition” which fall short of the required meaning. As we discover more and more about what Holy Tradition is not, we hopefully, move closer to, at least a partial, understanding of what Holy Tradition in fact is. So, although I do not wish to dwell on other meanings of “tradition”, some examination of several of the common usages could be of material advantage to us.
In everyday speech the word “tradition” is frequently used of long-established beliefs, values and practices, and a “traditionalist” is taken to be a person of conservative tendencies who upholds the worth of what has been handed down from the past and opposes the aspirations of radicals, progressives and revolutionaries who are bent on reforming or doing away with such “traditions”. The word “tradition” in this sense has beyond doubt penetrated ecclesiastical domains, but on no account must it be equated with Holy Tradition. Nevertheless, there is some link here with our capital “T” Tradition. Holy Tradition does involve a respect for the past, the well-tried and the established, but in Holy Tradition the past is not conserved simply because it is the past. The long-established if it is retained, if it is a genuine part of Holy Tradition, is retained because it is the Truth. Holy Tradition carries the past along with it, but it always relates to, operates within or perhaps, in a special sense, even constitutes the present. Holy Tradition is only, and can only be discerned through the operation of the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of Truth, working in the body of the Church in the here and now.
In Holy Tradition, indeed, there is no past to look back to, no future to look forward to, no click-clicking of the clock along the path of history, of historical (linear) time. Holy Tradition belongs to the eternal present not to linear-historical time. The genuine capital “T” Traditionalist is not, and cannot be, a conservative in the restricted common usage sense, nor can he or she be a progressive or revolutionary (again in the common use senses) because these terms denote not the eternal present constituted through the operation of the Holy Spirit, who is God with us in the congregation of the faithful, but to the linear-historical time of clocks and calendars. The ecclesiastical conservative who is continually looking backwards, who is always ready to quote some obscure Church law designed to handle circumstances very different from our own, who might even tell you that Orthodoxy is the following of every detail, and in all circumstances, of each and every canon or inherited practice, such a person is not a capital “T” Traditionalist but simply a small “t” traditionalist, a conservative.
In fact, not only does such conservatism not constitute Holy Tradition, it is antithetical to it. This kind of conservatism or traditionalism, which is really simply a modern form of pharisaism, binds the people of God by the letter, as opposed to the spirit, of law. In doing so, it actually inhibits the action of the Holy Spirit (which constitutes true perception) and hence prevents discernment as to what really does not belong within Holy Tradition. Another common usage of “tradition”, is where the word is used of this or that cultural element or custom of a given people, peoples or institution of some actual or supposed antiquity. If we talk of the traditions of the legal profession, say, then we are probably talking of such practices as the wearing of gowns and wigs by judges and barristers or over-indulgence at bar dinners. In the same vein we talk of school or service traditions. We also frequently refer to folklore ceremonies and customs as traditions. Again “tradition” in this sense has penetrated the ecclesiastical domain. Orthodox are very prone to label almost anything which hasn’t obviously only been introduced within living memory as “traditional”.
What are purely cultural practices, whether local, regional or national, thus come, all too often, to be regarded as essential elements of Orthodoxy per se. This not only creates a barrier between Orthodox and non-Orthodox, but between Orthodox and Orthodox. Because what in fact is purely local, temporally and/or spatially, comes to be labelled “traditional”, Orthodox are often dismissive or other Orthodox who, belonging to different local churches, do things in a slightly different ways. Even properly instructed Orthodox, who do not make this mistake, often attach too much importance to purely local customs and ways and hence feel uncomfortable when they encounter Orthodox from other “traditions”. Even given the abundance not only of Greek but Russian, Romanian, Serbian, Antiochian and other Orthodox churches, I have a horrible feeling that only a very small percentage of Orthodox living in Sydney, of any jurisdiction, have ever attended the Liturgy in a church under another jurisdiction.
Given the rarity of communication between Orthodox of different national origins it is scarcely surprising that few non-Orthodox realise that we all do belong to one single church. Of course recently there has been a little progress, particularly with the formation of S.C.C.O.C.A (The Standing Conference of Canonical Orthodox Churches of Australia) but we have an awfully long way to go before the situation becomes even tolerably satisfactory. We need action at the parochial as well as hierarchical level. Given some ingenuity and a great deal of patience, I think that there is a holy task here which could usefully be taken up by youth groups.
Now I am not, please, in any way denigrating practices which belong to particular ethnic or national churches. Far from it. These practices give a special flavour, as does the language, to the celebration of the Holy Mysteries. It would serve nobody’s interests if Greek churches stopped being Greek or Russian churches Russian. The cultural variety and distinctiveness is part of the richness of Orthodoxy. My point, rather, is that tradition, in the sense of local cultural tradition, is not Holy Tradition even where it is informed by and permeated with Holy Tradition. As an Orthodox of Greek extraction one should not make the Greekness of the Greek Orthodox Church – the language, the music, the national celebrations and so forth – an end in itself. The Liturgy is celebrated as the supreme act of worship and thanksgiving to God by the Universal Church. There is nothing wrong with an appreciation of the Greekness of Greek Orthodox worship, indeed this could well be a spiritual help if kept in its place; but there is everything wrong with treating the Liturgy, as I feel some people do, as a sort of cultural sauna in which one can work up a nice Greek-feeling glow. To attend the Liturgy without discerning and responding to the presence of the living God is bordering on blasphemy.
Just as we found that tradition in the sense of conservativeness was distinct from Holy Tradition because it belonged to linear-historical time, whereas Holy Tradition belongs to the eternal present, so we can say that “tradition” in the sense of cultural customs and ways is not Holy Tradition, or indeed even a part of Holy Tradition, because Holy Tradition belongs not only to the eternal now but also to the eternal here. In other words, as Holy Tradition is not time-bound, so also it is not space-bound; it is constituted of that which the Church not only holds always, outside ordinary temporal boundaries, but also what it holds everywhere, that is universally, outside ordinary spatial boundaries. That which is not intrinsic to the whole Orthodox Church everywhere cannot belong to Holy Tradition, however desirable, however venerable and sacred it be. Holy Tradition is concerned, we can say, with what is essential, that which relates to the deposit of the Faith entrusted by Christ to the Church. Local practices and cultural colouring might be part of ethnic tradition, they are not constitutive of Holy Tradition.
This is not to say, however, that elements belonging to Holy Tradition do not have an origin within particular cultures; the New Testament was, for example, written in Greek and Apostolic teaching was permeated with Greek philosophy, thought and language. The point is that the Holy Spirit in manifesting Holy Tradition transforms, universalizes all that is purely local, that is of an ethnic or national nature. Orthodoxy as a whole possesses a sacred inner culture which is distinguishable in every least detail from any and all specific, that is ethnic, cultures; it belongs equally and without distinction or favour to all right believing and right worshipping Christians, whether they be Russians, Ugandans, Englishmen, Koreans or Greeks.
A third common usage of “tradition”, and the last I wish to mention, will also, hopefully, help us along the negative road towards an understanding of Holy Tradition. This usage, however, is one which is more familiar in scholarly than everyday discourse. This is the sense in which tradition is applied to that which belongs to, or arises from, oral as opposed to literary culture. So a traditional culture, in this sense, is one which is non or pre literate. Oral cultures differ in many ways from literary cultures. It needs to be noted, however, that literary, or literate, cultures retain or possess varying degrees of orality along with their literacy. This being the case, it is acceptable to talk of “traditional” (oral) elements even within highly literate cultures. As we shall see, there is an intrinsic orality in authentic Christianity.
In literary cultures information is contained in books and other storage systems and can be pulled out by, say, a visit to the library or bookshelf. Information can be passed on, in highly reliable forms, from one generation to another. All one needs to know are the techniques required for retrieving the information from the storage systems available. Reading is largely a private matter, one takes oneself off to somewhere where one won’t be too disturbed and limits one’s field of vision to the printed page, screen or whatever. No direct communication with any other human being is involved. We talk, for example, of students engaging in private study or reading for University degrees. It is not difficult to see from all this that highly literary culture, such as post-Renaissance Western European culture, is likely to be highly individualistic.
In an oral culture, information has to be memorised if it is to be retrievable or to be passed on from one generation to another. If you want to know something the only storage-retrieval system available to you is another human being. Oral cultures are characterised by the need to memorise vast quantities of information, and this involves an intimate relationship between master and pupil over a great period of time. It is of course next to impossible to memorise vast quantities of dry facts, so all sorts of techniques are used to aid the memory; song, dance, symbolic devices and decoration, ritual, the encompassing of information in coded form in myths, and so on.
In oral cultures that “the medium is the message” – to use Marshall McLuhan’s famous expression – is true in a very special sense. The modes of transmission of knowledge are inextricably bound up with that which is transmitted, and, indeed, with the culture in its living totality. The transmission of such “traditional” knowledge brings that which is transmitted to life, it indeed constitutes, re-creates in each generation, the culture itself. Here an observation, relating to oral tradition, of Professor A. B. Lord in The Singer of Tales is particularly apposite. He wrote: “We ought to take a fresh look at tradition, considered not as the inert acceptance of a fossilized corpus of themes and conventions, but as an organic habit of re-creating what has been received and is handed on”. (p. xiii).
Professor Lord was speaking of traditional cultures in general, but what he says applies very much to Holy Tradition also. Holy Tradition is indeed “an organic habit of re-creating what has been received and is handed on”. The term “deposit of the faith” has its uses but it is a static term and cannot be said to be synonymous with “Holy Tradition” which is a dynamic term. Within Holy Tradition the deposit of the faith is re-created within the eternal present. The mode and place of transmission are intrinsic to that which is transmitted. Through the several acts of transmission the faith imparted by Christ to the Apostles is re-created, it comes to us as something entirely new. But while the acts of transmission occur within ordinary linear-historical time, what is re-created, is made present, or shown forth, by such acts is not something which can be separated from that once and for all Revelation through Our Lord God and Saviour Jesus Christ two thousand years ago.
The transformation of Revelation within the Church indeed constitutes Holy Tradition as such. Within the eternal present the mystery of Salvation from Genesis to the Apocalypse is manifested or revealed within the mysteries of the Church, the Body of Christ. The Church itself operates within the boundaries of historical time, and is served by unworthy human beings who make but a fleeting appearance on the cosmic screen, but that which is made present within Holy Tradition in the midst of the worshipping congregation is eternal and complete, the fullness of the living Faith, given as entirely new to those who are reborn through water and the Spirit.
The use of the word “tradition” we have been considering does certainly help in the search for an understanding of Holy Tradition, particularly by drawing our attention to the importance of the mode of transmission. However, difficulties have arisen through associating this sense of “tradition” too closely with the capital “T” Tradition of Holy Tradition. The main difficulty has arisen within Western Christianity as a consequence of the Reformation. The cause of the Reformation cut deep into late medieval and Renaissance culture, but the principal trigger for the greatest upheaval in the history of Western Christendom was, I think it can be said, the rampant ecclesiastical abuses. The reformers wished – and given the historical circumstances one can well understand this – to return to a purer Christianity, to the Christianity of the primitive Church, as they understood it. The record of the teaching of the Church in its earliest period is of course contained in the New Testament, and so it is not surprising that the Protestants sought to base the reform of the Church on the New Testament. Unfortunately, as happens with many reformers and revolutionaries, they went too far.
The doctrine which lies at the very heart of Protestantism is that of sola Scriptura, the Scripture alone; that is, as the sole and only source of authoritative teaching. Only that which could be proved by the plain word of Scripture could bind the Christian. Moreover the Protestants believed (and still do) that the plain word of Scripture can be grasped by any Christian devoutly reading the Bible by the Divine Light which is within every true believer in Christ. The claim of the Catholic Church that it alone possessed the Divinely instituted right to interpret the Scriptures in the light of the teachings of the Fathers, the liturgical texts and practices, the decisions of the Councils, the oral traditions passed down from the Apostles, and so on, was denied. There was no need of any intermediary between God and the individual believer of good conscience. The more extreme protestant churches threw out nearly all the practices and much of the teaching of the Catholic Church.
From an Orthodox or Catholic point of view one can say that the reformers, in throwing out the murky water of the ecclesiastical fishbowl, threw out most of the goldfish as well. The crux of the resulting dispute was the doctrine of sola Scriptura. The Catholics, while fully accepting the authority of Scripture, nonetheless maintained that the authentic teaching of the Church was based not only on Scripture but also on Tradition. Moreover, the Church was in existence before the New Testament was written; the Scriptures are a possession of the Church which alone has authority to interpret them. Given the historical context, it is easy to see how the essence of the dispute came to be seen in terms of the Protestants’ insistence of sola Scriptura versus the Catholics’ insistence on Scripture and Tradition as the source of teaching.
As the Roman, the Orthodox Church has always accepted a distinction between the public teaching of the Apostles, which was in the course of time written down to form the New Testament, and those things which the Apostles had received from Christ and transmitted to the faithful but which were not written down, at least very much later. These are the (small “t”) traditions of the Apostles. Scripture itself in fact acknowledges the existence of these traditions. St John, for example, says in his Gospel: “…there are also many other things that Jesus did, were every one of them to be written, I suppose that the world itself could not contain the books that would be written”, (21:25). Things which were not written down, which were not proclaimed to everyone in the Gospel, but were conveyed to the baptised faithful within the liturgical life of the Church – and here we should remember that in early times those not baptised were excluded from being present at the Eucharist – share, in the view of the Orthodox Church, an equal authority with the public teaching which was written down. These initially secret traditions related in particular, the Fathers tell us, to liturgical and sacramental practices.
To draw a distinction between the (initially) oral traditions and Scripture is proper; what, however, is not proper is to separate Scripture and the traditions to equate the latter with Holy Tradition. But this is exactly what the Roman Catholic Church proceeded to do and even embedded the separation in the decisions of the Council of Trent. The teaching of the Church, the Council declared, was founded on Scripture and Tradition, not Scripture alone. This renders Holy Tradition as something which is totally distinct from Scripture, but sharing an equal authority with Scripture. The Roman Church, in other words, effectively followed the Protestant lead in separating Holy Scripture out from Holy Tradition. The truth is, in the understanding of the Orthodox Church, that Scripture subsists within Holy Tradition alongside of the Apostolic traditions and all the summations and implications drawn from Scripture and the oral traditions in the form of creeds, decisions of the Ecumenical Councils and the like.
Scripture and the Apostolic traditions can be distinguished but not separated. The separation of Holy Tradition from Holy Scripture seems to have led to some rather odd thinking within the Roman Church. Since according to Roman doctrine the authority, the magisterium, of the Church is focused on, or concentrated within, the person of the Pope of Rome, the Pope came to be seen as the embodiment and infallible expositor of Tradition. Only in the light of this alarming distortion of the meaning of Holy Tradition can one make any sense of a remark attributed to Pius IX, the Pope in whose reign the doctrine of Papal Infallibility was promulgated (1870), “I am tradition”.
