Saturday, October 31, 2009

Orthodox Ascetical Wisdom: The significance of Humility

By Bryan Stiles

A Syriac (Syrian) Orthodox Christian monk in deep prayer

"And whosoever shall exalt himself shall be abased; and he that shall humble himself shall be exalted" (Matt. 23:12)

Humility is a door, among many others in the great labyrinth, which leads us to our divinization, so that we may become little Christs. Without overcoming ourselves, accepting our faults, submitting everything to the Lord…such a door could not be opened, therefore becoming a tiring obstacle in our wake. Our world, our America is a culture of egotism and the importance of self. It is a temptation that wants us to feel on top of the world, infallible and glorifiable - even though our sinful nature speaks the contrary. Our minds become distorted and our eyes misty, clouding the way to the path of Christ. I have seen too often people seek self-satisfaction in whatever they think and do or lie to maintain their pompous egotism. Such worldliness deprives us of what is the most important; such love for our earthly bodies and persona stray us away from the Good Lord.

Consulting the wisdom of Staretz* (Qashisho) Silouan of Mt Athos, we find he speaks on humility.

"Understand me. It is so simple. People who do not know God, or who go against Him, are to be pitied: the heart sorrows for them and the eye weeps....where there is pride there cannot be grace, and if we lose grace we also lose both love of God and assurance in prayer. The soul is then tormented by evil thoughts and does not understand that he must humble himself and love his enemies, for there is no other way to please God." (Material from Wisdom From Mount Athos: The Writings of Staretz Silouan 1866-1838, by Archimandrite Sophrony) **

Let us dwell on this wisdom, step by step: “People who do not know God, or who go against Him, are to be pitied: the heart sorrows for them and the eye weeps…where there is pride there cannot be grace…” Wherefore do we get off telling ourselves that we are TRULY good? “No one is good, except God alone”, said the Divine Lord. Pride is the toxin of the soul. The holy Fathers advise us to keep the heart pure from all impulses, feelings and fantasies of self, whatever they may be. But what do we do? We always fall back into the temptation of self-confidence. This self-confidence is a hazardous aspect in our earthly life. What we need to do is recognize that we are weak, wholly incapable of resisting the lure of the dominion of Satan. The less we rely on our delusional self-strength, and take on the reliance upon our Lord, the more we are able to stand.

“…and if we lose grace we also lose both love of God and assurance in prayer.” To lose such is a tragedy for a soul. We need complete reliance upon the Lord, for if we make the Lord, and not our own egotism, our protection, we will be ensured that the devil himself will not succeed in his temptation:

I will say of the LORD, “He is my refuge and my fortress;
My God, in Him I will trust.”
3 Surely He shall deliver you from the snare of the fowler[a]
And from the perilous pestilence.
4 He shall cover you with His feathers,
And under His wings you shall take refuge;
His truth shall be your shield and buckler.
(Psalm 91)

Even if we fall on this journey, which is quite possible given our nature, one must not be rueful over that fact we failed; that surely demonstrates one is pining over the fact that they failed to meet their own selves. That would then prove to us that only our self-reliance has been hurt. So that we may NOT lose the love He has bestowed upon His Church, the focus of work should be that we are sinners and that we need to put all our trust in God. He who does what the Lord has advised us to do, thanks God for rescuing him from sinking any lower into the self-cult of arrogance.

“The soul is then tormented by evil thoughts and does not understand that he must humble himself and love his enemies, for there is no other way to please God.” What other way can we please God than by following the character of His Son?

“7 but made Himself of no reputation, taking the form of a bondservant, and coming in the likeness of men. 8 And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself and became obedient to the point of death, even the death of the cross.” (Philippians 2:7-8)

The Eternal and Divine Son of God took the form of Man, subscribing Himself to a most humble form. He endured extreme humility for the sake of the world, by suffering, being mocked, and dying for the sins of mankind. What can we, Creation, do to live out our New Hope in the Ressurection? Pray God to forgive us and not again to allow us to be reckless, unwary, disobedient, and independent. Pray for grace and mercy and love that He who is All-Compassionate may help us abstain from falling back on our darker half.

I implore all who read this to not be tempted into taking what may seem the easy road, which encompasses accepting the temptation of Satan and the glorification of self. Pride, arrogance, haughtiness, and self-importance are all gems of the conceited man, which solicit what may seem an easy, comfortable life. Yet, what more is richer than glorifying others and the Lord? What more is satisfying than denying ourselves and taking up our cross? It sure beats what the other choice offers and the end result therein.

As the Nativity of Our Most Blessed Yoldath-Aloho (Theotokos) comes into view, let us pray that we may not follow the way of Adam, when he placed the blame upon Eve and the devil. Let us all accept the faults of ourselves and the mistakes that we have made and continue to make, so that each of us may never repeat the situation of Adam – for who wants to be outside the gates of Paradise?


*Staretz: A Russian term for the Syriac: Qashisho; Elder / Presbyrter; also meaning, "a spiritual guide."
*The Writings of St. Silouan the Athonite from Mt. Athos
St. Silouan the Athonite

source: http://www.socdigest.org/articles/03sep05.html

Monasticism and the way of radical peace


by Mother Raphaela

On this earth, peace is not an end in itself. We do not believe in an earthly utopia. There will be disagreements, violence, terrorism and wars until the end of time, for the prince of this world is still allowed to be active. As Orthodox Christians, rather than seeking peace, we are meant to seek the Lord first, and then He gives His peace to fill our lives.

In my own experience as a monastic, I find that there are several levels we have to deal with if we are going to find peace. I have heard monastics from other communities echo our own experience. In the middle of a time of incred­ible struggle and tension, with sisters at odds with each other and everything seeming to go wrong, visitors will arrive for a few hours or days and leave with the remark that they have found the monastery “so peaceful.” Of course in some instances this may be because the sisters have learned to behave nicely no matter what emotions and thoughts they may be hiding, but I believe it is something more than that. One of the great joys and inspirations of monastic life is to be living with people of enormous good will who truly want to be all that God wants them to be. It is amazing how such good-willed people can still offend each other, but we certainly do. If one perseveres in this life, one soon learns the sometimes bizarre lengths the devil and his minions will go to in order to cause divisions and strife in the monastery.

The “secret,” if there is one, to surviving in this environment, is never to forget that the others are good-willed; that each person is loving and striving to the utmost. Many of the monastic writers say that we should always consider others to be better than ourselves and I have found this to be very practical advice. If each woman remembers this, if she faces the struggle with the demons within herself without getting side-tracked by obsessing on what others should be like or should or should not be doing, then peace can and does reign.

This does not mean pretending hurtful behaviors and words have not been witnessed. It does mean not judging other’s motives and not holding on to grudges. It means forgiving one another from the heart “seventy times seven” each day and being willing to accept that same forgiveness for ourselves while realizing that we may be mistaken in our assessment of others and of situations.

As Orthodox Christians, we are called to spiritual warfare with all the weapons God has given us in the Church. As we persevere in this life of warfare, giving up all physical weapons of violence, we discover other levels of violence within ourselves. We do not need bombs or guns or missiles in order to kill. As each of us faces the venom within ourselves that slips out either intentionally or unintentionally in sullen looks, resentful words and hurtful actions, we may sometimes feel that the physical warfare of others may be less harmful in the eternal scheme of things. Yet no one, with the exception of the Lord Himself and His blessed Mother, has been free from this kind of sin.

I would say from my own experience that some of the angriest people I have met (and at one point I would definitely have included myself in that category) are unable to see their own anger. They become furious at the mere suggestion that they might be angry! They see themselves as very nice people — or at least as justified in their anger. We see this often in places like monasteries. People who have not faced their anger and find themselves stripped of their usual comforts and self-willed ways of doing things, can begin to act out — sometimes even in physically violent ways. But because they cannot take responsibility for their own anger, they will blame the monastery: I’m such a good, nice person. This monastery and these sisters must be evil (or today probably the word would be “sick”) because they are forcing me to act this way.

No one can force us to act out in anger. It is our own response, more or less conscious, depending on how responsible we are for our lives.