I hope you will agree that our following of a negative way in an examination of some of the meanings of “traditions” has shed some light on the authentic concept of “Holy Tradition”. I wish now to see what I might be able to add, applying a more cataphatic, that is positive, approach. But first let us gather up some of the points which have hopefully emerged thus far. Holy Tradition applies not to linear-historical time nor to any particular ethnic or national culture or location – what one might term the horizontal temporal and spatial plane – but to the vertical plane of the eternal present, the ever-present here and now. Holy Tradition is not separable from Scripture, rather Scripture, along with the Apostolic traditions, subsists within Holy Tradition. Holy Tradition is not a static deposit of the Faith passed on from generation to generation, but the organic re-creation in the eternal present of that which has been transmitted to us from the Apostles, and has been expounded and defined by the Fathers, the Councils, the sublime instruction of the Liturgy and the iconography of the Church. Finally, there is the point that Holy Tradition doesn’t simply denote that which is transmitted but involves the mode of transmission. What more can we add?
Well, firstly, the point should be made that Holy Tradition (in the words of The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church) “does not mean something handed down but something handed over”. To this we can add “something handed over within the body of the living Holy Catholic Apostolic and Orthodox Church”, for Holy Tradition is Holy not only by virtue of the fact it tells us of the Divine Revelation through our Lord Jesus Christ but by virtue of the fact that it is handed over within the Church, the very Body of Christ. Within the Church we receive the Holy Tradition, as if from the Incarnate Saviour Himself, as a gift which is pristine and new, not as some moth-eaten old garment passed down from ancestor to ancestor. “Handing down” denotes historical succession, “handing over” denotes the eternal present of the Kingdom of God. What is handed over must be cherished and absorbed and must be handed over, returned so to speak, as we received it.
This reminds me of the early baptismal practice of the Church known in Latin as the traditio symboli. Candidates for baptism (catechumens), who were usually adults, underwent lengthy instruction in the Faith, including in the later stages instruction in the Creed, which was thus handed over into the keeping of the candidates. This handing over of the Creed was known as the traditio symboli. At their Baptism the candidates returned the Creed, and act known as the redditio symboli, to the Church by reciting it to the Bishop. The handing over and the returning were thus intrinsic to the Holy Tradition itself.
So Holy Tradition, involving receiving, preserving and handing over (or back) entails dynamic interchange. This dynamic interchange can only take place within the Church; Holy Tradition has no existence outside the Church. If we wish to live within Holy Tradition then we must dwell in the Church, within its liturgical life. For the Orthodox Church, the Scriptures reside within Holy Tradition and hence their place is within the liturgy itself. When the Gospel is solemnly sung in the service of the Church, especially during the Liturgy, it is sung with power, the words are there, in their authentic context, the very living words of Christ, of God Himself. There in the Church at the Liturgy by word, by chant, by gesture, attitude and movement, by iconography, by incense and lamps and candles, by Holy Offerings of bread and wine, by prayer and supplication, by prostration and veneration, by obedience to Divine precept, with the bishops, the priests, the deacons, the readers and chanters, the acolytes and all the laity, there where Heaven and Earth become as one in that time which is outside of time, is Holy Tradition received, preserved and returned, now and for ever and to the ages of ages.
Because she has this understanding of Scripture within Holy Tradition and knows nothing of sola Scriptura or detached Tradition residing uniquely in the soul of an infallible Latin pontiff, the Orthodox Church tends to be wary of extra-liturgical Bible study groups and the like. The devotional (as opposed to strictly scholarly or historical) study of the Bible is good when it is an extension of the liturgy, when it involves reflection on the Word proclaimed within the Tradition; it can be valueless or even undesirable, as far as Orthodox are concerned, if it becomes, as it does in many Evangelical Bible groups, a wholly detached activity, a devotion in its own right which is nothing of the Scriptures outside of the living Holy Tradition of the Church’s worship. If one studies, in a devotional sense, the Scriptures outside of the life of the Church then one will quickly be led astray in a sea of personal opinion. The group nature of the activity also has the result of reinforcing error whenever it arises; and as error overtakes Truth, the home of Truth, the Church, tends to be shunned and finally possibly abandoned.
I hope that we now have Holy Tradition at least to some degree focused. I cannot give you a definition of “Holy Tradition” because it is a term which is proper to the mystery of the Church Herself, in the Body of Christ, and no definition could be more than horribly inadequate. However, we can now, I think, identify Holy Tradition as the continuous working or operation of the Holy Spirit infused into, and deposited within the Church on the Day of Pentecost. Let us recall the words of Christ to the Apostles concerning the descent of the Holy Spirit on the Church: “…when the Counsellor comes, whom I shall send to you from the Father, even He the Spirit of truth, who proceeds from the Father, will bear witness to me; and you also are witnesses, because you have been with me from the beginning… I have yet many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth; … He will glorify Me, for He will take what is mine and declare it to you. All that the Father has is mine; therefore I said that he will take what is mine and declare it to you” – (John 15.26-27; 16.12, 13a, 14-15). If one fully unpacks the meanings of these words, then I suggest, one will also unpack the meaning of the expression “Holy Tradition”.
This is the point where I am overcome by Holy terror, but, God being merciful, let me just make a few observations. The Holy Spirit is the Spirit of Truth and is the Spirit which bears witness to Christ. It is, therefore, the Spirit which determines the authenticity of what purports to be Revelation. Notice also that it is not the bare record of the words of Christ which we are to receive but the record as declared by the Spirit; the Scriptures are to be declared in the power of the Spirit, it is only the “en-spirited” words which are the Word of God. Moreover, the record is to be received within the body of the Apostolic Church on which the Spirit descended at Pentecost. Indeed, it is on the mystery of Pentecost that the Church is founded and it is one and the same Spirit received in the visible form of tongues of fire which has moved in the Church down through the ages, transforming historical time in every generation into the eternal present.
It is the Spirit working in the Church which authenticates and interprets the living Faith. The Church does not add to Revelation, it is the same Spirit in every age “glorifying” Christ and declaring and witnessing to the Word once and for all given through the Incarnate Christ, and pre-heralded by the Prophets. Notice also that the Apostles themselves are also witnesses to the Divine Revelation. The Church is thus the Apostolic Church because it preserves the Apostolic teaching and traditions. While the Church cannot add to Revelation, it can nonetheless, in power of the Spirit, draw out the meaning of that which has been received in the form of creedal formulas, decisions of Ecumenical Councils, authoritative liturgical texts, and so on.
In every age the Spirit acts within the Church declaring the Holy Tradition in its fullness afresh as is appropriate and meaningful for the people of each particular historical time. So, Holy Tradition is, as it was in the Church of the Apostles, always complete and received in its fullness, but nonetheless witnesses to the Revelation through Our Lord Jesus Christ in a way that responds to the needs and limitations of the times. Simultaneously, Holy Tradition remains as it always has, because it adds nothing to what it has already received at its beginning through Revelation, and speaks ever anew to each generation as that which is witnessed to by the Spirit is continuously re-created in the heart of the Apostolic Church. We can now see more plainly, I hope, why it is that Holy Tradition, although it involves the reception of those things which are the inheritance of all members of the Church, everywhere and at all times – quod semper, quod ubique, quod ab omnibus – is nonetheless antithetical to conservatism, to small “t” traditionalism. Although it belongs to the vertical spatial-temporal dimension, Holy Tradition nonetheless is always received within an historical context, the horizontal plane. In each generation the small “t” traditions of the past, the customs and practices and canons of the Church, are viewed with new eyes imbued with the razor’s edge of true perception, which is the work of the Spirit. It is perception in the Spirit which allows Spirit-bearing members of the Church in every generation to determine whether practices which have been inherited from the past do or do not genuinely belong to Holy Tradition.
A practice which has been virtually universal for a millennium or more might still not belong to Holy Tradition. To give an example, it has been convincingly shown in our own time that the universal practice of over a millennium of regular attendance at the Liturgy but infrequent reception of Holy Communion by the laity – a practice which has actually been enjoined by canons of local synods, encyclical letters, monastic rules, the advice of spiritual fathers, and the imposition of impeding restrictions of fasting, abstinence of marital relations, attendance at or reciting of offices and the like – not only does not belong to Holy Tradition, but is in fact inconsistent with it. But before we judge, let us note the words of Christ: “I have many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now”. In every age there are those things we can bear and those things we cannot bear. The Holy Spirit is patient and, although it always witnesses to Holy Tradition in its fullness, it never forces us to bear more than we can bear, to grasp what cultural constraints make it impossible to grasp in our own time. When the time is ripe, then the Spirit will enable us to bear, will speak to us of, things which have been contained within the Holy Tradition from the beginning.Holy Tradition, we can also see, involves not only the authentication of Revelation by the Spirit of Truth, but also transmission of the message in the Spirit. As reception of the Sacraments can only take place within the Church, so with Holy Tradition. Indeed as the traditio symboli bears witness, the receiving and handing back of Holy Tradition is really in itself sacramental. For this reason, the Church, has always stressed the importance, on the one hand, of transmission within the context of the liturgical life of the Church by duly ordained or appointed ministers, and, on the other, by Spiritual Father (and Mothers) who are recognised by the faithful as true bearers of the Spirit.Finally, let us note the Trinitarian character of the transmission and receiving of Holy Tradition. The Spirit, which bears witness to the Son and guides us into all truth, proceeds from the Father, but is sent by the Son to the Church. Moreover, it is only by the Son that we can come to the Father. In receiving and handing back of Holy Tradition we are indeed sharing in the life of the Holy Trinity itself; not in its essence, of course, but by virtue of the Divine energies.The Holy Tradition in which we live today is the same Holy Tradition in which the Apostles lived after Pentecost, although the Spirit is continuously acting and making all things new for each succeeding generation. Holy Tradition is, therefore, one and the same thing as the life of the Church Herself within the Holy Spirit; indeed, in a sense, it is the Spirit moving in the Church. The Holy Spirit is both the life-giver and the Spirit of truth, the witness and counsellor. Hence, the appropriateness of the conjunction of “Tradition” and “Life” as the theme of this Conference. Holy Tradition is indeed the very life in its fullness of the Church Herself.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Anyone who has any familiarity with contemporary Orthodox Theology will almost certainly detect my substantial debt to Vladimir Lossky’s analysis of Tradition. Material assistance was also provided by two papers published by Sobornost, one by Constantine Scouteris and the other by George Dragas. In addition, I must acknowledge my debt to the papers given by Archbishop Stylianos and Professor Yannaras at the National Youth Conference and to a number of entries in that invaluable reference work, The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church (notably Traditio Symboli and Tradition). The quote from The Singer of Tales was taken from Marshall McLuhan’s, The Gutenberg Galaxy, a work which I found particularly helpful for one section of the paper. The New testament quotations are from the Revised Standard Version. Finally I would like to thank organisers, all those involved in typing at any stage and especially Athena Sclavenitis, who translated the English text into Greek, for their industry, patience and cheerful goodwill.
REFERENCES
Dragas, G. “Holy Spirit and Tradition: The Writings of St. Athanasius”, Sobornost, N.S. 1, 1, 1979, pp. 51-72.
Lossky, V., “Tradition and Traditions”, In the Image and Likeness of God, London & Oxford: Mowbrays, 1975, pp. 141-168.
McLuhan, M., The Gutenberg Galaxy: The Making of Typographic Man, London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1962.
Scouteris, C., “Paradosis: The Orthodox Understanding of Tradition”, Sobornost, N.S. 4, 1, 1982, pp. 30-37.
The following work is a summary of a recent parish fellowship discussion. The theme as the title suggests was a discussion that explored some of the key themes of the work and life of St Gregory Palamas. This is not an exhaustive study but an outline of what was examined, and a basic appraisal for Orthodox Christian spiritual practice.
Introduction: The Quest for Knowledge of God
In the 1300s, as history attests to, there was immense controversy over whether people can come to know God. The trigger for this debate was inspired by the Athonite practice of “Hesychia” (roughly translated as internal silence), which involved the use of the ascetical life to cultivate and perfect a meditative prayer that sought to purge a monk of any distractions, and devote all efforts towards being receptive to God. The method of prayer centred around the recital of the “Jesus prayer”, while the monk who sought to instill within themselves, internal stillness and silence devoid of any distractions, remained stationary on a very low stool, crouching forwards with one leg outstretched to stabilise themselves, and the other tucked under the stool to stabilise the stool.
In leaning forwards, they would have the left hand (symbolising the hand which is closely connected with the heart) opened and placed on the forehead (as a symbol representing the mind); while the right hand held in the form of invoking the cross (three fingers clasped together and the last two pointed down against the palm) pressed against the chest where it is closest to the heart, in order to express the unity of the most crucial elements of a person’s being, the heart and mind. The monks would spend hours in isolation crouched over in this uncomfortable position reciting continuously the Jesus prayer, in the hope of attaining knowledge of God through either vision (theoria) or experience (peira).
Many monastic practitioners of this particular prayer devotion were illiterate but charismatic figures. Nonetheless, some very clever and intellectual Calabrian monastics, who had been influenced by exposure to Thomas Aquinas’ application of Aristotelian thought on knowledge (gnosis) of God within a Christian context, objected to this practice of “Hesychasm”. Prominent amongst them, was a certain Barlaam, who was joined by Gregory Akindynos, in denouncing the claims of Athonite monks who had asserted that they had attained “knowledge” (gnosis) of God.
These well educated protestors, correctly drew upon Scripture by citing that no one can “know” God, otherwise they would be dead since humans are incapable of withstanding perception or experience of God in His entirety. As true as this point may be, it overlooked key distinctions, while the alternate argument Barlaam and Gregory Akindynos put forward contradicted this point in their advocacy of knowledge (following Aristotelian thought), which could only be attained through the prism of rationale and logic.[1] It thus denied the possibility of attaining knowledge through other means such as experience or through the senses, which are other faculties of human discernment.
Palamas: The Struggle to come to terms with Gnosis
Enter St Gregory Palamas, who observed carefully the arguments of both sides, but noted the flaws of Barlaam’s faction. The flaw noted earlier, was the failure to recognise a key distinction with regards to divine knowledge, in that whatever knowledge we attain of God is the blessing of revelation, that is, what God allows to reveal of Himself to us created beings, for us to participate in. How this revelation occurs is not restricted to any particular means, nor confined to the realm of rationale and logic. Yet this acquired knowledge, which is a gift of grace, is not exhaustive or complete because God is infinite, whereas we as humans are only capable of receiving brief glimpses and revelations of an eternal existence of the supreme Divine Being.