For most of us, it takes years and years before we can become fully respon­sible, able and willing to say: “Yes, I was angry; I did say (or do) that; I did mean to hurt that person; I’m sorry; please forgive me” — even when we believe that the other person meant to hurt us first. As we become like Christ, we come to see that retaliation is not the answer. Humanly speaking, we cannot rise above such hurts, but when we admit our powerlessness and are willing to accept the grace of Christ and grow beyond our fallen nature into His divine nature, then we also can say: “Father, forgive them.” Even when they themselves may not want or ask for that forgiveness. We forgive, not to get the final moral victory over our opponent, but in order to make room for the Lord and His peace in our hearts. We have to do this. We have to be willing radically to let go of others so they also can fall into the hands of the living God. How often do our best efforts to fix others and situations result rather in substituting our own fallen and limited solutions for the power of our all-powerful God?

This willingness to let go in love and forgiveness is the real power of martyrdom and the reason why monasticism has been called at times the way of “White martyrdom.” We give up ourselves completely, trusting that God will be able to act through us even by — or perhaps most especially by — our death — or the death of our cherished dreams. Any other motive for martyrdom, the kind born of hatred, desire for justification or revenge, etcetera, simply adds to the escalating violence — as we see so clearly in the Middle East now.

When we haven’t dealt with the roots of our anger, while we may be able to put a lid on it in certain situations, it will sit there building up steam to explode through another vent when we aren’t looking. Thus the phenomenon of the loving husband and father who is a vicious boss — or the other way around: someone who is absolutely charming at work or in church or other outside social settings, but is transformed into a monster by walking through the front door at home. I’ve heard stories from children of well-respected professionals such as doctors and even clergy, of their cowering in the closets until they knew what mood mommy or daddy would be in when they came home.

Once we have admitted our own inner anger and violence, we must pray and use every means the Lord puts at our disposal to come to terms with it. The disciplines of the monastic life aim at helping us to cut out this kind of anger. We have the opportunity to pray daily; to hear in the services the stories of others who have conquered through love and forgiveness; to be fed by the Lord’s own life of love and forgiveness through the Eucharist, to admit to our own sins and failings and receive the healing of confession; to read books by the saints as well as by contemporary professionals which can help us to understand where our own anger is coming from and how best to cut it out by the roots. And perhaps even more importantly, we have the opportunity to live very closely with other women whom we did not choose for any romantic association — strong women from many very different backgrounds. This is the arena where we learn to fight — using our anger rightly — against the thoughts and feelings that threaten to destroy us from within with a death far more deadly than any lion in the coliseum.

Looking beyond this arena of our daily life, today especially we are con­front­ed with a world seemingly driven by anger. While it is true that many of us would hope our country would always be pure and holy and acting from Orthodox Christian principles, we need to face the fact that this did not happen even under the holy emperors of Byzantium and Moscow.

If we as Orthodox Christians cannot have unity of heart, soul and mind, how can we be surprised at or judge others who do not have the spiritual riches given to us for our salvation in the Church? The Lord said: “But I say to you that every one who is angry with his brother shall be liable to judgment; whoever insults his brother shall be liable to the council, and whoever says, ‘You fool!’ shall be liable to the hell of fire.” (Mt 5:22) I would submit that it is a far greater sin for Orthodox to engage in party spirit, whether it be on the level of party politics or ethnic-jurisdictional differences or within jurisdictions, which seminary or mon­as­tery is “more truly orthodox,” than it is for Jewish Israelis and Moslem Arabs to be killing one another with external weapons of violence. “He who did not know, and did what deserved a beating, shall receive a light beating. Every one to whom much is given, of him will much be required; and of him to whom men commit much they will demand the more.” (Luke 12:48)

The only “label” I want to wear is that of an Orthodox Christian monastic. I will not try to define myself otherwise. For this reason, my approach to this topic has been to look to Jesus Christ as the only Way to both true monasticism and true, radical peace.

The more we try to sustain our own ideas about things, including what it means to be a monastic as well as a pacifist apart from God’s reality, the less our attempts to grow into His calling for us and to live with the peace that only He can give will be blessed with His providential empowerment.

I found that the Revised Standard Version of the Bible lists 426 references to the word “peace,” beginning with Genesis 15:15 “As for yourself [referring to Patriarch Abraham], you shall go to your fathers in peace; you shall be buried in a good old age” and ending with Revelation 6:4 “And out came another horse, bright red; its rider was permitted to take peace from the earth, so that men should slay one another; and he was given a great sword.”

I was struck by these “bookend” references. The first suggests the nice, almost cozy type of peace our world would seem prefer. To quote the Litany of Supplication: “That we may complete the remaining time of our life in peace and repentance,” finding a “painless, blameless and peaceful” ending to our life. And without this type of peace at least for some people, for some of the time in some places, life on this planet earth would be unbearable.

The second reference from Revelation gives us the other picture we face all too often in our world: God has permitted peace to be taken from the earth that men should slay one another. This is the other side of the reality we live with and if it is all that we live with, we can be driven to despair and insanity.

The literary genre begun by Tolkien’s Ring Trilogy is so immensely appeal­ing to people, I believe, because it plays on these two contrasting themes. The hero (or band of heroes) is called to go on an epic, often super-human quest through incredible dangers, treachery, violence, warfare and ultimate tests of strength, intelligence and endurance. And this quest is necessarily interspersed with interludes of comforting peace.

The word “peace,” of course, comes from the Latin word, pax, whose root is pacisi, to agree. Without friends and supporters who in some way agree with us; with whom we share a unity of mind and soul, we can begin to doubt our sanity. Those who find themselves surrounded by constant doubt and disagreement can persevere, but only through a strong, living relationship with the Lord Who is the source of all unity, agreement and therefore, peace.

I’m sure reference must have been made to the difference between real unity and peace and superficial agreements.

I would submit that any peace, to be a true peace, must be literally comforting. We have lost the root meaning of the word in our common speech — coming from the Latin word, fortis, meaning strength, modified with the prefix com, meaning together, we understand that at their best, times of peace and comfort are meant to give us the strength and courage we need to return to our God-given, demanding tasks. “Comfort, comfort my people, says the Lord,” in the prophecy of Isaiah.

Yet for us — and here is where I think we can see the danger of trying to set up definitions apart from God’s reality — comfort has degenerated to visions of soft pillows and blankets, easy chairs and walking shoes that may indeed help us to find necessary relaxation, yet may also tempt us away from our higher calling and enervate us rather than strengthen us.

And I think this is the difficulty with some approaches to pacifism. If peace for someone means being unendingly comfortable, in the common usage of that word, then I believe that person has misunderstood the nature of peace. And I believe a peace based on this assumption will not be able to stand.

Mother Raphaela is the Abbess of Holy Myrrhbear­ers Monastery in Otego, New York, a stavropighial monastery for women of the Orthodox Church in America. She is the author of two books, Living in Christ, Essays on the Christian Life by an Orthodox Nun, and Growing in Christ, both published by St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press. Her monastery website is holymyrrhbear­ers.com. Her paper was presented at the Orthodox Peace Fellowship conference at St. Tikhon’s Monastery in June 2003.

Copyright by the author.

source: http://incommunion.org/articles/issue-30/monasticism-and-the-way-of-radical-peace

Friday, October 30, 2009

A Vision of Saint Nikodemos of the Holy Mountain

In this video Father Paul Jaroslaw, an Orthodox priest from Homer, Alaska, relates a story from the life of Saint Nikodemos of the Holy Mountain.

The scenes in this video are from the Holy Monastery of Simonopetra on the Holy Mountain in Greece, and the chanting is done by the monastic brotherhood of the Holy Monastery of Vatopaidi, also on the Holy Mountain.

Father Lazarus Moore on Hinduism

This video is a section from a lecture by the British Russian Orthodox Hieromonk Archimandrite Lazarus Moore. It was recorded in 1983. Father Lazarus died in 1992.