It is for this reason, Palamas then reiterates and highlights historical-traditional Christian belief that God is a mystery that cannot be grasped by the mind or experienced in His entirety because we can never have the faculty to perceive God unless we are God ourselves, which of course is an impossibility. Consequently, Palamas points out in one of his treatises, that the Exodus account of when Moses ascends Horeb, that he could only perceive the light emanating from the Burning Bush (and a brief glimpse of what seemed to be the back and shoulder of a person), which forced him to look downwards. Then as the dialogue proceeded between God and Moses, Moses inquired after God’s name, to which he was answered by God with the enigmatic response, “I Am”.
The response, initially may have seemed difficult to comprehend or interpret, because it revealed a deep eternal truth that cannot be defined or constricted by the designation of a name. For God to assert “I Am”, is to indicate “I Exist”, “I Live”, “I Function”, irrespective of time or place, not confined by the created universe or the natural world. That He existed before the presence of time or the universe that we know, and yet will continue to exist when all of this that we know ceases to exist or disappears. To ascribe a name would be to try to set parameters around God whose very presence or existence knows no bounds. The so-called names, or more precisely “titles”, that humanity ascribes to God refer specifically to His attributes and His workings within our worldly reality. Such titles as the Almighty, the All-Merciful, Creator, Deliverer, Sustainer, Holy Trinity, Son of Man, Emmanuel, Comforter, Lord and so forth, are but a sample of the names and titles that humans have designated to God, based on what God has revealed of Himself and manifested through His actions within the world.
Pauline Inspiration
As a result, St Paul builds on this revelation of Exodus, when he says in his epistle (Rom. 1:20): “For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so they are without excuse”.
To put it into other, but clearer terms, St Paul identifies that there is a distinction between the essence and energies of God. The manifestation, expression or revelation of God’s attributes and presence within this world, are the divine energies at work within our own created reality. Thus we are able to perceive, experience and even come to know something of God through these energies, even though we “are made” (created) as St Paul says. It is from these that we can deduce some sort of perception, even if vague, the sheer power and divinity of God’s being, and the essence which emanates from that identity.
Accordingly, St Paul implies that we can know God through the presence and functioning of creation, whether it be a tree, an animal, a mountain, the tidal waves of the sea, the stars and so forth, they all bear the fingerprint of God’s creative endeavour. Yet their fine-tuned functioning within a complex cyclical pattern of life, death or formation, demonstrate that the creative process is not a one-off event, but one that is ongoing and that is sustained by God. For example the collision of tectonic plates and subsequent earthquakes are the means by which mountains are formed, that in turn act as a catchment for all kinds of moisture. From moisture gathered within mountains, rivers are born, which flow down to lowlands and out to sea, thus providing water that sustains plant and animal life.
Volcanoes arise from tectonic movement, acting as a release valve for the pressure created by tectonic collisions, yet their eruptions bestow fertility to land or provide useful stones and minerals. Many of the world’s best farmlands for example are the product of volcanic action. Such examplesof“natural”revelations of God’s energies within the world consequentlyremindus of some of the very epithets we ascribe to Him. To which our attention is then brought to meditate upon the immensity and awe that is the infinite mystery of God and His very essence.
This of course is possible to be perceived by all peoples of the world. Yet those who strive to follow the ways of God, there is also the “spiritual” or “cosmological” revelation of God’s energies, which help us to come and know God as best we can as finite beings. It is to this that St Paul also implies in his statement to the Romans, to which St Gregory Palamas draws upon, making the clear link with the Christian liturgical life, manual labour and rule of prayer to which the “Hesychasts” adhered to, in order to attain knowledge of God.
In this way St Gregory Palamas was able to correct Barlaam’s misunderstanding, by drawing his attention to this particular distinction between God’s essence and internal life which we could never know; while on the other hand experience God’s energies which reveal to our knowledge something of the infinite mystery of God who neither has a beginning nor an end, but eternally exists.
The Use of Analogies
St Gregory of course cited many examples within Scripture, particularly events of “Theophanies” to illustrate this point. His favourite reference point seemed to be his discussion of the events of the Transfiguration, whereby three of the Disciples, Peter, John and James, were exposed to a foretaste of the divine being of Christ. The divine light that shone forth from Christ, overwhelmed and bombarded the senses of these three Disciples who as a result had to duck down, cover their faces, while try to find some means to shelter themselves from this awesome power which revealed to their senses, a knowledge of God and participation in the infinite mystery of His being.
Of course this was to the extent that Christ was willing to manifest to them this mystery, in accordance to their ability to receive such revelational knowledge. It is at this point that St Gregory then provides various analogies to illustrate how one can discern the differences between essence and energies of God. His most famous and well known analogy inspired by various texts of the Pauline epistles, especially the previously mentioned Rom. 1:20 quote, gave rise to his reference to the sun. According to Palamas, this great orb of fire within our cosmos, could not be gazed upon by the human eye for long, nor could a human approach it and survive its sheer power and heat, should they ever have the means to journey to it.
Yet, in spite of these limitations that humanity may confront, we are still capable of knowing to the extent of our ability to perceive, the very power and force of the sun through experiencing the radiance of its energies of light and heat that help sustain growth and life upon our planet. The concrete implications of Palamas’ analogy upon human existence, is that the gift of God’s love, that is being born in God’s image, sets us on a life-long journey of faith and discovery towards returning to God and attaining in cooperation with His grace, the fulfillment of being in His likeness.
What is the Framework?
The experiences we attain along this journey help build our knowledge base of who God is and how we best mimic and follow His love and being. These points upon the journey of return towards our divine origins in God, sustain us, but also reveal the direction along the path that we need to follow or return to if we have veered off its course. This knowledge also reveals how far we have progressed or need to progress. However, God does not abandon us to our own devices like orphans without love or protection, seeking to learn without help on how to survive. Palamas like Christians before him, and eloquently expressed in greater detail after him by St Nicholas Cabasilas, that the setting and framework for the acquisition of divine knowledge in the journey towards likeness of God, is inevitably the Church and its liturgical life and rites.
This “mystagogical” (sacramental and liturgical) approach has its foundations by one being based within a parish, experiencing and interacting with its cycle of life, partaking within the mysteries[2] that it administers and guided by the counsel of its appointed spiritual father. All of this is geared towards each believer in “experiencing” God through His energies, and thus engage into a deeper relationship (personal and communal) with Him along our journey of transformation. In doing this, we carry our cross of ignorance and incompleteness along this journey, so that every obstacle, personal failing, doubt, or misconception, shall be crucified upon it and thus purify us and make us receptive to God’s knowledge. In this way we may witness and experience our own regeneration and renaissance of being and meaning.
That is, to go from our own potential (being in the image of God) towards the full realisation and manifestation of that potentiality (becoming by grace in the likeness of God). This approach, which through the physical manifestation of the mysteries, initiates us into an eternal existential mystery, which is a life in and with God. The immense number and variety of mysteries and liturgical services within Orthodoxy have the express purpose of bringing all peoples into communion with God, to be empowered by Him through the energies of His infinite attributes and attain the supreme knowledge of divine wisdom, which St Paul in his first letter to the Corinthians cites, is living in the being of love (agape).
Reflections & Implications for Orthodox Spirituality
Within present-day Orthodox Christianity much premium, as it was in Palamas’ time, is given to monasticism which maintains a strong presence within the Church’s spiritual life. These bulwarks of prayer and grace, even if they are not perfect, exist to allow the faithful to “recharge their spiritual batteries” by offering a very austere setting in which to engage unhindered their journey towards God, utilising the daily cycle of services, confession, fasts and manual labour to cultivate this objective.
These centres of spirituality seek to “reenergise” and strengthen the wider Church beyond their own confines by offering to God worship, and engage in dialogue (prayer that is) with Him, while the outer world is too preoccupied in the ongoing struggle for survival.[3] This is the particular strength of the monastic calling and why it features so prominent within Orthodox spirituality, for it has deliberately removed any obstacles preventing the fulfillment of executing the complete cycle of the Church’s liturgical services. Yet we must remember that this mode of faith, has its origins within the communal mode of parish life and thus is a reflection of it. For monks are not “born” as they are, but are first introduced to their vocation via the liturgical life of a parish.
Regretfully in our modern times, in many places, parishes struggle to maintain the complete daily cycles of services and mysteries, or to cultivate parish life and sense of community, thus witnessing the virtual monopolisation of Orthodox spirituality by monasticism, more specifically the “Athonite” tradition of monasticism.
However, these trends tend to follow a cyclical pattern, since they follow the changes, demographics, developments and responses of the faithful in every generation towards the call for divine participation. It is to that our blessed father amongst the Saints sought to defend.
Dedicated to the memory of Nikos Nicolaou, an Orthodox Christian who sought to ensure the welfare and benefit of others before himself, ignoring his own troubles and afflictions. To his family who benefited and learned from his example, may the prayers of the faithful be with you and bestow strength. Eternal is Nikos’ memory! -VM
[1] Something that European Enligtenment philosophers espoused later on in human history.
[2] Rites/Sacraments. In Orthodox terminology, our Church does not particularly like the word “sacrament” because it does not convey the full meaning of the rites of the Church. It calls them “mysteries” because they are physical expressions and manifestations which initiate us and make us partakers of eternal truths/realities which are ever present throughout time and indelibly linked to God. These physical manifestations which we call mysteries are closely tied to the liturgical life, and thus the more appropriate terms for the Christian perspective, specifically within Orthodoxy, is mystagogy or the mystagogical approach (Compound of “mystos/mysterion” and “agogeo” – verb for struggle and initiation). We could call the Church’s rites mystagogies as a better alternative than the term sacrament, because it gives the full meaning, context, and understanding of what are the Christian rites. An example would be baptism which is an initiation into becoming a partaker of the eternal life by being physically joined to a life in Christ, which also means in His crucifixion and resurrection. That is why the baptismal font is often characterised as both as a tomb and womb, because our old selves are put to death only to make way for a new life and identity. It is an initiation into eternal life, it is literally being born again, but as the past continuous tense often used within many of the prayers of the service indicate that it is not a one off process, but an ongoing relationship with God, sustained by the Holy Eucharist and confession of sins. Participation in confession and the Eucharist are as one Orthodox writer cites are “born again” experiences that continuously occur as we are journeying along our path of being saved. We cannot say as some Western Christians claim “I am saved” as if it is a definite fact and one off event, because it is a blasphemy against God, for salvation is a mystery only God knows, for we often fall off the path of following Christ through sins, passions and doubts. The need to continuously strive to reconcile ourselves with God and follow His path is ongoing. We can say that we are saved in the sense that we have entered into the journey and are trying to struggle according to the ways of God, and for that God will observe carefully the effort we have made to join our will with His.
[3] This may seem as something ridiculous to atheists and secularists, who often assert that a person is running away from the reality of the world, and that we should just accept living in the world. However the truth is that people have developed many forms of retreat to help alleviate the monotony of life and work. There are for example the numerous forms of recreation and entertainment which provide people with diversions like clubs, cafes, pubs, cinemas, theaters etc. If there are serious “personal” problems then there are psychologists, counsellors and even psychiatrists (who prescribes medications) to which one can turn to, of course one has to pay for these services, but the point is, is that the secular world does the same thing but in a different way. What marks out the secular approach is the level of noise and interaction, there is not the emphasis on silence, prayer, contemplation, meditation and manual labour. There might be reference to self-introspection and the challenging of thoughts if one seeks out mental health specialists, and it is this which the monastic life converges with the secular perspective, but their approaches to this effort differ.
This gospel refers to the greatness of the role of women for
a better society. At the time that Christ’s disciples were waiting hidden in a secure place, “due to fear of
the Jews”, we see a few women, the
myrrh bearers, arriving courageously at Christ’s tomb without any fear
for their lives.
It was known to everybody that fanatical Jews were on the lookout to
violently attack anybody, who attempted through whatever means to steal
the dead crucified body of Jesus Christ, because they did not
believe in the prophecies concerning Christ’s Resurrection. They
thought that some followers of Christ would attempt to steal His body
and hide it, and then spread the rumor that He supposedly had risen from the
dead. This is why they insisted that Christ’s tomb be guarded night and
day by the Roman guards.
So, in the face of this frightful reality, Christ’s disciples thinking
logically, remained enclosed in a secure place, in the “loft” waiting to
see how the situation would unfold.
At the same time however, the Myrrh bearing women proceeded boldly
towards Christ’s Tomb. Under no circumstances were they afraid of the
dangers which the so called courageous men considered, who a little
while before were saying to Christ: ‘we will be with You to the end’; they claimed to be
ready to sacrifice themselves, but before “the cock crowed” they had denied
Him three times (Mk 14:72; Mk 14:27).
Finally, the fearless enthusiasm of the Myrrh bearing women is rewarded with God’s
heavenly gift of being the first fruits in the world to witness and see the Resurrection of
Christ.
These women became the first people to give evidence of Christ’s
Resurrection. Historically, we also acknowledge another great woman, who represented the human race for the Incarnation of the Son and Word of God to be fulfilled, and who led all of us to our salvation through Christ. It is our All Holy Virgin, Theotokos, who replied with humility to
God’s calling, “Behold the handmaid of the Lord. Let it be to me
according to Thy word”. These examples highlight the important status of woman within our
Church, as important and unique, with regards to the economy of our salvation.
Just as our All Holy Virgin gave her flesh to the Son and Word of God
for the salvation of all humanity, similarly today it is the woman, the
mother, the grandmother, the wife, the daughter who prepare with much reverence
and fear of God the consecrated bread which they give to the priest, who
as a servant offers it to God, Who in turn changes it into the Body of
Christ, and we with our worthy participation in the Sacrament of Holy
Communion all become the Holy Body of Christ.
Therefore, the role of the woman in this contemporary age, with its own failings and
multifaceted social problems, becomes even more important so that we can
have hope for a better world. For example, women’s contribution
in the protection and in the strengthening of the family institution is
something that is all the more necessary. In the face of crisis within
the family institution, many families suffer and separate. Contemporary
woman is therefore invited to play a brave, uniting, patient, reconciliatory
and affectionate role, which will protect the entire family body. When
the family is protected and stands tall, then the whole family body
moves forward progressively.
However, for modern woman to be able to respond to her lofty mission, she
is required with faith in God to have as an example in her life, our All Holy
Virgin Theotokos, all the Holy and great Women saints, and the Myrrh- bearers.
The first phase of preparation for following the example of such holy figures is to take our
children to Sunday school. The second phase is the example of the holy
life of the parents during day to day life. The third stage is the harmonious and respectable
environment which we create for our children from home. The fourth stage involves
our worthy and professional educators, who simultaneously constitute the
prototypes of moral or honorable examples. All these stages however look to our personal
preparation so that we might live in the stage/state of virtues with our
worthy participation in the holy life of our Church, in the Holy
Sacraments, together with our participation in the ongoing developmental, charitable, and
missionary work of our Church. In this way we become ready to develop an
enormous responsible consciousness in the local and universal Christian family, whose
presence in this disoriented society that we live in constitutes an oasis for
life.
So, in the persons of the Myrrh bearing women in today’s Gospel extract
we honor those women who are courageous, honest, responsible, devout and remarkable pioneers,
who with their works and holy attitudes, make all of us feel indebted and grateful.
We would like to bring to your attention a matter that has been debated in the public domain recently. Currently our Federal House of Representatives is considering proposals that would re-define marriage to include same sex couples. The Australian Parliament is asking for our views. Our Orthodox Bishops have already made a joint submission to the Senate (click here). It is very important to take the time to express support for marriage between a man and a woman. The closing date for responses is Friday, 20 April 2012. Please do not leave your response until the last day. The survey link is www.aph.gov.au/marriage.
STATEMENT OF THE EPISCOPAL ASSEMBLY OF OCEANIA
Dear Sir/Madam,
The Orthodox Christian position on marriage requires an adequate understanding of how the term ‘marriage’ is understood not only in our faith community, but also its broader societal implications. Marriage is regarded above all as a sacrament that has been instituted by God who created man and woman in His own image and likeness (Genesis 1:27-31). There is a strong biblical basis for this view, and the position of the Orthodox Church worldwide (not only in Australia) can never depart from the teaching of Holy Scripture. The union between a man and a woman in the Sacrament of Marriage reflects the union between Christ and His Church (Ephesians 5:21-33).
Those who freely choose to enter into marriage, enter into a conjugal union which ideally leads to procreation. Whilst not every marriage is blessed with the birth of children, every such monogamous union exists to form of a man and a woman a new reality of ‘one flesh’ (Mark 10:6-8). The implications of such within society are: Marriage is a unique relationship between one man and one woman wherein the human person is made complete through gender complementarity; Marriage is the very foundation of a family, which in turn is the foundation of society itself; Confusing the institution of marriage with same-sex unions will have serious consequences for religious freedom and implications for freedom of conscience; and Children should be afforded every opportunity to start life, grow and develop with both their biological parents, i.e. their mother and father.
Our purpose is not that government legislation should become a ‘tool’ to impose Christian ethics upon fellow citizens who do not share our beliefs. This of course would not be legitimate, given that we respect the free will of all. Rather, our concern is that the very institution of marriage, which has a Christian tradition of two entire millennia, should remain as it is, and not be confused with the political debate concerning the legal status of same-sex unions.
Prayerfully,
His Eminence Archbishop Stylianos (Ecumenical Patriarchate – Australia)
His Eminence Metropolitan Paul (Antiochian Patriarchate)
His Eminence Metropolitan Hilarion (Russian Church)
Review: Let Us Attend – A Journey through the Orthodox Divine Liturgy
Author: Fr. Lawrence Farley
Publisher: Conciliar Press Ministries, April 25, 2007
It is quite often difficult to locate in English, books that give a good introduction and basic outline of the Divine Liturgy for catechumens and those attending church for the first time. Let Us Attend is one such book that is an excellent study aid for people who inquire about the various elements of the Divine Liturgy and the underlying meaning. Of course there are things that regular church participants can also draw upon, as Fr Lawrence examines the various elements of the Divine Liturgy from a devotional perspective, as well as its historical development and practice.
Nevertheless the key objective of the author is catechetical in nature, so as to dispel the confusion, disorientation or ignorance that one might experience when being overwhelmed by the beauty of Orthodox worship. As the author contends: “If you would like a deeper understanding of your Sunday morning experience so that you can draw closer to God, then this book is for you”. The supplementary definitions, terms as well as the appendix which provides outlines as to the structure and practice of the Divine Liturgy in Apostolic, Byzantine and modern eras, help to reinforce the author’s contention, while illustrate Orthodoxy’s liturgical continuity.
As for Fr Lawrence, he is a graduate of St. Tikhon’s Orthodox Seminary in Pennsylvania, and presently serves as the priest of St Herman of Alaska Orthodox Mission (OCA) in Surrey B.C., Canada.
Q. Holy Elder, after the events pertaining to Noah and the Flood, what was the next crucial turning point for humankind according to what our Faith asserts?
A. My beloved child, since multitudes of people came into existence and repopulated the earth, once again the same problems arose, with people turning away from God. Yet God who foresaw humanity’s predisposition towards evil intent and freely making negative and evil decisions; He sought to take preventative measures by dispersing humanity over a greater area and distance, allowing them the freedom from social pressure to refocus attention onto their spiritual vocation. The purpose of this loving pedagogical approach, was to help encourage humanity to attain a sense of balance and proportion, while help cultivate a more harmonious and sound noetic[1] mindset, away from the distraction from evil.
However, in being blessed with the bountiful gifts of the earth and the joys brought forth from this blissful state of being, together with the beauty of the natural world, once again humanity became indifferent and unreceptive to God, or His guidance.
Then Nimrod (Νεβρώδ) the Giant,[2] who was a notable elder (προεστώς) amongst humanity, pressured people to accord him divine honours, and to build a great high tower. However Eber (Heber)[3] was the only one who was not cajoled into building the Tower, and it is for this reason that he preserved his natural “Hebrew” speech,[4] and it is from him that the Hebrew race is descended.
Yet within Tradition (Scriptural and Oral) where God the bestower of gifts (θεωδόριτος) and Accomplisher of All (Περατής), chose Abraham as the forefather of all the Hebrew races, that is all his descendants are known and named “Hebrews”.[5] Nevertheless, within the Old Testament, we are told that the builders wanted to make a name for themselves by which they will be remembered for by later generations. With this in mind, the builders proceeded in constructing that very high Tower, as a place of refuge and insurance against God sending another cataclysm upon humanity like the Flood.
For through oral tradition, the Tower builders knew only too well the reasons and the events surrounding the Cataclysm, and they were still able to go and see the relics of the Ark. It is noteworthy to mention that humanity spoke one common language, and as a consequence were able to communicate with each other and effectively organise such an immense task as the construction of the Tower. Yet God, seeing that once again humanity had lost their focus and was building a Tower as an insurance against being chastised for doing evil, He thus confused the common language they spoke.
Thus each person communicated with their fellow man in different languages, causing immense confusion, whereby no one was able to comprehend the other. Through this lack of communication, the great construction project ceased, and humanity’s so-called insurance policy came to nought. Instead it created greater division because the cause of humanity’s previous unity was sinful intent and not godlike harmony or attention to the cultivation of virtue and the effort towards immortality.
Either way, the place where these things took place, was named Babylon, because it was here that the speech of humankind became confused babble, that we today refer to as the numerous languages of humanity. As a consequence of these events, those people who understood each other because they spoke the same language, banded together to form their own particular group. With this accomplished, each group departed to settle in other places, thus forming many nations which populated the earth.
Unfortunately, many of these nations drifted further into error by becoming idolaters, others sought to worship the Sun as a god, some chose to worship the Moon instead, others opted to make gods of the stars, while many other nations instead created their own gods out of the fertile whims of their own imagination like dragons, while others simply became animists or used animal images as the basis of creating new gods.
The Persians within their pre-history for example, had blindly come to believe in a good and just god who had light as his symbolic representation and physical manifestation, while contrasting him with the god of evil whose manifestation and symbol was darkness. Yet Zoroaster a great Persian philosopher, corrected this errant belief, asserting that there is only one Divine Power and Being which had no beginning, but created the Angels which belonged to two different categories, that of good and those of evil. Those that belonged to the first group were the true Angels who dwelt in truth, while those who apostatised from living true to their purpose were the angels that became demons. However Zoroaster blasphemed, in the sense that God is not the author or creator of evil, particularly given that it is not something He wants or desires.
There are of course many witnesses to this supreme truth from amongst all nations, including those who are not believers, and in their own way testify to the truths that our Christian Faith would affirm and agree with.
As for our Hellenic (Greek) forefathers, there were many wise men amongst them who “theologised” (εθεολόγησαν) in many different ways, some in a good and positive manner, while others according to a negative and evil manner. Some of them called the Skies (Heavens) a god that ruled over all things and set their boundary since it encircled our cosmos. Other wise men referred to supreme Deity which lives and dwells in all of creation, with some naming this deity Zeus, while others ascribed the name Cronous (Κρόνον), in other words “time” (Χρόνον). Other wise men claimed that this reality was Hades and Pluto. Then they would ascribe wives and daughters to this cosmological view, like Hera, Athena or Aphrodite, then they would attribute to these divine or cosmological beings, human characteristics or allegorically attribute these characteristics upon these beings.
Yet within this milieu, there were philosophers and poets who did come to know of a supreme Creator God, who made the universe, such as Orpheus, Archaelaus, Sophocles, Plato, Aristotle, Andisthenes, Menander, Zeno, Cleanthus, Chrysippos, Archidaemus, Poseidonius and Hermes the Thrice-Great (Τρισμέγιστος).[6] Of course much of the things that these men had said or written, were passed off by their fellow compatriots as eccentric or blasphemous murmurings that they viewed as strange, unusual, illogical or completely unacceptable. Interestingly much of those same thoughts which were condemned or not accepted, corresponded with what was written within the Pentateuch (Torah) of Moses and its theology.
It is asserted in some quarters, that the reason for this, is because the source of knowledge was the Pentateuch which God Himself authored and inspired, while Moses served as His chosen stenographer. Therefore, as the argument goes, the oldest written book in the world is the Pentateuch. As a consequence, someone amongst the philosophers may have come into contact with its teachings directly or indirectly via their own studies, or through their mentors or even through learning about the beliefs and customs of the East.
Speaking personally, I cannot verify with any certainty any of these claims. However I would cite that the Pentateuch is one of the most reliable sources of divine knowledge and wisdom that God inspired.
As for the writings of those Greek wise men, I would attribute their contemplative search for Divine Truth as a miracle, not inspired by Scripture as some would claim, but as a result of God speaking to their hearts and inscribing His Precepts upon them. Naturally, God would speak to them in a manner that they would be familiar with and could comprehend, but did not bestow the fullness of revelation, since the peoples to which these philosophers taught were not ready or receptive to what they had to teach.
Consider for example the Jews (Ιουδαίοι), who as a nation had immense difficulty in listening, accepting or manifesting what their Prophets taught them. In like manner, the Greeks often had difficulties in receiving with an open heart what their philosophers had to impart to them. In both cases, these men of inspiration were harassed, persecuted or even killed, and yet their voices were not silenced. Particularly if we consider that many of these Greek philosophers not only spoke of one eternal God without beginning or end, Creator of all things, but even began to “theologise” (spiritually contemplate) about the Holy Trinity.
For example, Hermes the Thrice-Great, towards the end of his work “Theologia” where he speaks about the Holy Spirit he says, and I quote: “This Spirit holds all things within It’s care, by animating and giving life (Ζωογονεί), sustaining and nourishing all, grounded in and coming forth from the very spring (πηγήν), the Father, who like It, is one with It, and yet is also a [distinct] hypostasis”.[7]
Yet Plutarch, Plato and many others theologised (contemplated) upon the Supreme God who is without birth, eternal (άναρχον) and without end, and that through Him all things became (came into existence). Furthermore, that all good, clean and beautiful souls desire and seek out to receive Divine Grace, while those with an evil soul seek after detrimental things and thus create their own living hell. Yet these wise men also speak of an incomprehensible (ακατάληπτον) God who makes Himself present and known through His energies which are particularly perceptible to the nous, together with His divine providence and grace allows humanity to come to know God and that He is. As you can see, these very thoughts reflect clearly our own Christian theology and should be considered as a “Protoevangelion” (First-Gospel) that prepared and paved the way for the Greeks and all those nations that follow their customs and pedagogy, to receive the Christian Faith.
Yet to conclude our answer to your pertinent question, I would like to quote the Platonic philosopher Maximus of Tyre, who said: “Godthe Father and Creator of all, who discerns and presides over time and all ages, who is without name and is unknown and imperceptible to our human logic or reasoning, and whose nature and personhood (φύσιν)[8] cannot be grasped or understood. Rather we are grounded and supported by the voice and name of His energies, and therefore we ascribe titles calling Him, Creator, All-Good, Merciful and so forth”.
Translated by V. M.
Dedicated to Fathers Leonidas Ioannou and Menelaos Hatzoglou, as well as their families.
[1] Noetic comes from the word nous which is a Greek word which is difficult to define within modern English, but as Dr Guy Freeland would aptly translate it as “the spiritual intellect”.
[2] Gen 10:8-13. Nimrod is an interesting character within Scripture, because within v. 8 he “began to become a giant on the earth” which seems to tie into oral traditions which refer to him taking on religious overtones as some sort of overlord who wanted people to worship or reverence him. Thus v. 8 could possibly mean that Nimrod was putting himself forward as a divinity in place of God. Yet it is worthy to note that Nimrod is also the founder of Babylon, Erech, Akkad and Calneh in Shinar within Southern Mesopotamia (Iraq). He also seemed to have founded Nineveh, Rehoboth, Ir, Calah and Resen in Assyria within Northern Mesopotamia. It could thus be concluded according to Scripture, that the founder of civilisation begins with Nimrod who did not just establish one city like Cain, but numerous cities and thus spread civilisation. The world’s first cities and thus man-made “artificial” environments were founded by the world’s first murderer, Cain, and by the man who helped cause humanity’s disunity, Nimrod!
[3] Gen 10: 21, 24-25. A descendant of Noah’s son Shem, from whom the title Semite is derived, since it is asserted by the Bible that he is the forefather of all Semitic peoples including the Jews, Ethiopians and the Arabs etc. The emphasis on Eber is due to the fact that he is the forefather of Abraham, and it is from his name that his descendants become known as “Hebrews” from Abraham till the bestowal of the Mosaic Law and the settlement of Canaan, where in time they became known as Israelites or Judeans (Jews).
[4] Theophilos leaves this point unclear as to whether he means literally the Hebrew language, or whether he refers to the “natural” language of grace and prayer, which many others lost at Babel. However in view of traditional Jewish and Christian interpretations of Scripture, and this oral tradition from which Bishop Theophilos draws upon, the latter seems to be the correct understanding, since it assists the Biblical narrative; whereby Abraham is born into a family that has some perception of prayer and piety, and is searching for the true faith. According to Scripture Abraham’s father, Terah, takes his family and departs from the city of Ur with the intention of settling in Canaan. However Terah did not make it to the land of Promise, due to the fact that it was his son Abraham who would enter into the covenant with God. Thus Terah and his family settled in Haran in Northern Mesopotamia, with the hope of moving to Canaan. Yet according to oral tradition, Terah was a craftsman who manufactured devotive offerings and idols for temple and tribal worship cults. Accordingly, this was the spiritual obstacle for Terah from reaching Canaan; for when Abraham was called by God, one of Abraham’s responses to finding what he spiritually sought, was to destroy all his father’s idols in his craft shop. How he destroyed these idols and how he tried to explain away their destruction vary from an oil lamp causing fire in the shop to gusts of winds knocking down the idols onto the floor. Whether Abraham smashed them or burned them is irrelevant, the point is that it estranged him from his kin, and as St Cosmas the Aetolian cites prompted Abraham to take his wife and all those within the household who were willing to follow him and depart for Canaan. Thus separating the family into two groups, those who followed Abraham and settled in Canaan, and those who remained in Haran. Those who remained in Haran, reappear within the Scriptural narrative when Isaac (Gen 24) and Jacob (Gen 27: 41-46; 28-31) have to find brides to marry from amongst their kinsmen, that is, those Haran relatives. In Jacob’s case it was also to escape from his brother Esau’s anger, for taking Esau’s birthright blessing.