There is no better teacher than Death: Teachings and Lessons from the Grave

by Bryan Stiles

ShroroThe title of this essay is deliberately provocative, meant to bluntly establish that, however morbid it may seem to one individual, the grave is truly one of our most tangible spiritual teachers in this realm. The first stanza of this title, first promulgated by St. Cosmas Aitolos, testifies to Orthodoxy's rich tradition, that death is a viable guide for our theosis. Even if we look throughout the various components of Orthodoxy, we find death to be a very eminent, re-occuring, and transformative trait. Throughout the centuries, men have pondered on what lies beyond the grave, yet neglected to focus on the very foundation of such a journey. Too often we spend day-dreaming our personal fantasies concerning heaven, indulging in our self-delusions, and give little credence to what could happen to us tomarrow or this very hour. This consequently gives rise to the greediness that often prevails among Earth's societies today - and this, this intrinsic flaw in our very nature, will be our main focus.

Let us first recall a relevant story, from an Athonite Gerontikon. A monk approached his elder, inquiring the already 100 year-old man, "Now that you will depart from this temporary life, what do you feel?" The wise and frail elder replied, saying "I feel such happiness and tranquility, as if I am going to a wedding."

Unfortunately, this type of euphoria concerning death is often lost in the common world. Especially within the diaspora, facing all Orthodox Christians of all jurisdictional backgrounds, one finds indulgence in the flesh around every corner. The reason why I say this euphoria is so rare, is because its antithesis reigns supreme over the general populous! It is indeed very hard to focus on death and the grave when we find ourselves already pre-occupied with sin and the passions therein (albeit, with our natural tendancy to flout our chest and become proud, this realization may not all the time be clear). So to re-adjust our lenses, we must take a multi-path course. I propose that we, sinful and despiseful as we are, first must take a look at those who have become "dead" to the world (i.e. monastics and clergy). Furthermore, through their sufferings, wisdom, and continual reflection over death, we may come to understand for ourselves the importance of death and what we must do now to prepare for our earthly departure. However, there is also a very direct connection in which we can realize this more clearly.

Imagine you are walking along the road, with cars passing by. There is no sidewalk in which you are strolling along, and you have little space on the shoulder of the road between the brush to your right and the rushing cars to your left. Your heart races and sweat surfaces on your forehead. Something hits your stomach as a stark realization comes to mind: "Wow, there is a definite possibility that I could get hit and die at any moment."

Well, I dont intend to paint such a terrifying picture. And no, I'm not saying that we should keep fear upon our mind constantly. What I'm saying is that everday incidents and possibilities could take us in our present state - without having any moment to repent of our sins in the day. Therefore, what we need to keep in our heart is not fear of impending danger but sincere repentence, BECAUSE of these possiblities in the world. To instill within ourselves this obedience of love, prayer, and repentence, I ask to turn to my initial example of the monastics - and what we call, joyful mourning.

Monastics are a beautiful example, a shining beacon that show us how we really need to act as Orthodox Christians. Just by the fact that they adorn themselves in black reminds us of their dedication to keep death upon their mind - and the benevolence and inexhaustible mercy of Our Lord. By keeping their death upon their mind, and their hopeful meeting with the Lord, they keep the words of "O God have Mercy upon me a sinner," upon their tounges every minute of the day. With each step, with each breath they sigh with a joyful mourning that both makes them look forward to the grave, by their continual repentence.

The holy St. Isaac of Syria once wrote, "Let us love silence till the world is made to die in our hearts. Let us always remember death, and in this thought draw near to God in our heart -- and the pleasures of this world will have our scorn." When we seek out the countenence of the Lord by dwelling upon the grave in this sincere repentence, we truly come closer to Him. We become aware of our mortality and our frailty as humans, and that truly brings us to our knees. Because in this instance, falling upon your face in the face of death, towards the Lord, is equal to ascending to Heaven.

This is the paradox of Orthodoxy: death brings life; darkness is light; mourning in joy; the dead speak with more wisdom than do the brightest teachers on earth. We are to look to the grave, see what our predecessors have done, and use them as a rule, accompanied by Holy Scripture and Tradition, to ascend higher in theosis. Whether they lived a rotten or holy life, let us look to the dead and use their examples so we may be found worthy in the sight of the Lord.

May God have mercy on us all. Amen.

source: http://www.socdigest.org/articles/08oct06.html

Thursday, October 29, 2009

Orthodoxy: The Way to Christ - Part 2

by George Aramath

As a summary from the first part of this series, man is created in the image and likeness of God. But in this fallen world, man gets sidetracked, chasing after other gods, and therefore all throughout life he longs to return back to this image. As St. Augustine eloquently wrote, “our hearts are restless until they find their rest in Thee”. The Church, the body of Christ, is instituted by God to continually bring back His children. Being the house of God, the Church is the place to which the prodigal son returns after his meaningless journey in life. The Holy, Universal, and Apostolic Church holds the map that leads to Christ.

We will first examine its prayers, for this is what we experience mostly within the Church. If you examine these Orthodox prayers, an often-repeated but rarely understood word is “mercy”. Our prayers are overflowing with it. For instance, the Trisagion ends:

O thou who was crucified for us, have mercy on us. Lord have mercy upon us. Lord
be kind and have mercy. Lord accept our prayers and worship and have mercy on us.


Our songs are also filled with this word. For instance, we sing a beautiful song written by St. Ephrem during evening prayer that begins:

Lord have mercy upon us,
Kindly accept our prayers
Grant us mercy, redemption
From thy treasure above


Besides mercy, Kurielaison is constantly chanted and sung. And this Greek word means “Lord have mercy”. So here again is the word mercy. It seems as if our Church is constantly asking for mercy. Look at most of our prayers, and you’ll come across it. In fact, our prayers are structured into different sections with a portion always for redemption and mercy. Why so?

First of all, the Greek word for repentance is metanoia. The prefix meta- means “a change”. Metamorphosis, for instance means to change form. Repentance and mercy is all about change of mind. It’s taking a 180-degree, turning from sin to God. It’s about reconfiguring our journey to the proper way and destination. Mercy and repentance is turning from the devil and the many false gods and a turning to Christ, the One true God.

In the Orthodox understanding of life, this reconfiguration is continuous. There is no concept of “once saved, always saved”. Though I myself have confessed Him as my Savior, I have spit upon Him many times thereafter. Lord have mercy! Orthodoxy therefore is a continual call to holiness. Man is continually called to return to union with God. In this sense, life is a pilgrimage, filled with stages of growth “known in the monastic tradition as purification, illumination and finally deification”. We become deified when “it is no longer I that live, but Christ who lives in me”. This is our calling and mission in life; it is our destination.

But on this path towards deification, our Fathers write about how all of life is mercy-filled:

As Abba Sisoes lies on his deathbed, surrounded by his disciples, he is seen to be talking with someone. “Who are you talking to, father?” the disciples ask. “See,” he replies, “the angels have come to take me and I am asking for a little more time—more time to repent.” “You have no need to repent,” say the disciples. “Truly,” the old man replies, “I am not sure whether I have even begun to repent.”

St. Isaac the Syrian teaches: “During every moment of the four and twenty hours of the day we stand in need of repentance.” This journey to Christ is constantly reaffirmed with our mercy’s and Kurielaison’s. Mercy is properly seen when examining the Hebrew root for it, hesed, meaning steadfast love, a love that perseveres to save the beloved. It is not so much a mercy that makes us feel worthless but more so a healing mercy. We, like the prodigal son, make many journeys hoping to find fulfillment. But eventually “he came to himself” it is said of the son. Through God’s grace we too come to ourselves and return back to Him. The prayers and songs of our Church call its faithful to return back to Christ, acting as a constant reminder of our proper way and destination.

Soc DigestRepresented visually, these all-encompassing prayers continually bring man back to the Way:


They act as safe barriers so that His children will not wander too far. If these prayers are said genuinely, then man cannot but return back to Him, filled with repentance and change. On a personal note, during those times when I stray away from God, saying these prayers are difficult. But in doing so sincerely, it allows us to return with a repentant heart, asking for His mercy.

So the challenge given to us by Christ through His Church is to build a discipline of prayer everyday, using the prayers written by our Fathers, inspired by the Holy Spirit. The goal of prayer is to encounter Christ and to live “in Christ”. So saying these prayers with an open heart and attentiveness is most important.

So in summary, the Orthodox Church continuously leads one back to Christ. The first and most noticeable path is through its prayers and songs filled with mercy.