[5] Theophilos is pointing out, that the Jews are not the only people who are Hebrews, but acknowledges that Abraham is the father of many nations, and that many who were enslaved in Egypt, or adherents to the Law throughout the course of history, fell away from the faith and became separate nations or assimilated into other cultures. Like for example the Naphtali who became pagan and were assimilated into Phonecian society, or the Samaritans who kept the faith of Abraham but did not accept later traditions which the Jews adhered to. The topic is difficult because Theophilos is trying to define and identify an identity which crosses ethnic, genealogical, religious and social divides.
[6] Unfortunately, Theophilos does not give specific details, examples or even the titles of works that these men wrote, because he assumes that we are already familiar with them and their corpus of written works.
[7] We are not sure how the term “υποστατικόν” is exactly utilised by Hermes the Thrice-Great, but given the fact that Theophilos quotes this within the context of this didactic dialogue, we could assume that the term hypostasis here, is meant to mean “person”. Thus being in line with St Basil the Great and the 4th and 5th Ecumenical Councils’ use of the term “hypostasis” to mean person. This is opposed to early Alexandrian terminology, as utilised by St Cyril of Alexandria, whereby the term φύσις would be applied to mean person or identity.
[8] Again we cannot be sure that the term φύσις as used here in Maximus’ quote means nature/character, or to mean person/personhhod, thus as a compromise we put both because it is correct to say that we can never “understand”, “comprehend” or “know” God’s nature or His personhood. We could possibly experience it through the energies which emanate from Him, but we cannot “know” it.
The experience of Lent is a spiritual journey whose purpose is to transfer us from one spiritual state to another, a dynamic passage. For this reason the church commences Lent with the great repentance Canon of St Andrew of Crete. This repentant lamentation conveys to us the scope and depth of sin, shaking the soul with despair, repentance, and hope.
The only times it is appointed to be read in church are the first four nights of great Lent (clean Monday through to clean Thursday, and fourth sections of each ode are read at great compline) and at Matins for Thursday of the fifth week of great Lent, when it is read in its entirety (in this latter service, the entire life of St Mary of Egypt is also read).
This complex poem (actually a chanted hymn) was written in the early 700′s, and it picked up the adjective “great” for two reasons: it is extra-long (about 250 verses), and it is majestic. It is a liturgical poem consisting of nine odes. The great Canon was written by St. Andrew of Crete, a bishop who was initially a monk in Jerusalem.[1]
The whole Canon is a kind of “Walk Through the Bible”. St. Andrew begins with Adam and Eve and goes all the way through, exhorting himself by applying the stories and characters of the Bible.
Reading the Canon helps us see how Christians in the Holy Land, 1,300 years ago, understood the Scriptures. It is a way to time-travel, and actually joins them in these ancient Christian devotions which are part of the dynamic life of the church.
Father Alexander Schmemann says about the ‘great Canon of repentance’ that: “…with a unique art, St. Andrew interwove the great biblical themes – Adam and Eve, Paradise and the Fall, the Patriarchs, Noah and the Flood, David, the Promised Land, and ultimately Christ and the Church – with confession of sin and repentance. The events of sacred history are revealed as events in my life, God’s acts in the past as acts aimed at me and my salvation, the tragedy of sin and betrayal as my personal tragedy. My life is shown to me as part of the great and all embracing fight between God and the powers of darkness which rebel against Him”.[2]
Of the Canon, Father Alexander, continues: “The Canon begins on a deeply personal note…One after another, my sins are revealed in their deep connection with the continuous drama of man’s relation to God; the story of man’s fall is my story”.[3]
Father Alexander goes on to say that these stories from Scripture are so much more than merely allegories. He reminds us that even though we are each unique persons, we are all moving through the same drama. We all face choices that through the ages others have faced before us and just as we must choose the sacred pathway to return to God so they had to choose; and in their choosing have much to teach us, to remind us, to reveal to us the tried and tested path to life. And it is in this way that my own and deeply personal sin becomes the lens through which I can begin to grasp the real importance of His redemptive acts.
Part of the reasons that we are so vividly lukewarm in the faith, according to Father Alexander, is that we are too much concerned with things of the world, and we fail to remember the true heights from which we fell from grace as sons and daughters of Adam. This is something that is common to all mankind through the ages, but Father Alexander adds another element to this that brings it closer to the reality of contemporary life. He says: “Sin … is thought of primarily as a natural “weakness” due usually to a maladjustment, which has in turn social roots and, therefore, can be eliminated by a better social and economic organization. For this reason even when he confesses his sins, the modern man no longer repents … [he] shares his problems with the confessor – expecting from religion some therapeutic treatment which will make him happy again and well-adjusted”.[4]
However, the great Canon, says Father Alexander, reintroduces us to the truth about sin and our sinfulness. It directs us back to the culture of Creation, Fall, and Redemption where we may have some chance at once again to recall our experience and existential failures within our life, therefore repentance from sin is: “…the shock of man who, seeing in himself the “image of the ineffable glory,” realizes that he has defiled, betrayed and rejected it in his life; repentance as regret coming from the ultimate depth of man’s consciousness; as the desire to return; as surrender to God’s love and mercy … [allows confession to become] meaningful only if sin is understood and experienced in all of its depth and sadness”, as the rejection of communion with God.[5]
Unfortunately, the culture in which we live excludes the concept of sin or distorts its notion in relation to the biblical and Christian tradition. For if sin is, first of all, humanity’s fall from an incredibly high altitude, the rejection by humanity of its ‘high calling’, what can all this mean within a culture which ignores and denies that ‘high altitude’ and ‘calling’, and defines a human not from ‘above’ (according to the image and likeness of God) but from ‘below’ (according to mere biology or physiology). Sadly this culture we live in thinks of human life only in terms of material goods and thus ignores the fact that human beings have a transcendental vocation.
The biblical and Christian tradition of sin has a depth and density which the culture in which we live is simply unable to comprehend and which makes confession of sins something very different from true Christian repentance. For this reason the great Canon reminds and teaches us that the ground that we need to walk in order to return to anything resembling the “image of the ineffable glory” is a field that we too often leave uncultivated and neglected. For most of us, locked into the familiarity of institutionalised, rule bound, and well worn praxis the simple words in the Canon which have so much to do with acts of self-denial and obedience, are a wilderness of exceptionally rich and unfamiliar ground, in the culture in which we live and which shapes our world-view.
A Summary and Brief Overview of the Main Theme of Repentance
This poem, beloved by the Eastern Church, lets us overhear a conversation between Christ and an old man, who knows he will soon die and then face judgment on all the deeds of his life.
It is a dialogue between St. Andrew and his soul. The ongoing theme is an urgent exhortation to change the direction one’s life. St Andrew always mentions his own sinfulness placed in juxtaposition to God’s mercy, and uses literally hundreds of references to good and bad examples from the OT and NT to “convince himself” to repent.
Andrew asks renewed forgiveness for his known sins and the light to uncover any hidden leanings still within him that, if uttered, would show how unfit he was to talk openly with his Lord. Christ, in words found in Scripture, reminds Andrew of how all-inclusive the two commandments of love are, and how eager he is to greet prodigals when they return.
To many the mere thought of anyone having to face judgment will be terrifying. Imagine: an all-knowing God coming to question us, weak from age, about things we did in youth, middle age, and later years!
When, however, we hear this poem chanted in church, it will strike us as indeed grave, but still consoling because it shows Christ’s never-failing desire for us to become one with Himself. He wants to talk personally with us in the way God did with Adam in the coolness of the afternoon.
Andrew has a vivid sense of his own failings, but, despite this, the conversation between him and Christ is between people who love one another. Andrew is talking to his soon-to-arrive judge, but he knows Him to be presently anxious to help him put on the wedding garment guests need to wear.
The old man grieves over his past wrongdoing, but expressions of this concern are interspersed with memories of his master trying to find lost sheep or search for lost coins that have the king’s image stamped on them. Even more to the point, Christ condemns our failings because He wants us to be better and to live fully.
In listening to Andrew, Christ hears an old man who has spent his life seeking to find what his Master wants. Now, in these last days, that old man is striving to know whether there are unknown commands he has not heeded, or failings he has neither recognised nor confessed. From the bottom of his heart he is begging his Lord to help him become a good disciple; he fears being disowned by someone he loves and whom he knows wants him not to fail.
There is no better way for any of us to learn what God wants of us than meditating on the stories of good and bad men spoken of in Scripture. Andrew has been pondering on them during all the years of his monastic life. Now, in old age, he is going over in his mind texts grown dear to him and peering into them in hope of discovering lessons he has missed.
He does not, like some scholar, speak in an orderly way of all parts of Scripture simply because they are there to be read dispassionately. Instead Andrew will be listening for messages God set down for us to heed. In the light of those stories there is one more chance to find out how he falls short of thinking and feeling as God does.
Memories of past blindness renew his worry about wrong desires that may still be lurking in some corner of his heart. Therefore he keeps asking for both forgiveness for the failings he knows about, and help for him to uncover still hidden ugliness.
The great Canon shows us the thoughts of someone who reads the Scriptures in an effective way. He knows stories about God’s interaction with outstanding men and women from the past, and, as he thinks about them, he uncovers their bearing on him. So his impending meeting with Christ is not something unlooked-for; on the contrary it is a culmination of many years spent talking with his Master about his actions and how to make them better.
The church invites us to listen to this poem during Lent firstly, because we too will have to face judgment and secondly, Lent is a time for readying ourselves to rise into the newness of life made possible by Christ’s death and resurrection.
The church punctuates verses of the poem by inserting familiar litanies and other prayers well known to the faithful. These additions give us time to pause and see how Andrew’s words relate to our life. Most importantly, the church, after each verse, adds a petition we will want to make more meaningfully our own when we recognise some message in Andrew’s poem as addressed to us, something that will make us want to say:
“Have mercy on me, O Lord, have mercy on me”
By joining our minds and hearts to these words as they are chanted, we may, with the help of the Holy Spirit, gradually come to see hidden failings in our life, and so more clearly recognise our need for forgiveness and purification.
Because the great Canon has the possibility of taking on real importance in our spiritual life, we should make an attempt to say exactly what kind of poem it is. A well-known theologian, Olivier Clement, calls it “A Song of Repentance”.
As we grow older and have a wider experience of coping with the world, we will, as we pray, recognise how much we need to take a deeper look at what we are doing. We will discover unsuspected ways God’s commandments bear on what we are or not intent on doing. What loving God and our neighbour means will emerge gradually through prayer and meditation on scripture and our own mindset. Again, as this happens, our pleas for mercy and forgiveness will become more to the point and more earnest.
On each of the three Sundays before Lent, the church brings before us a plea for repentance, set to sacred music. Here are the words of that prayer:
Open unto me, O Giver of life, the gates of repentance.
For early in the morning
My spirit seeks Thy Holy Temple,
Bearing a temple of my body all defiled.
But in Thy compassion cleanse it
By Thy loving-kindness and Thy mercy. (Lenten Triodion, p. 101)
Before Lent the church tells us to pray for repentance, and then during the first four weeks of Lent it has us listen to Andrew’s poem. This proximity of antiphon and poem suggests a connection between Lent and the hope for repentance.
This theme stands forth in the opening words of Andrew’s poem:
Come wretched Soul with thy flesh to the Creator of all.
Make confession to Him, and abstain from thy past brutishness;
And offer to God tears of repentance (Canticle 12).
After looking at these suggestive texts we need to ask what the term ‘repentance’ means. Andrew seeks to answer this question by looking at an example:
David once joined sin to sin,
Adding murder to fornication;
Yet then he showed at once a twofold repentance…
David once composed a hymn setting forth,
As in an icon the action he had done
and he condemned it, crying
“Have mercy on me for against Thee only
Have I sinned.
O God of all, do Thou cleanse me” (Canticle VII 5)
A violent change came over David when he awoke to the fact that he had forsaken God. This response was not just another good action he did during his lifetime. It was a shaking experience and it profoundly changed his relationship with God.
To help us understand this let us look at more things Andrew says:
I fall down, Jesus, at thy feet;
I have sinned against thee; be merciful to me
Take from me the heavy yoke of sin,
And, in thy compassion, grant me tears of compunction.
Enter not into judgment with me
Bringing before me the things I should have done,
Examining my words and correcting my impulses,
But in thy mercy overlook my sins,
And save me, Lord almighty. (Cant. 1, last two verses)
Falling down before Christ because we realise we have sinned, asking Him for mercy, begging that the heavy weight of sin be removed, are all parts of repentance, and so is praying for grace to help us shed tears of remorse. David abjectly fell down before God as soon as he recognised that his actions toward Bathsheba and her husband betrayed his duty toward God. This discovery happened suddenly. David learned that God condemned his actions since by doing them he had forgotten God.
In his sinful state David no longer talked to God about his desires, his hopes, or his fears. Wrong choices had taken over his life. He had to spend his time thinking up excuses and lies to keep others from finding out what he had done. He did not even think of asking God for help. For the first time in his life he was walked alone without the awareness of the presence of God. What God does or doesn’t want was no part of his concern. This attitude was decidedly new for David. When he decided to kill Goliath, he did so because he thought it was wrong for an uncircumcised heathen to threaten those whom God had chosen for His own. Now only Bathsheba’s beauty filled David’s mind.
Andrew accurately describes David’s new experience as an awakening; and for that reason the words of the poem tell us accurately what repentance is and they invite us to see how, like David, and, indeed, Andrew, we can change our path even when we sin.
What is crucial here is the “once” of David’s mind fixed on Bathsheba’s beauty and the “later” of his repentance. Repentance is the decisive change that happened between these two moments. It took a special intervention from God for David to change. Repentance is something new and sudden like our being created or our Baptism.