Kurielaison, Kurielaison, Kurielaison.


source: http://www.socdigest.org/articles/01oct07.html

Wednesday, October 28, 2009

Orthodoxy: The Way to Christ

by George Aramath

Life is a journey. This is a common phrase we hear or read. So we wonder about this journey. Where exactly are we going? What is this journey all about?

In looking back at life, this journey begins from our moment of birth. We seek after something that is beyond ourselves, reaching for something we never had. We can’t initially put a face or name to it, but its still there. Sometimes we forget about this search. Other things distract us along the way, but we return to it once again.

Oftentimes, we think that others have found what we are seeking. When we’re children, we assume that adulthood is what we seek. This is when we’ll be independent and self-sufficient. When we’re adults, we think that marriage will be our answer because they seem to have found fulfillment in a partner and family. After marriage, we look at the rich who seem to be satisfied and content. After chasing money, we long for retirement because they are the ones enjoying life with little responsibilities and complete freedom. But throughout it all, we find this journey unfulfilling. We return to where we began, still searching, still wandering.

Soc Digest“Within the depths of every human being there exists an insatiable longing for God.”[1] God creates us in His image. Genesis repeats it several times to make an emphatic point: “Then God said, ‘Let us make man in our image, after our likeness . . . So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created them”[2]. Man therefore desires this image all throughout life. And since a part of this image is found in others, we chase after it. All human beings desire relationships for this reason. Even the worst of them look for others, for instance, by joining gangs or mobs. But for most of us, partial fulfillment comes from relationships built with family and friends. All of this nonetheless leaves a yearning of the heart for something more. We are still in search of that perfect image of our Creator.

But within our fallen and corrupt world, this image becomes deformed and disfigured. We constantly whore with other gods like the Israelites[3]. What an appropriate image to express our search for God! It is a love affair like marriage; we can’t get Him off our head. He’s always there even if we choose to ignore Him. And though we whore ourselves with other gods, He’s the groom waiting for our return. God through Jeremiah expresses this concept beautifully when he writes to us:

"If a man divorces his wife and goes from him and becomes another man’s wife, will he return to her? Would not that land be greatly polluted? You have played the harlot with many lovers; and would you return to me, says the Lord" [4].

Ezekiel takes up this imagery much more vividly, breaking the reader’s heart. Please take a moment now and read this powerful chapter written about us: Ezekiel 16.

Our corrupt passions take over and our search becomes perverted. The world readily offers us many gods, promising joy and fulfillment. Achievements, acquisitions, consumption, and passions are a few. As it’s lived out, life becomes pointless with no meaning. And many wonder if this is all that life is about. Though the terrible longing for something more still exists, many have fallen away from it, senselessly chasing after other gods.

Orthodox means right or true, the proper way. The Church is given this treasured name because it prescribes the way for her children. Jesus exclaims, “’I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life’"[5]. Christ Himself knew that this Way would be difficult to find in this fallen world. So it is vital to have proper directions. Therefore Christ gives His Church the responsibility to lead His children to Him. He instructs Peter to feed and tend His sheep [6] and this Apostolic Church continues to follow His instruction. Like John the Baptist, the Church is told, “’prepare the way for the Lord; make his paths straight’[7].

There are many ways and paths, even amongst other followers of Christ. But Orthodoxy professes to be the way not so much to defame all others but because the Church genuinely believes in holding the pathway to Christ. Christ gives the map of finding fulfillment in His Church. How so? We shall wait until the next part of this series, “Orthodoxy: The Way to Christ”.

-----------------

[1] John Breck, Longing for God Orthodox Reflections on Bible, Ethics, and Liturgy (Crestwood: SVS Press, 2006), 9.
[2] Genesis 1:26-7
[3] Exodus 34:15
[4] Jeremiah 3:1

[5] John 14:6
[6] John 21:15-17
[7] Mark 1:3

source: http://www.socdigest.org/articles/02sep07.html

Another word about fear and hatred

Responding to some questions and suggestions in addressing "religion of fear," Archbishop LAZAR expands on his talk on fear as the death of compassion in this video.

On forgiveness

on forgiveness: For an offense, whatever kind may have been given, one must not only not avenge oneself, but on the contrary must all the more forgive from the heart, even though it may resist this, and must incline the heart by conviction of the word of God: “If you will not forgive men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses”; and again, “pray for them which despitefully use you.” One must not nurse in one’s heart malice or hatred towards a neighbor who bears ill-will; but must strive to love him and, as much as possible, do good, following the teaching of our Lord Jesus Christ: “Love your enemies, do good to them that hate you.” And thus, if we will strive as much as lies in our power, to fulfill all this, then we may hope that Divine light will shine early in our souls, opening to us the path to the Jerusalem on High.
– St. Seraphim of Sarov

Tuesday, October 27, 2009

Join us for prayer retreat

United Nations Prayer Service

Ninth Annual Orthodox Christian Prayer Service, presided over by His All Holiness Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew, for the United Nations Community sponsored by the SCOBA/SCOOCH Joint Commission of Eastern and Oriental Orthodox Churches with Ambassador Strobe Talbot as featured speaker at the Archdiocesan Cathedral of the Holy Trinity in New York City.

Becoming the Jesus Prayer

by Fr. Michael Plekon

The true aim of our Christian life is the acquisition of the Holy Spirit. As for fasts, and vigils, and prayer, and almsgiving, and every good deed done because of Christ, they are only means of acquiring the Holy Spirit… Of course, every good deed done because of Christ gives us the grace of the Holy Spirit, but prayer gives us it to us most of all, for it is always at hand, so to speak, as an instrument for acquiring the grace of the Spirit. For instance, you would like to go to church, but there is no church or the service is over; you would like to give alms to a beggar, but there isn’t one, or you have nothing to give… you would like to do some other good deed in Christ’s name, but either you have not the strength or the opportunity is lacking. This certainly does not apply to prayer. Prayer is always possible for everyone, rich and poor, noble and humble, strong and weak, healthy and sick, righteous and sinful.

— St. Seraphim of Sarov (Valentine Zander, St. Seraphim of Sarov)

For many, the “prayer of the heart” or the “Jesus prayer” is understood as a practice of personal devotion, a response to St. Paul’s admonition to “pray unceasingly,” a prayer said with the lips which descends from the head into the heart. Our prayer is to become eventually so much a part of us that our very breathing, our very living becomes prayer. However, the personal and interior aspects of this prayer are never separated from liturgical prayer or from our lives. Prayer of the heart should not be considered as an alternative preferable to the Hours or the Liturgy, just as the other elements of asceticism, such as fasting and the hermit life, are not in contradiction to receiving communion and communal liturgical prayer. Rather these forms of prayer complement and support each other. The Jesus prayer extends the Hours and the Liturgy through the rest of the day and night. The readings from scripture, the psalms and intercessions of the divine office, as well as the action of the Eucharistic Liturgy, nourish the rest of the life of prayer. There is no opposition between the prayer of the heart and liturgical prayer anymore than there is opposition between prayer and service, contemplation and action.

The lives and words of three holy people of our time show that the integration of prayer in our existence makes of life, in the phrase of St. John Chrysostom, a “Liturgy after the Liturgy.” These “living icons” bridge the time from the 19th century to our own: St. Seraphim of Sarov (1759-1831), Paul Evdokimov (1900-1969) and St. Mother Maria Skobtsova (1891-1945). These three do not dwell on the techniques of the Jesus prayer, but they all practiced it, along with liturgical worship and intense service to their neighbors.

Seraphim is certainly the most popular Russian saint. A monk and priest at Sarov, he was also hermit, for a time a recluse, and in the last years of his life an extraordinary elder. Able to read people’s hearts, his luminous face showed how the Spirit dwells in us. He was a gifted healer, an “icon” of the spiritual life, as Paul Evdokimov called him. Rooted in traditional Christian life, he was constantly moving beyond traditional ideas of status, beyond traditional activities and constrictions.

Seraphim of Sarov

In the 19th century, St. Seraphim of Sarov shines brightly, a true “seraph.” For him, the Spirit was warmth in a world grown cold. Looking back on him in historical context, despite the popular pictures of him feeding his black bear, hunchbacked, walking with an axe handle, and kneeling in prayer on the rock for a thousand days and nights, he refuses to be imprisoned by popular piety just as he refused to be captured by all the roles he filled in his life. He was a light in the midst of the forest, in a Church deeply in need of renewal, in a time of great cultural stirring, in a society of political questioning. Donald Nicholl recounts how a century after his death, around his feast day people would bring fir branches into the anti-religious museum set up in the Kazan Cathedral in Leningrad. They sensed his relics were there. When the end of the Soviet era finally came, those relics were rediscovered and returned to Sarov.

St. Seraphim seems to have embodied many traditional elements, not just of Church life and piety but of Russian culture. Yet Paul Evdokimov and other biographers observe that in his person, actions and words he steps out of the usual, expected forms, overturning stereotypes and myths that have accrued to “spirituality.” It is no surprise that he was so beloved to many of the leading Paris émigrés. St. Seraphim surfaces in Sergius Bulgakov’s The Bride of the Lamb as an example of the divine humanity at work in a person. He plays a major role in Evdokimov’s Ages of the Spiritual Life, a study of holiness in the Eastern Church. Seraphim stands out by his willingness to follow the Spirit through regular cenobitic life to a hermit’s vocation, to years as a virtual recluse, to an intensely active ministry of healing the distressed and organizing the Diveyevo women’s communities.

There was persistent criticism of his character and activities by local bishops, by his abbot Niphon, and by other members of the Sarov monastic community. Metropolitan Filaret’s editing of Seraphim’s words, very likely the smoothing out of details of his life, suggest the unease with which Seraphim was regarded. Despite an overwhelming popular cult, many icons, pilgrimages to his tomb, healings and prayers, it took the pressure of the Romanovs, Nicholas and Alexandra, to push through the decision for Seraphim’s canonization in 1903.

Numerous events attest to his unusual personality and spiritual activity. His early invisibility in the Sarov community gave way to notoriety for his reclusive behavior, his unusual dress, his detailed instructions for the construction of churches, the mill and the Virgin’s walkway at Diveyevo, not to mention the healings of both Michael Manturov and Motovilov of clearly psychosomatic afflictions, and the subsequent relationship between him and these two associates. There is Seraphim’s warm – but to some, scandalous – relationship with the Diveyevo nuns, his direction of their physical and spiritual existence down to details of prayer, dress and work.

The famous incident, recorded by Motovilov, richly illustrates both Seraphim’s personality and position. On a snowy winter afternoon, in a field outside his hermitage in the Sarov forest, Seraphim allowed Motovilov not only to see the luminous results of being in the presence of God, in communion with Him, he also enabled Motovilov to share in this experience himself. Motovilov described an almost blinding light, the warmth he experienced despite the winter cold, the beautiful fragrance, and, above all, the indescribable joy and peace – exactly what the New Testament indicates the real presence of the Spirit to be.

The most unusual nature of this “encounter” and the even more radical content of what Seraphim had to say is often overlooked. Seraphim stressed the absolutely universal character of holiness. Everyone can acquire the Holy Spirit. This is not the result of saying many prayers, lighting candles, keeping the fasts, attending numerous services. All this activity has but one purpose – allowing the Spirit to make his dwelling in us. God deeply desires the holiness of every person. Whether one is a monastic, ordained, a lay person, rich or poor, single or married – none of this matters.

Healed miraculously by the Mother of God in his childhood as well as in later life after a brutal attack by robbers, the recipient of numerous visits by her and other saints who constantly said, “He is one of us,” the seer of visions of Christ at the Liturgy, Seraphim’s biography appears to be hagiography. To be sure, many details conform to the classical models of a monastic saint. But there are important differences.

Though a monk and priest, Seraphim chose to dress as the peasants of the surrounding area, in an unbleached smock, birch-bark sandals in summer, boots and coat in winter. To be sure, he would don the riassa, cowl, the stole and cuffs when going to communion at the Liturgy in the monastery church. He lit thousands of candles in his cell for those who came for healing, yet he also rubbed holy oil on their arms and legs, gave out bread, wine and water to everyone, an extension of the Eucharist, even an image of the feeding of the multitudes by Christ in the wilderness. He raised his own vegetables, cut wood, cleared the brush, just as local farmers and early monastics did. He kept a prayer rule, read the Hours, and almost literally lived in the pages of the Bible. Visitors – from small children to troubled young adults – were urged to read the Gospels along with him. Accounts tell of the monastic community’s resentment at the hundreds of visitors lined up daily to see him, crowding the corridor outside his cell. Memoirs report that all kinds of people came: not only Orthodox but Catholics, Protestants, Jews, Muslims and nonbelievers.

In the end, he does not conform neatly to the category of monastic saint. In St. Seraphim the categories of priest, monastic ascetic, even of staretz, are never rejected, yet he transcends them all. He flees even from routine monastic life to his hermitage, and both there and back in his monastery cell, the door is shut to all, even his confreres. But then the door is opened to all, and never closes again. After “fleeing the world,” he embraced the world. Through him, very reluctantly at first, the monastery too was opened to the world, a prefiguring of the wonderful openness of the elders of Optina, of St. Elizabeth and the Mary-Martha monastery, of St. Maria of Paris, and of Paul Evdokimov.

St. Seraphim extends the possibility of life in the Spirit to every person, in every situation in society. Any prestige due to status, ordained or monastic, is obliterated. Gone too are any stereotypes of what holiness looks like, of what ascetic practices are necessary. He keeps all the monastic rules and churchly traditions, yet his life and his words make it clear that these are but means to an end and never an end in themselves. When one has recognized the Holy Spirit, prayers cease, for the Spirit takes over, praying in one’s life, making all of one’s life prayer. “Acquiring the Holy Spirit,” he said, “is the whole point of the Christian life.” Still better known is this related saying: “My joy, acquire the Spirit of Peace and thousands around you will be saved.” Each person was his “joy,” every person, no matter how desperate, was being illumined by the Spirit. No wonder his greeting all year round was “Christ is risen.”

Paul Evdokimov and St. Maria Skobtsova

Paul Evdokimov and Mother Maria were both part of the Russian emigration in France, members of the Exarchate of Metropolitan Evlogy. Evdokimov was in the first graduating class of the St. Sergius Institute, a student of Fr. Sergius Bulgakov. The future Mother Maria, Liza Pilenko, emigrated with her mother, second husband and three children. In addition to being a gifted writer and artist, as well as one of the first women to attend classes in the St. Petersburg Theological Academy, she was also active in political life, almost executed by both the Reds and the White Army. She was acting mayor of her home town of Anapa on the Black Sea, was a published poet in her early twenties and eventually immersed herself in social service to fellow émigrés. With Metropolitan Evlogy’s encouragement, she was tonsured to monastic life “in the world,” much like the sisters of the Mary-Martha Convent in Moscow under St. Elizabeth Feoderovna. She set up houses of hospitality in Paris and its suburbs for the elderly, the homeless, unemployed and the distressed. At the heart of each was a chapel. She and Paul Evdokimov were among the founding members of the Russian Christian Students’ Movement, Evdokimov serving as its first secretary. In photographs of meetings and retreats of this and other groups, such as the fraternity of St. Sophia and Orthodox Action, Mother Maria is to be seen with Metropolitan Evlogy, Fr. Sergius Bulgakov (her spiritual father), and such other leading figures of the “Russian Paris” as Nicolas Berdiaev, Basil Zenkovsky, Nicolas Afanasiev, George Feodotov, and especially Constantine Mochulsky, Ilya Fundaminsky and Frs. Lev Gillet, Kyprian Kern and Dimitri Klepinin, her chaplains.

During the Nazi occupation, Mother Maria sheltered Jewish people as well as others who were being hunted by the Gestapo. Fr. Dimitri furnished many with baptismal certificates and enrolled them in the membership of the parish attached to the hostel at 77 rue de Lourmel. Eventually they were both arrested by the Gestapo, along with her colleague, Ilya Fundaminsky, and her son, Yuri. All four died in concentration camps, and were canonized this year by the Synod of the Ecumenical Patriarchate and their own diocese in France.