Prior to hearing Nathan’s message David’s mind did not waver. As soon as he saw Bathsheba, he forgot God, seduced her. Then he started to worry how he could get away from the trouble that might arise when others learned what he had done. When his first efforts at a cover-up failed, he arranged for the woman’s husband to be murdered. Safeguarding his reputation filled his mind. For him to repent, something outside these thoughts had to burst in on his darkened mind because David’s eyes could not be opened of themselves; God had to intervene. God, unlike David, wanted their close friendship to live again. The wellspring of repentance is God actively seeking out the sinner and helping them change their mind, heart, and therefore their path.
God’s messenger, the Prophet Nathan, was skilful in the way he approached David. He came to the king’s court ostensibly to complain about the injustice some rich man had done to a poor neighbour. Nathan claimed this rich man had refused to kill any of his own flock to feed a suddenly arrived guest, and instead stole the lone ewe a poor neighbour owned and loved so much. A king in Israel is anointed to defend the poor against the rich. When he does so a king is doing what God named him to do. Nathan aroused this still uncorrupted side of David’s mind; and so the king with indignation asks: “Who is that man?”
Nathan’s abrupt reply: “You are the man”, brings David back to himself; and he was able to speak to God again and say:
Against thee alone have I sinned;
And I have done evil before thee. (Psalm 51:4)
David now knows his heart has for a long time been turned away from God. He had settled into adultery and murder. That turn of mind makes him worthless; he is just one more man fleeing from God. That is why he can say, “Against thee alone have I sinned”.
Taking Bathsheba and killing her husband are indeed sins against them, but by cheating them David broke the commandments of God and robed himself of his right to life. The parallelism between Nathan’s words and David’s deeds was so close that David’s ears were immediately opened. He saw how he was misguided and so pleaded for mercy. This is the true meaning of repentance.
Before his sin David of course knew the commandments, and was consequently, on one level, aware that adultery and murder were wrong. That knowledge, however, existed in a separate part of his mind than the operative part absorbed in Bathsheba’s beauty. In this sense, Andrew expects us to think of repentance as an awakening to the realisation that we have turned from the path of life established by God because of our corrupt choices and actions.
Without concern for what God wants from us, our life is trivial and has no true goal. But our desire to please Him joins us to the immensity of God’s activities and purposes for His creation. The first of these is His merciful and unexplainable decision to bring the cosmos and us, out of nothingness into existence.
Inseparable from this mysterious kindness, is His equally unfathomable desire to share His own divine life with us, to communicate intimately with us. He had no intention of creating us and then forgetting us. His coming to talk with Adam in the coolness of the afternoon is as genuine a fact as His creating us. He wants to share His life with us and asks that we share freely ours with Him. We know this marvel and feel guilty because we have not consistently tried to keep pace with Him in our daily life.
Andrew knows that his life and all of humanity’s life are encompassed in God’s divine plan. Astounding as it sounds, we are called to glory, to be with God. This fullness is already present among us; Christ by His death and resurrection has outdone evil and death. It is a mistake to think of the world and not see the evidence of God’s presence in it and therefore rejoice in it. The kingdom of God is, as Christ says, within us. It shines forth in the faith of millions living and dead (asleep in Christ) who display the truth of what He says.
Andrew writes his poem because this uniquely worthwhile link between us and the loving God is dear to him. We are to one degree or another separated from God when we fail to see God’s gift of life to us. Stories in the Old and New Testament spur Andrew on to ask pardon for the known and unknown moments in his life when he forgot to lovingly share his life with his Maker.
In this poem, written at a time close to the day he will face judgment, he is once more going over the record of things God has told us about Himself and what He wants from us. Andrew now wants to hear any messages God has sent him and that selfishness may have driven him to ignore.
This is the purpose underlying the long reviews Andrew makes of his life, in the great Canon. He is begging God to show him sides of himself that make him unable to be a man whose whole heart and mind are fixed on loving God above all things, and to love and serve his neighbour as himself. The great Canon is an effort to reach that purity of heart. It is a plea for full repentance.
We will not learn of Andrew’s past failings in any detail nor will we be privy to new discoveries he makes. He is talking to God who already knows what Andrew has to say and is waiting to hear the admissions it will be good for his disciple to make.
If we want to understand the great Canon we must remember the already mentioned fact that it is a conversation between lovers. Andrew does not want to disappoint Christ. Every genuine lover thinks he or she is not worthy of being loved. Each of us almost surely has just reason to suspect his or her words and actions have not always been what they should have been. These memories, though heavy, will not erase the certitude that Christ unfailingly loves each of us and is calling us to repair our past by living with Him. Because of our failures, feelings of guilt haunt us. Because of our blindness in the past we have reason to fear other impairments may be darkening our sight. True lovers unrelentingly struggle for purification. Andrew is asking Christ to make him now fit for their imminent meeting.
We too need to ask for this help, and we can count on getting it. It may however come to us in strange ways. God does not start off as a mere spectator of our actions and then turn into a judge. He follows each turn in our actions. The Holy Spirit in His mysterious way knows how to enlighten, strengthen, and guide us while still leaving us free to venture out on our own. God hears us when we pray, though He in His wisdom often fails to give us exactly what we ask for; a refusal is sometimes the favour we need. All of us can probably discover examples in our life when this was true.
God wants our real good and helps us reach it. He grieves when we are far off and rejoices when we return to Him. There is therefore nothing plain or prosaic about our life; it is mysterious because God is entangled in it and we are entangled with Him even when on the surface of our mind we are busy only with the people and things around us. Andrew knows that, especially at this late hour, he must talk to Christ about his past failings, so that by growing beyond them he can even at that late date become clean as God wants him to be.
Christ told us to become perfect as His heavenly Father is perfect. That goal stays beyond rational explanation; nevertheless it is, as we have remarked, the primary truth about human life. Squirm as we sometimes do, there is no escape. The only counterweight to our feebleness is trust in a God willing to help us meet Him on His terms. We can count on being more able to love, if we remember that someone has first loved us.
Andrew’s poem is full of examples from Scripture showing this truth about how God is operative in the world and in personal lives. Andrew is talking to someone who cares for him and in his poem he will share with us his reasons for thinking so.
Scripture to the degree we understand it tells us what God intends. It contains stories of God’s relationship with His people. That gives us a start on finding who we are. To learn more, we must search this record of what He thinks and keep on comparing it with memories of what we have in fact loved and neglected.
God sees the meandering of our actions and all their strange interconnections and unfolding, and He looks on them with the same loving concern that guides Him while He made and makes us. Nothing happens separate from this benevolence. Reading Scripture in its ecclesial context, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, gives us a share in this accurate sense of what is going on in the world.
When Moses and Elijah met with Christ at the time of Christ’s Transfiguration they recognised Him as the fulfilment of the work they had begun for the race of humanity. Christ too, a man like them, heard His Father praise Him lovingly and tell the Apostles listen to Him. They fell on their faces before the splendour shining from Christ and His two predecessors. Those Apostles had, unknown to themselves at the time, their own place in this continuing story of God’s care for His creation. At that moment they did not know their own future; they only knew it was good for them to be there.
Peter’s offer to build three tabernacles, one for each of the three heroes of our spiritual history, is, unbeknownst to him, a prophecy of what the church they would help to build would bring about. That same church, active in the whole world, is now making it ready for Christ’s return in glory at the end of time.
If, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, we are able to see in Andrew’s verses that which describes our own relationship to Christ, we are blessed. Each such awakening is a step on our road to sharing God’s nature by His grace. We, like Andrew, must try to uncover hidden complexes in our thoughts and actions that keep our minds and hearts apart from God.
The obstacles that halter our ascent to being Christ-like are idols, counterfeit forms that try to usurp the place of the source of life. God assesses whether we place priority in His creations or in Him, our Creator and source of life. When a person voluntarily rejects God, their heart is hardened and they “become impudent” according to the great Canon. This is so because instead of living as an image of God in light of Jesus Christ our Archetype, one lives as an idol, or follows the idols of their imagination as though they are the archetype. Consequently the unity of one’s psychosomatic functions “is ruptured” and the integrity of the person is shattered.[6] This state is mentioned at the beginning of the Canon where it offers a clear depiction of the state of glory and beauty of the human being as it was created by God, and the effects thereafter:
The tabernacle fashioned by God…
The first robe
That the Creator wove for me in the beginning…
The beauty of the image…
The beauty which was first created…
The first fruits of the original beauty (canticle 2)
This tabernacle, the human being, fashioned by God is what St Paul spoke of to the Corinthians as the body which is created as a temple of the Holy Spirit (1 Cor. 6:19). This body leads humanity to its ultimate purpose in life, to experience the delight of the eternal kingdom (Canticle 1). Humanity has been granted the royal dignity… the diadem and purple robe…and is wealthy and righteous… laden with riches and flocks. (Canticle 4)
However, humanity voluntary changes its direction or objective and becomes its own idol limiting itself to time and space, and instead of becoming a theological being capable of transcending itself by God’s grace, it becomes a biological one, “living by his [its] own nature”[7], confined to mere creation:
A famine of God has seized thee…
Knowing myself stripped naked of God (canticle 1).
We should note that although the most central theme in the Canon is repentance from sin, theologically, it does not talk about sin in the common sense of committing an error and the expected punishment from the Judge. Instead, St. Andrew speaks of sin as something that arises from deep inside, from a darkened and confused mind and heart. It is like a self-inflicted wound. He speaks of God as all-compassionate, rushing toward us with healing love, like the Good Samaritan or the father of the Prodigal Son. In this concept of approaching the tern ‘sin’, there’s no sense that God’s justice or honor have to be satisfied by Christ’s suffering before we can be forgiven. Christ’s suffering, instead, is the “battle scars” of His fight to free us from Death and the Evil One. For this reason, salvation is not just a “legal fiction” that imputes righteousness we don’t really have; it is life “in Christ,” saturation in the lightbearing presence of God.
After reciting psalm 50 of repentance, immediately afterwards the marathon struggle of the great Canon begins, and signals the time the whole of the human person is to participate, and is invited to purification:
Come, wretched soul, with thy flesh to the Creator of all. Make confession to Him, and abstain henceforth from thy past brutishness; and offer to God tears of repentance. (Canticle 1)
The ability to weep with a repentant attitude is regarded as a gift from God, something that a heart of stone or selfishness cannot achieve by its own power. Repentance is regarded as the first phase of transformation. The gift of tears or weeping for ones distance from God is a prerequisite disposition in reaching God.
St Andrew’s great canon teaches and instructs us to live a certain life-style appropriate and befitting of our purpose in this life. It demonstrates the sinfulness of all except Jesus and Mary, and yet it highlights salvation offered to all who are willing to repent and accept the ‘good news of Jesus Christ’, out of love.
Therefore the purpose of the great Canon is to help humanity become aware of the tragic nature of the unnatural situation in which it finds itself corrupted by sin. Humanity’s broken communion with God (humanity’s brokenness) is renewed by the incarnation of Christ which not only heals but also offers an irresistible hope, as humanity is oriented back to its Archetype. It is reminded that it was created in the image of Christ, and its goal is His likeness.
In the first canticle, the canon tells us of our natural state as it was before the fall:
As the potter moulds the clay,
Thou hast fashioned me,
Giving me flesh and bones,
Breath and life
The first line is directly taken from Gen. 2:7 “The Lord God formed man of dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being.” This signifies that the life within us is God’s own life. The life of all creation is in Him.[8] This makes more sense when reading the prophecy of Jeremiah which clarifies the incarnation of Christ:
“I went to the potter’s house… And the vessel he was making of clay was spoiled in the potter’s hand, and he reworked it into another vessel, as it seemed good to the potter to do” (Jeremiah 18:3-4)
God constructs mankind as a potter moulds clay. The potter has full control of the material at hand. The creator constructs (“Thou has fashioned me”) that which pertains to the body (“flesh and bones”) and to the soul (“breath and life”). Panagiotis Nellas affirmed this cosmological theme when he said: “These two dimensions of man unite the human person organically with the material and spiritual dimensions of creation, and make him a recapitulator of the universe, a microcosm.”[9]
This shows that mankind’s existence has origins, reasons, and cosmological significances rooted in God, since it is created in the image of God. Mankind cannot find beauty without its creator who initially bestowed the miracle of creative and personal existence; this is what it means to approach the likeness of God.
The great Canon is part of the Eastern Orthodox tradition, but really, it’s part of every Christian’s tradition; we all go back to first-century Jerusalem. The Canon makes more sense when you experience it in context, as part of the continuous flow of Orthodox prayer, liturgy, fasting, and sacraments. Within the Church, says Nellas, we have a different cosmology that incorporates a different conception of time and space. This is expressed by Byzantine architecture and iconography and is also presupposed by Byzantine hymnography. Everything in the Church seems a metaphor but in actuality is a reality. These anthropological and cosmological settings are to be taken seriously in order to grasp the church’s life as an active, decisive, and salvific reorganisation and refashioning of the limited dimensions and functions of the created world and the created being of mankind.[10]
By repenting and living in awareness of one’s brokenness from the source of Life, St Andrew inspires each person who reads the poem to struggle for salvation as did our forefathers. To achieve this goal, St Andrew transfigured scripture by personalising, interiorising, and subjectifying all biblical events and characters evoked in the poem (except Jesus and the Theotokos).[11] For this reason the poem becomes his own creative masterpiece, yet loyal to the Scriptures and Holy Tradition conveyed in the form of poetry; and it relates and penetrates each of us to always keep in mind our task, our salvation in Christ on a personal and communal level.
One the one hand, the beauty of the canon is witnessed as a theological treatise which leads humanity to repentance – to refashion one’s self and one’s environment. On the other hand, it is an ecclesiastical liturgical act that transfigures one personally, and in turn the whole world is saved in the one person who returns to God.
Conclusion
The great Canon of St Andrew, Bishop of Crete, is the longest canon in all of our services and is associated with the initial stages of the spiritual journey of great Lent. There is no other sacred hymn which compares with this monumental work, which St Andrew wrote for his personal meditations. Nothing else has its extensive typology and mystical explanations of the scripture, from both the Old and New Testaments. One can almost consider this hymn to be a “survey of the Old and New Testament”. It’s other distinguishing features are a spirit of mournful humility, hope in God, and complex and beautiful Trinitarian Doxologies and hymns to the Theotokos in each Ode.
St Andrew wrote the Canon to challenge the faithful spiritually. For Eastern Orthodox, all spiritual exercises are designed to heighten our perception of basic reality: Sin is much more serious than we think, and God’s forgiveness is much more vast than we think. Left to ourselves, we go around with Playskool impressions of what’s at stake. So the goal of all spiritual disciplines are to cultivate charmolypi — to use a Greek term coined by the 6th-century abbot of the monastery on Mt Sinai, St. John of the Ladder. Charmolypi means the kind of penitence that flips into joyous gratitude, “joy-making sorrow,” repentance shot through with gold.