Not only did Mother Maria scavenge food from the markets at Les Halles and collect contributions of bread and clothing, she obtained medical treatment, training and jobs, even government food subsidies for her dining room, to feed all hungry in the neighborhood during the occupation. In addition, she continued to live an active intellectual life, writing plays, poetry, and numerous articles.

During the Nazi occupation, Evdokimov also worked with the resistance to hide people pursued by the Gestapo. For almost a decade after the war he directed hostels for the care of the poor, refugees, distressed people. As a theologian with experience in pastoral and service work, he eventually taught at St. Sergius, L’Institut Catholique and the Ecumenical Center in Bossey. He was an observer at Vatican II and became an important voice for the Eastern Church in the West. He was one of the founders of the international Orthodox youth movement, Syndesmos. His research was wide ranging, including study of the historical contributions of Russian theologians, the Eastern Church’s understanding of the Mother of God and of the Holy Spirit, the theology of the icons, of prayer and the liturgical services, the significance of the fathers and monasticism for modern society, and most especially, the vocation of all the baptized and the ways in which holiness finds distinctive patterns and shape in modern life. The work of his teachers and friends Frs. Bulgakov and Afanasiev, Professors Kartashev, Olivier Clément and Nikos Nissiotis are all present in his writing along with his own singular sense of being a person of prayer, a “liturgical being,” a witness to Christ both in the world and the church.

Preaching at the funeral service for Paul Evdokimov, Fr. Lev Gillet said that he was one who “worshiped in spirit and truth.” Having known him for nearly forty years, Fr. Lev said he was more at ease in the invisible realities of the Kingdom, while at the same time diligent, effective, enormously solicitous for those around him. Prayer and life were a constant unity for him. In his Ages of the Spiritual Life, Evdokimov wrote:

In a special manner the invocation of the name of Jesus makes the grace of his Incarnation universal, allowing each of us our personal share and disposing our hearts to receive the Lord… When the divine Name is pronounced over a country or a person, these enter into an intimate relationship with God… The “prayer of the heart” frees and enlarges it and attracts Jesus to it … In this prayer … the whole Bible with its entire message is reduced to its essential simplicity… When Jesus is drawn into the heart, the liturgy becomes interiorized and the Kingdom is in the peaceful soul. The Name dwells in us as its temple and there the divine presence transmutes and Christifies us… (pp. 211-212)

Here, as with St. Seraphim, the prayer of the heart is much more than an arcane spiritual practice. Rather, its genius is that it summarizes all that the scriptures say, the whole of life is to be “in Christ” and the Spirit. Prayer does not drive us from the world or restrict our being, but on the contrary, it opens and widens our love, our service. Today, when the temptation for many is to make of the Church and the Liturgy an oasis apart from other believers and the world, Evdokimov argues precisely the opposite.

Liturgy… teaches the true relationship between myself and others and helps me understand the words, “Love your neighbor as yourself.”… Liturgical prayer makes the destiny of every person present to us. The liturgical litanies lead the individual beyond himself, toward the assembly, toward those who are absent, those who suffer and finally those who are in their agony. Liturgical prayer embraces the city, nations, humanity and asks for peace and unity of all… every soul knows by experience that one cannot stand alone before God and that, liturgically, one saves oneself with others. The pronoun in the liturgy is never in the singular. (Ages, pp. 215-216.)

Evdokimov put this into practice, whether bathing and feeding his young children while his wife was teaching, or working on his thesis as they slept. He did so in the years of lay pastoral ministry in the hostels, leading evening prayers, listening to the joys and miseries of those residing in them. Later he would also live out his prayer as a teacher and in his writings. Olivier Clément called him a “go-between” the Church and the world. In his essays one finds a critique of a Sartre, a De Beauvoir, a Camus, presented with respect and discernment. He proposed that a chair of atheism be set up in every theological school, so profound were the questions modern thinkers put to the community of faith. He listened to and used the insights of the leading thinkers of our time, as well as those of his teachers Berdiaev and Bulgakov, and a wide range of others including Nicolas Cabasilas, Therese of Lisieux, Simone Weil and Jung. No modern theologian has so deftly probed the problem of human evil despite a supposedly good and just God. His image of the God who suffers along with us, who empties himself in love to become one of us, who pursues us with an absurd or foolish love could only stem from prayer and loving service to the suffering, the pattern of his life.

Mother Maria described the integration of prayer, liturgical as well as of the heart, into the fabric of one’s life:

But if at the center of the Church’s life there is this sacrificial, self-giving eucharistic love, then where are the Church’s boundaries, where is the periphery of this center? Here it is possible to speak of the whole of Christianity as an eternal offering of the Divine Liturgy beyond church walls. What does this mean? It means that we must offer the bloodless sacrifice, the sacrifice of self-surrendering love not only in a specific place, upon the altar of a particular temple; the whole world becomes the single altar of a single temple, and for this universal Liturgy we must offer our hearts, like bread and wine, in order that they may be transubstantiated into Christ’s love, that he may be born in them, that they may become “Godmanhood” hearts, and that he may give these hearts of ours as food for the world, that he may bring the whole world into communion with these hearts of ours that have been offered up, so that in this way we may be one with him, not so that we should live anew but so that Christ should live in us, becoming incarnate in our flesh, offering our flesh upon the Cross of Golgotha, resurrecting our flesh, offering it as a sacrifice of love for the sins of the world, receiving it from us as a sacrifice of love to himself. Then truly in all ways Christ will be in all. (Mother Maria Skobtsova: Essential Writings, p. 185)

St. Maria echoes St. John Chrysostom’s vision of the extension of prayer into the works of love, the “Liturgy after the Liturgy,” in which the heart of the brother or sister, the neighbor before us, becomes the altar. Hence we can speak of the Eucharistic Liturgy pervading all of our life, our everyday work becoming the “sacrament of the brother or sister.” Paul Evdokimov also spoke often in his writings of how the face of the person before us becomes an icon of Christ. His moving memoirs of the years he spent directing houses of hospitality capture this, as do the recollections of many who knew him, among them Fr. Lev Gillet, Olivier Clément, Christos Yannaras, Nikos Nissiotis and Elisabeth Behr-Sigel.

It is impossible not to see in St. Seraphim as well as in Paul Evdokimov and Mother Maria the amazing “evangelical inversion,” the turning upside down of things that Christ works in all human situations. Seraphim began life tall and strong, and was later shrunk by injury and age. But this little man, huge in holiness, is very accurately depicted in the last section of Mother Maria’s essay, “Types of Religious Lives.” The “evangelical” or radical life of the Gospel is described as giving away to others the love one receives in abundance from God. If we cannot love the neighbor whom we can see, it is impossible to love the God we cannot see. Seraphim, healed many times himself, made God’s healing available to thousands of others, in his time and down to our own.

Mother Maria followed a path in some ways similar to that of Seraphim. Her critics faulted her for not living the classical pattern of monastic life. It is true that while she was always present for the eucharistic Liturgy, she was more often absent from other daily services. But did not Seraphim offer a simpler cycle of prayers for his convents and was not a simpler prayer rule the one St. Elizabeth proposed for the Mary-Martha Convent? Evdokimov also stressed that it is not how many services we attend or how many prayers we recite that matters. The point is that we become our prayer, that all our life becomes prayer.

The perennial opposition of Mary and Martha, of contemplation versus action, of prayer versus work needs to be transcended. The idea that one could take preference over the other was abolished at rue de Lourmel and other Paris locations, the nursing home at Noisy-le-Grand, in the prison at Compiègne and at the Ravensbruck camp. God’s humanity, his taking on of all that creaturely existence entails in the Incarnation, brings together the love of God and of the neighbor as the Gospel itself expressed it. As Mother Maria put it:

“Christification” is based on the words, “It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me.” The image of God, the icon of Christ which truly is my real and actual essence is the only measure of things, the only way given to me…Christ gave us two commandments: to love God and to love our fellow man. Everything else, even the Beatitudes, are merely elaborations of the two commandments which contain within themselves the totality of Christ’s Good News…It is remarkable that their truth is found only in their indissolubility. Love for man alone leads us to the blind alley of anti-Christian humanism and the only way out of it is, at times, to reject man and love for him in the name of all mankind. But love for God without love for man is condemned…These two commandments are two aspects of a single truth. Destroy either one and you destroy the whole truth. (Essential Writings, pp. 174-176)

Perhaps another way of putting this is to see prayer as the celebration of the sacrament of the present moment, as Fr. Alexander Schmemann put it, finding how, in the Incarnation, God, has come to fill all things.

Evdokimov’s words sum it all up:

It appears that a new spirituality is dawning. It aspires not to leave the world to evil, but to let the spiritual element in the creature come forth. A person who loves and is totally detached, naked to the touch of the eternal, escapes the contrived conflict between the spiritual and the material. His love of God is humanized and becomes love for all creatures in God. “Everything is grace,” Bernanos wrote, because God has condescended to the human and has carried it away into the abyss of the Trinity. The types of traditional holiness are characterized by the heroic style of the desert, the monastery. By taking a certain distance from the world, this holiness is stretched toward heaven, vertically, like the spire of a cathedral. Nowadays, the axis of holiness has moved, drawing nearer to the world. In all its appearances, its type is less striking, its achievement is hidden from the eyes of the world, but it is the result of a struggle that is no less real. Being faithful to the call of the Lord, in the conditions of this world, makes grace penetrate to its very root, where human life is lived. (Sacrament of Love, p. 92)

Fr. Michael Plekon is professor at Baruch College-City University of New York in the department of Sociology/Anthropology and the Program in Religion & Culture. He is a priest of the Orthodox Church in America, serving as the associate pastor at St. Gregory Orthodox Church, Wappingers Falls, NY, and is the author of Living Icons (University of Notre Dame Press) and editor of Tradition Alive (Rowman & Littlefield). His essay is based on a paper he presented at a recent conference on Prayer of the Heart at Bose Monastery in Italy.

source: http://incommunion.org/?p=338

Jesus Christ as Medicine of Life. A St. Ephrem Christological Perspective

by Fr. Jomy Joseph

Blessed be the shepherd, who became
the lamb our atonement!
Blessed be the Vineshoot, which became
the chalice for our salvation!
Blessed also be the Grape,
the source of the Medicine of Life!
Blessed also be the Farmer, who became
the wheat which was sown
and the sheaf which was harvested!
(Hymn on Nativity 3:15)

In the ancient civilized societies, health and diseases were allied with deities and hence, often magic and medicine went together. The Indian Vedic Text ‘Atharva Veda’ contains prayers against diseases. In China, health and disease are integrated into the philosophy of the Tao and the two polar principles, the yin and the yang. In ancient Egypt, people believed that pain and sickness are caused by the gods and goddesses.

But today ‘Health and Healing’ are under the purview of a new deity, Global Market
Economy. New inventions and innovations to health care have moderately tainted the
relationship of medicine to medical ethics. The Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs) on the products and processes of the medical world ended up in a new ‘Medi-Ethics’ – “Profiteering from the sick! As a student of Praxis Theology, cannot close my eyes towards the ongoing tyranny in the healing scenario. In this very context where the health concerns are at its zenith, St. Ephrem’s healing imagery “Jesus as Medicine of Life” (a Christological perspective) has not only theological implications, but also ethical implications in today’s Christendom.

St. Ephrem the Syrian, a celebrated poet-theologian and musician of the 4th century,
portrayed Jesus as the ‘Medicine of Life’ in the context of salvation (The other terms that are harmonized by Ephrem for Jesus Christ in the healing context are Paradise’s fragrance and Tree of Life). In Paradise, Adam and Eve enjoyed good health. Ephrem considers their life in Paradise to be a ‘companion of well-being’. To put it in nut shell, Adam and Eve were created rich in health. According to Ephrem, both Adam and Eve were created in an intermediate state, neither mortal nor immortal. However, through their freewill they were permitted to decide.

When they had sinned against God, they came underneath the vicinity of curse and pains. In Ephrem’s analysis, there are two agents that cause sin and sickness – external and internal. The external is Evil one (satan) and the internal is one’s freewill. To be precise, sin is the consequence of the influence of the Evil One and the misuse of freewill. In the beginning, sin persuaded human history through disobedience, eating the fruit from the Tree of Knowledge. The fruit was offered by the serpent to Eve and then to Adam and thereby the serpent led the inhabitants of Paradise to sin. Thus, the poisonous advice of the Evil One instigated the Fall of Adam and Eve. Later sin continues in many different ways – desire, greed etc.

Ephrem compares freewill with the honorableness of God. Freewill enables human beings to decide between good and evil. By the freewill, Adam and Eve plucked the fruit which contains the ‘poison of death’. Thus, the transgression of the divine commandment and the eating of the fruit were the first wrong decision of freewill. So Ephrem is on the view that freewill is a spring of all visible and invisible diseases.

Ephrem portrays Jesus as the Medicine of life in the light of incarnation. Ephrem continues, “He is the healer of everything who came down from heaven as the ‘medicine of life’ to heal humanity from its state of sickness”. With his ‘Good News, Compassion and Caring’ Jesus granted perfect healing and restoration to humanity. Jesus’ passion, Cross, His garment, His word and hand contributed to the healing. Jesus, the ‘Medicine of life’ and the ‘Physician’, has been sent to fulfill what wants in humanity for restoration.

The food offered by the Evil One poisoned the life of Adam and Eve in the Paradise. At
the last supper, Jesus offered himself in the form of bread and wine as against the poison offered by the Evil One. Thus, bread and wine (his Body and Blood) became the medicine of life. Jesus’ healing ministry has not ceased with him, but continues with his disciples, saints, martyrs and the sacraments of the Church through the priestly ministry. We became the part of Jesus’ healing process through the Church’s Sacraments – by the water and oil of Baptism and Eucharistic bread and wine, Holy Qurbono. For Ephrem, healing of world is considered to be a second creation. So Jesus Christ, the son of God, came down from heaven as the ‘Medicine of life’ to heal not only humanity, but also creation as a whole.

Today our world is diseased heavily. The zeal of ‘exploring new opportunities and discovering new horizons’ has diseased not only the human nature but also the nature of the world. We too are consuming the poisonous food by our own freewill. In these days our wants and greed lay red carpet to more destruction. When Adam and Eve were poisoned by the Evil one, they were expelled from the richness of health. The unseen fluctuations in every corner of inhabited earth are impact of our poisoned nature and thereby we too are loosing the richness of health. It’s high time to post a second thought to our deficiencies that which leads to devastations. The medicine offered by Jesus Christ against the poisoned food was his own Body and Blood. When we take part in the Holy Qurbono, we are accepting communion with him, since his Body and Blood became the ingredients of our own very life. The Holy Week which proclaims the passion of Christ towards the redemption of the humanity and the inhabited world may lead us to that realization “I have come that they may have life, and have it abundantly” (John 10:10). Let us adore that Lamb, Jesus Christ who slaughtered for the medicine of life.

source: http://www.socdigest.org/articles/01oct09.html

Monday, October 26, 2009

Catholicos H.H. Aram I of the Armenian Church visits the Holy Father at the St. Ephraim, the Syrian Monastery in Damascus

St. Ephraim Monastery, SYRIA: His Holiness Catholicos Aram I of the Armenian Orthodox Church of Cilicia visited the holy father Patriarch H.H. Ignatius Zakka-I Iwas at the St. Ephraim Monastery in Ma`arat Sayy'dnaya near Damascus on Tuesday the 2oth October. The Armenian delegation was received at the Monastery entrance by H.E. Mor Philexinos Mathias Nayis, the Patriarchal assistant and Director of the St. Ephraim Theological college, priests, monks and students of the seminary.

After a warm welcome, the Holy Father introduced Catholicos Aram I as a strong ecumenical leader who Moderated the Executive and Central Committees of the World Council of Churches for two terms and described him as a dynamic force in the meetings of the Heads of the Oriental Orthodox Churches in the Middle East and its standing committee. His Holiness the Patriarch also added that their cooperation has strengthened the contribution of Oriental Orthodox Churches in bilateral dialogues on theological, dogmatic and other issues with Christian world communions.