There is a tone of awe and mystery that runs throughout its expression — a sense of seriousness and urgency for the restoration from the old Adam to the new Adam based on the incarnation. The great Canon provides the faithful with the tools not only to approach God but more importantly, to unite with Him. Its main theme is: repentance, the return form sin or the unity of the cosmos and the human race – as one creation united in love – to its Creator. The great Canon invites the faithful to utilise all aspects of their existence including all their senses to communicate with their Creator, in order to live with Life itself. For this reason St Andrew’s Canon contains both anthropological and cosmological themes, which include:
How we should think about ourselves:
Where shall I begin to lament the deeds of my wretched
life? What first-fruit shall I offer, O Christ, for my
present lamentation? But in Thy compassion grant me
release from my falls Mon:1.1
Desire to change – dialogue with the soul:
Come, wretched soul, with your flesh, confess to the
Creator of all. In the future refrain from you former
brutishness, and offer to God tears of repentance Mon:1.2
Recognizing Reality:
The end is drawing near, my soul, is drawing near! But
you neither care nor prepare. The time is growing short.
Rise! The Judge is at the very doors. Like a dream, like
a flower, the time of this life passes. Why do we bustle
about in vain? Mon:4.2
How to pray – Laments and supplications to God:
Thou art the Good Shepherd; seek me, Thy lamb, and
neglect no me who have gone astray Mon:3.5
OT and NT examples of righteousness and unrighteousness,
for the purpose of emulation or avoidance:
Do not be a pillar of salt, my soul, by turning back; but
let the example of the Sodomites frighten you, and take
refuge up in Zoar. (Genesis 19:26) Thu Ode 3:5
I have reviewed all the people of the Old Testament as
examples for you, my soul. Imitate the God-loving
deeds of the righteous and shun the sins of the wicked. Tue Ode 8
Therefore the function and purpose of the great canon is to reveal sin to us and to lead us thus to repentance, and it reveals sin not by definitions and enumerations but by a deep mediation on the great biblical story which is indeed the story of sin, repentance and forgiveness. It indicates to us the revealed Biblical world-view of humanity, of its life, its goals, and its motivation. It helps us to see that sin is first of all the rejection of life as offering/sacrifice to God; in other words sin is the rejection of the divine orientation of life, sin is therefore the deviation of our love from its ultimate object and subject, the presence of God, God Himself. By offering us this deeper realisation about ourselves and our life, the great canon restores in us the fundamental framework within which repentance again becomes possible, having now found the true dimension of our life by its guidance.
[1] St Andrew was born in Damascus about 660, and joined the Monastery of St. Saba, outside Jerusalem, at age 15. His intelligence and holiness were evident, and he soon became secretary to the patriarch of Jerusalem. He was a representative at the Sixth Ecumenical Council, and then manager of ministries to the poor, elderly, and orphans in Constantinople, and by the end of his life was Bishop of Crete.
[2] Alexander Schmemann, Great Lent (New York: St Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1996), 63-67.
[3] Alexander Schmemann, Great Lent (New York: St Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1996), 63-67.
[4] Alexander Schmemann, Great Lent (New York: St Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1996), 63-67.
[5] Alexander Schmemann, Great Lent (New York: St Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1996), 63-67.
[6] Panagiotis Nellas, Deification in Christ, trans. Norman Russel (Crestwood, N.Y: SVS Press, 1987), 179.
[7] Makarios of Egypt, Spiritual Homilies cited in Panagiotis Nellas, Deification in Christ, trans. Norman Russel (Crestwood, N.Y:SVS Press, 1987),175.
[8] Frederica Mathewes-Green, First Fruits of Prayer: A Forty Day Journey through the Canon of St Andrew (Brewster, Massachusetts: Paraclete Press, 2006), 6.
[10] Panagiotis Nellas, Deification in Christ, trans. Norman Russel (Crestwood, N.Y: SVS Press, 1987), 169.
[11] (Father) Doru Costache, ‘Reading the Scriptures with Byzantine Eyes : The Hermeneutical Significance of St Andrew of Crete’s Great Canon’, Phronema 23 (2008).
Orthodox Christian Reflections on the Book of Genesis
Author: Fr Patrick H. Reardon
Publisher: Conciliar Press (2008)
The intention of this particular book is not to serve as a purely exegetical work on Scripture in the traditional sense, but to serve as an accompaniment to the Scriptures. It does not aim to spoon feed the reader, but rather to help the reader to contemplate certain themes raised within Scriptural narrative. Thus the objective is not to tease out the multiple and infinite meanings that Scripture has, by dissecting and analysing every word under a microscope and then being diverted onto other ends and missing some crucial teachings or inspiration.
There are those who term such a presentation as narrative criticism, narrational analysis, or bringing things into perspective. Whatever you wish to call the book does not restrict you from drawing your own strength and inspiration from the text, but encourages you to meditate on its themes and in its own manner also exhorts you to read exegesies by Church Fathers and go and read Scripture carefully.
This particular book is part of an excellent series of works by Fr Patrick H. Reardon who to my knowledge serves as priest at All Saints Antiochian Orthodox Parish in Chicago, and had previously been an Episcopal minister and lecturer at a prominent Protestant Theological College in America. However his writings avoid falling into the trap that so many modern day Biblical scholars fall into, by observing the Scriptures as purely a man-made work or feeding dry, spiritless teachings which neither speak to the mind or the heart, but are nothing more than mental gymnastics and amusements devoid of genuine substance or content.
Instead Fr Patrick provides a balanced spiritual presentation with scholastic insight which remains firmly grounded in the ecclesial mindset. In this particular book he delves into the themes of the Book of Genesis with its particular focus on Creation, humanity’s role within that frame of reference and the appearance of the Old Testament Patriarchs and their role within God’s covenant of Creation. If any draw backs were to be cited with this book or the other works authored by Fr Patrick, some might say his introduction/foreword were a bit tiresome. This is because Fr Patrick begins engaging in a discussion which has not found a sound forum within Australia which pertains to questions over evolutionary theory.
Firstly we should cite that Fr Patrick is not an evolutionist, but he raises the questions posed by it within his introduction, particularly questions of intelligent design which regretfully here in Australia has been grossly misrepresented and subsequently misunderstood. From an Orthodox perspective as well as that of science, a theory is not a conclusive fact until it is tested, measured, observed and verified. Furthermore there are many different interpretations to evolutionary theory, not solely the Darwinian perspective, as the eminent Professor Ted Steele can attest having been chased out of Britain by Darwinists in the late 1970s for advocating the Larmarchian Theory of Evolution.
Nevertheless to give a basic overview to what intelligent design is, when Fr Patrick makes references to the debates within America, is that it does not advocate nor disprove the possibility of a Creator behind the formation of our present world, rather it observes carefully the complicated patterns by which life-forms have developed means to survive and perpetuate themselves. The theory seeks to focus on those things which can be measured and verified, and in this way arrive at some sort of conclusion, rather than make simple observations and test to theorise. For it maintains no “real” theory, at the most it simply asserts that chance and coincidence cannot be the driving forces behind evolution, thus challenging again the Darwinian view but possibly affirming a Larmarchian model.
In any case, I did not have a problem with Fr Patrick’s introduction, but if you cannot be bothered by it then do not be diverted from it because that is not what the book is about, and I would highly recommend it, as well as his other works for reading, like:
Christ in the Psalms – This book looks at Psalmic references to the Messiah and where one can observe typological links with Christ.
Christ in His Saints – This book looks at the various Old Testament figures like the patriarchs, prophets gentiles and so forth who became sanctified and even make reference to the Messiah’s coming, but also demonstrate the road towards salvation, and what is the role of a saint and thus their importance for us.
Wise Lives – Is a reflection on the Wisdom of Sirach
The Trial of Job – Looks at the Book of Job and the fundamental meanings that the Church and Orthodox Christians have often drawn upon.
Chronicles of History and Worship – Looks at the Book of Chronicles as a meaningful book with spiritual and ethical meaning for us today, and is not a dry collection of historical narrative as some may feel.
Bertrand Russell
Book: A HISTORY OF WESTERN PHILOSOPHY And Its Connection with Political and Social Circumstances from the Earliest Times to the Present Day
Bishop Kallistos Ware
“SEEK FIRST THE KINGDOM” Orthodox Monasticism and Its Service to the World
Colloquy, Arts, Monash University
Colloquy is an annual, online journal publishing articles and reviews by current Monash University postgraduates, recent doctoral graduates and post-doctoral fellows in literary and cultural studies and related interdisciplinary fields.
Daniel Paul Payne
The revival of political Hesychasm in Greek Orthodox Thought: A study of the hesychastic basis of the Thought of John Romanides and Christos Yannaras
Daniela SOREA
MAXIMUS THE CONFESSOR AND RENÉ GIRARD: A HERMENEUTIC APPROACH
Demetrios T. Demopoulos
BOOK REVIEW: Light from the East: Theology, Science, and the Eastern Orthodox Tradition By Alexei B. Nesteruk Minneapolis, Fortress, 2003. 287 pp.
Denis Edwards
Final Fulfilment: The Deification of Creation
Denis Edwards
Celebrating Eucharist in a Time of Global Climate Change
Deno J. Geanakoplos
Some aspects of the influence of the Byzantine Maximus the Confessor on the Theology of East and West
Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy
The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy (IEP) was founded in 1995 as a non-profit organization to provide open access to detailed, scholarly information on key topics and philosophers in all areas of philosophy.
John L. Drury
GREGORY OF NYSSA’S DIALOGUE WITH MACRINA The Compatibility of Resurrection of the Body and Immortality of the Soul
John Meyendorff
What is the Orthodox Church? An Introduction
John S. Romanides
FRANKS, ROMANS, FEUDALISM, AND DOCTRINE: AN INTERPLAY BETWEEN THEOLOGY AND SOCIETY
John S. Urban (Eastern Baptist Seminary)
A Close examination of the concept of mysticism in Jewish literature and the Apostles Paul and John addressing the mystical parallelism primarily in the Mystical Union
Last Seminary
Last Seminary is an academic resource for Christian research and education. Database of over 5000 files, used in over 160 countries. Complete access is free.
Orthodoxy Today
List of Orthodox Authors With Their Articles
Patrick Henry Reardon
The Commerce of Human Body Parts: An Eastern Orthodox Response
Paul M. Blowers
Maximus the Confessor, Gregory of Nyssa, and the concept of Perpetual Progress
Paul M. Collins
COMMUNION WITH GOD, A PROPOSAL FOR UNDERSTANDING THE OUTCOME OF THEOSIS IN THE WRITINGS OF MAXIMUS THE CONFESSOR
Paul M. Collins
THE EUCHARIST AS AN INTERPRETATIVE FRAMEWORK FOR THE INTER-RELATION BETWEEN DIVINE AND ECCLESIAL KOINONIA
Paul R. Valliere
RUSSIAN ORTHODOXY AND THE CHAL L ENGE OF MODE RNI TY: THE CASE OF ARCHIMANDRITE MAKARY
Pekka Metso
Dissertation: Divine Presence in the Eucharistic Theology of Nicholas Cabasilas
Philip Kariatlis
Uploaded Works. He is the academic Secretary and Lecturer in Theology at St Andrew’s Greek Orthodox Theological College in Sydney. In 2010 he graduated with a Doctorate in Theology from the Sydney College of Divinity having examined the notion of koinon
Presbytera Fotini (Clare) Cagnoni
PERSONHOOD, HUMAN BROKENNESS AND THE THERAPEUTIC CALLING OF THE EASTERN ORTHODOX CHURCH: A PASTORAL APPROACH TO MENTAL HEALTH ISSUES AND DISABILITY
Scott Brenne
BOOK REVIEW: THE SHAPE OF THE LITURGY, by Dom Gregory Dix. 764 pp. London, Dacre Press, 1945. 45 s
Sebastian Moldovan
ORGAN TRANSPLANTATION AND THE ORTHODOX CHRISTIAN ARGUMENT FOR LOVE
Senem Suzek
THE DECORATION OF CAVE CHURCHES IN CAPPADOCIA UNDER SELCUK RULE
Seraphim Sepalla
Dissertation: In Speechless Ecstacy (Expression and Interpretation of the Mystical Experience in Classical Syriac and Sufi Literature)
Willem B. Drees
Religion and Science: Drees holds the chair in philosophy of religion and ethics, in the Leiden (in the Netherlands) Institute of Religious Studies, Faculty of Humanities,Leiden University, since 2001.
William E. Mann
Book: The Blackwell Guide to the Philosophy of Religion
Ştefan Buchiu
The Monarchy of the Father Cataphatic and apophatic dimensions
Alexandros Papadiamandis
Alexandros Papadiamantis (Greek: Ἀλέξανδρος Παπαδιαμάντης; 4 March 1851 – 3 January 1911) was an influential Greek novelist and short-story writer. Papadiamantis was born in Greece, on the island of Skiathos, in the western part of
Archbishop Stylianos Harkianakis
Archbishop Stylianos Harkianakis (Greek: Στυλιανός Χαρκιανάκης) is the Greek Orthodox Archbishop of Australia, and Primate of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of Australia. He serves as inaugural and permanent Chairman of the Standing Co
Basarab Nicolescu
Basarab Eftimie Nicolescu (b. March 25, 1942, Ploieşti, Romania) is a theoretical physicist at the Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS), Laboratoire de Physique Nucléaire et de Hautes Énergies, Université Pierre et Marie Curie, Paris. H
Dr Nick Trakakis
At the beginning of 2011 he moved to the Australian Catholic University, where he is part of an exciting team of philosophers of religion seeking to boldly push the discipline in new directions.
Elder Aimilianos
ARCHIMANDRITE AIMILIANOS (VAFEIDIS) IS THE FORMER ABBOT OF THE MONASTERY OF SIMONOS PETRAS ON MOUNT ATHOS IN GREECE, AND THE FOUNDER OF THE CONVENT OF THE ANNUNCIATION OF THE MOTHER OF GOD IN ORMYLIA, GREECE, A DEPENDENCY OF SIMONOS PETRA.
Erudit Depot de documents
Offers advanced and reliable services for hosting, preserving and disseminating scholarly documents
Evelyn Underhill
Evelyn Underhill (6 December 1875 – 15 June 1941) was an English Anglo-Catholic writer and pacifist known for her numerous works on religion and spiritual practice, in particular Christian mysticism.
J.S Custinger
James Sherman Cutsinger (born May 4, 1953) (Ph.D., Harvard University) is a professor, author, and editor, whose works focus primarily on the subjects of traditionalism and Eastern Orthodoxy.
J.S Custinger
Not of this World: A Treasury of Christian Mysticism (Treasures of the World’s Religions)
J.S. Custinger
Professor of Theology and Religious Thought – USC
John F. Haught
Professor John Haught teaches in Georgetown’s Department of Theology and was the chair of the department from 1990-1995. His courses include Religion and Ecology and Science and Religion, and his teaching and research interests focus especially on issues
Last Seminary
Last Seminary is an academic resource for Christian research and education. Database of over 5000 files, used in over 160 countries. Complete access is free.
Peter M. Kalellis
Dr. Kalellis practices individual psychotherapy and provides counseling services to married couples and families in Westfield New Jersey and the surrounding communities.
Philip Kariatlis
Uploaded Works. He is the academic Secretary and Lecturer in Theology at St Andrew’s Greek Orthodox Theological College in Sydney. In 2010 he graduated with a Doctorate in Theology from the Sydney College of Divinity having examined the notion of koinon
Rev Dr Doru Costache
Senior lecturer in patristics at St Andrews Greek Orthodox College Sydney. His qualifications are: Bachelor of Theology (Bucharest 1993), Doctor of Theology (Bucharest 2000). Current research , St Cyril’s formula ‘one incarnate nature’; the meaning
Rev. Metropolitan of Mesogaia and Lavreotiki, Metropolitan Nikolaos
Metropolitan Nikolaos (Hatzinikolaou) has degrees in Physics, Astrophysics, Mechanical Engineering, Biomedical Engineering and Applied Mathematics, Theological Studies, and Theology. In 2003, he received a Ph.D. in Theology from the University of Thess
Richard Barch
Especially his book called Jonathan Livingstone seagull
Early Church Directory
Great source for bibliographical paths to the writings of the fathers
EarlyChurch
Texts from the first 500 years of Christianity
Elder Aimilianos
ARCHIMANDRITE AIMILIANOS (VAFEIDIS) IS THE FORMER ABBOT OF THE MONASTERY OF SIMONOS PETRAS ON MOUNT ATHOS IN GREECE, AND THE FOUNDER OF THE CONVENT OF THE ANNUNCIATION OF THE MOTHER OF GOD IN ORMYLIA, GREECE, A DEPENDENCY OF SIMONOS PETRA.
Philokalia
A general outline of the four volumes from wiki. The collection of writings known as the Philokalia is often considered the second most important spiritual text for the Eastern Church after the Bible. Yet, the Philokalia is not just for the East – indee
Seraphim Sepalla
Dissertation: In Speechless Ecstacy (Expression and Interpretation of the Mystical Experience in Classical Syriac and Sufi Literature)
A Vow of Conversation
A Blog from an Orthodox Christian, a South African, a bookbinder, a former Cistercian, and – in an increasingly distant past – a one-time western would-be theologian.
Elder Aimilianos
ARCHIMANDRITE AIMILIANOS (VAFEIDIS) IS THE FORMER ABBOT OF THE MONASTERY OF SIMONOS PETRAS ON MOUNT ATHOS IN GREECE, AND THE FOUNDER OF THE CONVENT OF THE ANNUNCIATION OF THE MOTHER OF GOD IN ORMYLIA, GREECE, A DEPENDENCY OF SIMONOS PETRA.
FOCUS: Fellowship of Orthodox Christian University Students
This blog was created for the spiritual enhancement of members of the Fellowship of Orthodox Christian University Students (F.O.C.U.S) at the University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia..
Fr Alexander blog
If you click on the English you can download pdf’s of some interesting scholars
Greek Orthodox Metropolis of Boston
The Metropolis consists of 63 Parishes in the New England states of Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Vermont and four towns in Connecticut (Danielson, Enfield, New London and Norwich).
Hellenic College
Currently Hellenic College offers the following majors: Classics & Greek Studies, Elementary Education, Human Development, Management & Leadership, Religious Studies and Literature and History.
Hermitage of the Holy Cross
The Hermitage of the Holy Cross is an English speaking monastery under the jurisdiction of the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad in the Diocese of Eastern America and New York.
Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy
The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy (IEP) was founded in 1995 as a non-profit organization to provide open access to detailed, scholarly information on key topics and philosophers in all areas of philosophy.
J.S. Custinger
Professor of Theology and Religious Thought – USC
Jocobs Well
Jacob’s Well is the official publication of the Diocese of Washington and New York (Orthodox Church in America). It provides, as did the well in ancient communities, a place for the distribution of news and activities regarding the life of the Diocese
Kansas City Reconciliation Services
The vision of Reconciliation Services is to experience life together where every human being is treated as if he or she were Christ Himself.
Last Seminary
Last Seminary is an academic resource for Christian research and education. Database of over 5000 files, used in over 160 countries. Complete access is free.
Leitourgia Kai Qurbana
Leitourgeia—Greek, noun, meaning “public work” (”work of the people” being another common understanding), as in “liturgy.” kai—Greek, conjunction, meaning “and.” Qurbana—Syriac, noun, meaning “offering” or “Eucharist.”
Orthodox Heritage
The periodical’s emphasis is on Orthodox education, spirituality, sacramental living (as taught by the Orthodox Church and Her Holy Fathers), heretical / ecumenical awareness, prophecies by Orthodox Saints, and Holy Tradition.
Orthodox Missions
Information about Orthodox Christians around the world, particularly those outside of North America and traditionally Orthodox countries
St Nicodemos Publications
Constantine Zalalas is a layman of the parish of St. Nicholas Greek Orthodox Church in Bethlehem, he is known for his piety and faithfulness to our Holy Orthodox Tradition.
Sts Peter and Paul Greek Orthodox Church, Boulder, CO
We welcome everyone to visit our parish to experience the ancient forms of worship that existed in the early centuries of the Christian Church – which we continue to practice unchanged today.
The Missionary Association of St Cosmas Aetolia
The Association maintains permanent cooperation with the Patriarchate of Alexandria and the Greek Orthodox Missions located in its jurisdiction. Moreover, it has been working with missions under the jurisdiction of the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constanti
The Voice of Orthodoxy -Radio- in English
A programme by the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of Australia, in English. Every Wednesday evening from 7:30 until 8:00pm on Radio 3XY (1422AM).
Translating Alexander Papadiamandis
This blog is dedicated to Greece’s unforgettable literary figure, Alexandros Papadiamantis, and to my efforts to make his work more widely known to an english-speaking audience by translating some of his works for publication.
CIRET
Le Centre International de Recherches et Études Transdisciplinaires (CIRET)
Counterbalance
Counterbalance Interactive Library, offers new views on complex issues from science, ethics, philosophy, and religion. Here you’ll find extensive resources on the evolution/creation controversy, biomedical ethical challenges, and much more.
Dan Chitoiu
The Dialogue between Science and Orthodoxy: Specificity and Possibilities
Dan Sandu
EASTERN ORTHODOX THEOLOGY AND PRACTICES RELATED TO ECOLOGICAL ISSUES
Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy
The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy (IEP) was founded in 1995 as a non-profit organization to provide open access to detailed, scholarly information on key topics and philosophers in all areas of philosophy.
John F. Haught
Professor John Haught teaches in Georgetown’s Department of Theology and was the chair of the department from 1990-1995. His courses include Religion and Ecology and Science and Religion, and his teaching and research interests focus especially on issues
Last Seminary
Last Seminary is an academic resource for Christian research and education. Database of over 5000 files, used in over 160 countries. Complete access is free.
Lovethepics
Beautiful photos of Meteora and UNESCO World Heritage Areas
Metanexus
Metanexus is a not-for-profit organization that promotes transdisciplinary research into profound questions of human meaning and purpose with the aim of transforming our educational, religious, and civic institutions.
Rax Website
ENCYCLICAL OF ECUMENICAL PATRIARCH BARTHOLOMEW ON THE PROTECTION OF THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT
Religion, Science and the Environment
RSE symposia are organised under the auspices of His All Holiness Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew, the pioneer of this movement. The symposia have also reached out across different faiths and denominations, revealing the wisdom of diverse theological tra
Rev Dr Doru Costache
Senior lecturer in patristics at St Andrews Greek Orthodox College Sydney. His qualifications are: Bachelor of Theology (Bucharest 1993), Doctor of Theology (Bucharest 2000). Current research , St Cyril’s formula ‘one incarnate nature’; the meaning
Rev. Metropolitan of Mesogaia and Lavreotiki, Metropolitan Nikolaos
Metropolitan Nikolaos (Hatzinikolaou) has degrees in Physics, Astrophysics, Mechanical Engineering, Biomedical Engineering and Applied Mathematics, Theological Studies, and Theology. In 2003, he received a Ph.D. in Theology from the University of Thess
Synaxis Orthodox Study Blog
Synaxis is a unique Study group that began at Holy Cross Greek Orthodox School of Theology.
FOCUS: Fellowship of Orthodox Christian University Students
This blog was created for the spiritual enhancement of members of the Fellowship of Orthodox Christian University Students (F.O.C.U.S) at the University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia..
Fr Alexander blog
If you click on the English you can download pdf’s of some interesting scholars
Last Seminary
Last Seminary is an academic resource for Christian research and education. Database of over 5000 files, used in over 160 countries. Complete access is free.
Leitourgia Kai Qurbana
Leitourgeia—Greek, noun, meaning “public work” (”work of the people” being another common understanding), as in “liturgy.” kai—Greek, conjunction, meaning “and.” Qurbana—Syriac, noun, meaning “offering” or “Eucharist.”
Liturgica
Essays on Eastern orthodox liturgics, and chant
Mozarabic Chant
Mozarabic refers to the Mozarabs, that is, the Christians of Hispania (modern Spain and Portugal) living under Muslim rule. However, the chant existed before the Muslim occupation began in 711.
Nektarios Mamalougos
user name on Psaltologion: nektar. He publishes the services in order of the typikon for free use, off the psaltologion web site.
The Voice of Orthodoxy -Radio- in English
A programme by the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of Australia, in English. Every Wednesday evening from 7:30 until 8:00pm on Radio 3XY (1422AM).
Theandros
Online Journal of Orthodox Christian Theology and Philosophy
FOCUS: Fellowship of Orthodox Christian University Students
This blog was created for the spiritual enhancement of members of the Fellowship of Orthodox Christian University Students (F.O.C.U.S) at the University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia..
Fr Peter Mavrommatis
A teacher of Orthodox Studies and Personal Development at St Spyridon College Senior School Sydney
Hellenic College
Currently Hellenic College offers the following majors: Classics & Greek Studies, Elementary Education, Human Development, Management & Leadership, Religious Studies and Literature and History.
Jocobs Well
Jacob’s Well is the official publication of the Diocese of Washington and New York (Orthodox Church in America). It provides, as did the well in ancient communities, a place for the distribution of news and activities regarding the life of the Diocese
Kansas City Reconciliation Services
The vision of Reconciliation Services is to experience life together where every human being is treated as if he or she were Christ Himself.
Last Seminary
Last Seminary is an academic resource for Christian research and education. Database of over 5000 files, used in over 160 countries. Complete access is free.
Liturgica
Essays on Eastern orthodox liturgics, and chant
Lovethepics
Beautiful photos of Meteora and UNESCO World Heritage Areas
Mount Athos
Information about the history and each monastery
Orthodox Christians For Life
To present and support the position of the Orthodox Church on matters of the sanctity of innocent human life to all peoples.
Orthodox Church in America
The Orthodox Church in America, is the local autocephalous Orthodox Christian Church
Orthodox Heritage
The periodical’s emphasis is on Orthodox education, spirituality, sacramental living (as taught by the Orthodox Church and Her Holy Fathers), heretical / ecumenical awareness, prophecies by Orthodox Saints, and Holy Tradition.
Orthodox Missions
Information about Orthodox Christians around the world, particularly those outside of North America and traditionally Orthodox countries
Orthodox Observer
News Paper of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America
St Nicodemos Publications
Constantine Zalalas is a layman of the parish of St. Nicholas Greek Orthodox Church in Bethlehem, he is known for his piety and faithfulness to our Holy Orthodox Tradition.
The Missionary Association of St Cosmas Aetolia
The Association maintains permanent cooperation with the Patriarchate of Alexandria and the Greek Orthodox Missions located in its jurisdiction. Moreover, it has been working with missions under the jurisdiction of the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constanti
The Voice of Orthodoxy -Radio- in English
A programme by the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of Australia, in English. Every Wednesday evening from 7:30 until 8:00pm on Radio 3XY (1422AM).
FOCUS: Fellowship of Orthodox Christian University Students
This blog was created for the spiritual enhancement of members of the Fellowship of Orthodox Christian University Students (F.O.C.U.S) at the University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia..
Fr Alexander blog
If you click on the English you can download pdf’s of some interesting scholars
Last Seminary
Last Seminary is an academic resource for Christian research and education. Database of over 5000 files, used in over 160 countries. Complete access is free.
Philokalia
A general outline of the four volumes from wiki. The collection of writings known as the Philokalia is often considered the second most important spiritual text for the Eastern Church after the Bible. Yet, the Philokalia is not just for the East – indee
The Voice of Orthodoxy -Radio- in English
A programme by the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of Australia, in English. Every Wednesday evening from 7:30 until 8:00pm on Radio 3XY (1422AM).
Theandros
Online Journal of Orthodox Christian Theology and Philosophy
Colloquy, Arts, Monash University
Colloquy is an annual, online journal publishing articles and reviews by current Monash University postgraduates, recent doctoral graduates and post-doctoral fellows in literary and cultural studies and related interdisciplinary fields.
FOCUS: Fellowship of Orthodox Christian University Students
This blog was created for the spiritual enhancement of members of the Fellowship of Orthodox Christian University Students (F.O.C.U.S) at the University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia..
Halki Seminary
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halki_seminary
Hellenic College
Currently Hellenic College offers the following majors: Classics & Greek Studies, Elementary Education, Human Development, Management & Leadership, Religious Studies and Literature and History.
Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy
The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy (IEP) was founded in 1995 as a non-profit organization to provide open access to detailed, scholarly information on key topics and philosophers in all areas of philosophy.
Ken Parry
Book: The Blackwell Companion to Eastern Christianity
Last Seminary
Last Seminary is an academic resource for Christian research and education. Database of over 5000 files, used in over 160 countries. Complete access is free.
The Voice of Orthodoxy -Radio- in English
A programme by the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of Australia, in English. Every Wednesday evening from 7:30 until 8:00pm on Radio 3XY (1422AM).
Theandros
Online Journal of Orthodox Christian Theology and Philosophy
Author: Vladimir Moss
The Great Schism of 1054 had no immediate impact upon England until the Pope gave his blessing to the Normans, led by William the Conqueror, to invade England in 1066. For it was 1066 that the Norman “Crusade” helped impose finally and firmly Rome’s control over English Christianity. Many churches and monasteries were burnt, holy sites and relics desecrated, while clergy and laity who refused to tow the Papal line were killed, condemned as heretics, imprisoned and so forth. Those who were able to escape, fled to Byzantium, many men finding employment within the Varangian Guard (possibly in the hope to fight Papists).
Reviewed by V.M.