Thanking Patriarch H.H. Ignatius Zakka-I, the Catholicos Aram emphasized the centuries old strong ties between their two Churches, which was rooted in common Christological, dogmatic and theological principles. The Catholicos also wished the Holy father a long life and success in leading the Syriac Orthodox Church. Later the Catholicos answered certain questions from the audience concerning the relationship between the two churches, the Coptic Orthodox Church and sister.

The visit ended with a banquet organized in honor of His Holiness Aram I and his delegation.

Photos and News from the official Syrian Orthodox

& Armenian Orthodox websites

source: http://www.syrianchurch.org/

Miracle at Kattchira


KATTACHIRA, INDIA - Oct 23, 2009: The miracle that started in a simple looking icon of Mother Mary carrying Infant Jesus, printed in flex and kept at the chapel of our Kattachira St. Mary's Jacobite Syrian Church near Kayamkulam, is continuing for the 3rd consecutive day.

It was on October 21st that the women who gathered for Wednesday prayers first noticed the miracle. Thinking that the picture was wet because of rainwater the women took it and wiped it clean. But they noted that it is becoming wet again. They immediately called upon the Vicar, Rev Fr. Roy Kattachira, who also tried to wipe it clean many a times but noticed that a water like substance was still coming from the eye part. This happened on Wednesday the late-forenoon. One of our friends took a small video clipping in his mobile camera which is shown in the links as the 'first video footage'.

On the next day Mor Thevodosius Mathews, the Metropolitan of our Kollam diocese under whom the parish comes, also visited the chapel and witnessed the same thing happening again. H.G. wiped the picture clean using a soft cotton cloth, but in half an hour the oily fluid again started dripping from the same portion, ie; from the eye part of Mother Mary in the icon.

This simple looking icon of Mother Mary and infant jesus, printed in flex material, is not a very old one and is not even properly framed, hence either sides are exposed. Since the news first spread the faithful fromall denominations are visiting the church to see the miracle happening.

Hail Mary , Full of grace.....

Holy Virgin , Theotokos Pray for us


source: http://www.syrianchurch.org/

Fear is the death of Compassion

"We have not been given over in bondage to a spirit of fear" (Paul/Saul of Tarsus). Listen to Archbishop LAZAR latest video from the monastery.

Sunday, October 25, 2009

12 Sayings of Elder Porphyrios

Elder Porphyrios Bairaktaris (1906-1991) was an Athonite hieromonk known for his gifts of spiritual discernment--i.e. a type of clairvoyance which he sometimes called "spiritual television."
A native of Evia province, the future Elder Porphyrios (his birth name had been Evangelos, while his monastic name was Nikitas) became a monk at the age of fourteen or fifteen. He served in the Athonite skete of Kafsokalyvia), in the Cell of St. George, under two spiritual fathers: Fr. Panteimon and Fr. Ionnakios. Forced by pleurisy to depart the Holy Mountain, he returned to his birthplace, where he was unexpectedly elevated to the priesthood at the age of 21 by Porphyrios III, Archbishop of Mount Sinai and Raithu. With the outbreak of World War II he became a hospital chaplain in Athens, in which post he continued for three decades (1940-1970). His later years were devoted to the construction of the Holy Convent of the Transfiguration of the Savior. After 1984 he returned to Mount Athos, occupying the same cell which he had earlier in life been forced to abandon.
Through his role as spiritual father, Elder Porphyrios became known to an ever-wider circle of Orthodox followers. Several compilations of stories and sayings attributed to him have been published.

Saturday, October 24, 2009

The Old Testment is about you: Jonah.

In what ways are you like Jonah, and how is his story about you. Archbishop addresses that question in this video.

Wednesday, October 21, 2009

Do you have a strange talent, or an ordinary one?

Pleasure? Why did the holy fathers warn us about it?

We can take pleasure in vengeance, seeing someone we are jealous of suffer or fail, as well as the things we usually think of. Being drunk activates pleasure mechanisms in the brain; being high on narcotics is pleasurable for the moment. All these are carnal pleasures. This is not just about "sex" or hot-fudge sundaes.

Monday, October 19, 2009

Elder Arsenie - On Suffering

Elder Arsenie talks about humbleness, sacrifice and suffering. Spiritual son of Elder Cleopa, (born on August 13th, 1914), in prison on and off for over 12 years between 1938 and 1964, one of the greatest Romanian Elders of our days.

Sunday, October 18, 2009

The life of the Orthodox monks

The monks leave their life for a life for God.they stay in monasteries,where they pray for their souls and for all the world,they paint,write,create religious clothes.they don't sleep too much,because is considered a sin any kind of exageration.they don't eat too much,just simple food,without specialities.their life is very simple,they never get married,some of them move in the mountains where they pray and live a wild life in the God's name.some of them become saints,and this thing can be proofed after their death when their bodies remain intacts,having a beautiful smell.


Their life is not at all simple,they have to fight with all the temptations of the world and to imitate the life of Jesus Christ.
they pray day and night and stay in touch with God in every moment of their life.

Moscow's Punk Priest, the Rev. Sergei Rybko - ABC News

Moscow's Punk Priest, the Rev. Sergei Rybko - ABC News

Shared via AddThis

From Hindu to Orthodox


Can Orthodoxy Speak to Eastern Religious Seekers?

By: Kevin Allen

Former Hindu devotee

I recently had a conversation with an Eastern Orthodox priest, whose twenty-six year old son recently left home for an indefinite stay at a Buddhist monastery. The priest was heart broken. His son was not a stranger to Eastern Orthodoxy or to its monastic tradition either, having spent time at several Orthodox monasteries, and even two months on the holy mountain of Mt. Athos. His son’s journey to a non-Christian Eastern religious tradition is not an isolated event. Eastern religions in North America are a growing and competing force in religious life with Christianity. Buddhism is now the fourth-largest religious group in the United States, with 2.5 - 3 million adherents, approximately 800,000 of whom are American western "converts". There are more Buddhists in America today than Eastern Orthodox Christians! The Dalai Lama (the leader of one of the Tibetan Buddhist sects) is one of the most recognized and admired people in the world and far better known than any Eastern Orthodox hierarch. Look in the magazine section of Borders or Barnes and Noble. You will find more publications with names like "Shambala Sun", "Buddhadharma", and "What is enlightenment?" than Christian magazines!

In addition to losing seekers (many of them youth) to non-Christian eastern spiritual traditions, eastern metaphysics have seeped into our western culture without much notice. For example, think of how often one hears the phrase "that’s good (or bad) karma". Karma is a Hindu word that has to do with the consequences of deeds done in a previous life (reincarnation)! They are doing a better job (sadly) "evangelizing" our culture than we Eastern Orthodox Christians are!

The Lord Himself commands us clearly "that repentance and remission of sins (baptism) should be preached in His name to all nations" (Luke 24:47). Buddhists (of which there are many sects) and Hindus live among us in America in ever-growing numbers right in our own backyards -- in our college classrooms, on our soccer fields, shopping in our "health foods" stores. They are a rich, potential "mission field" for the Eastern Orthodox Church in the United States. Unfortunately with few exceptions, like the writings of Monk Damascene [Christensen] and Kyriakos S. Markides, we are not talking to this group at all.

As a former Hindu and disciple of a well-known guru, or spiritual teacher, I can tell you Orthodox Christianity shares more "common ground" with seekers of non-Christian spiritual traditions of the east than any other Christian confession! The truth is when Evangelical Protestants attempt to evangelize the eastern spiritual seeker they often do more harm than good, because their approach is culturally western, rational, and legalistic-juridical with (generally) little understanding of the paradigms and spiritual language (or yearnings) of the seekers of these eastern traditions.

There are three "fundamental metaphysical principles" that Buddhists and Hindus generally share in common:

1. A common "supra-natural" reality underlies and pervades the phenomenal world. This Supreme Reality isn’t Personal, but Trans-personal. God or Ultimate Reality in these traditions is ultimately a "pure consciousness" without attributes.

2. The human soul is one in essence with this divine reality. All human nature is divine at its core. According to these traditions, Christ or Buddha isn’t a savior, but simply a paradigm of self-realization, the goal of all mankind.

3. Existence is in fundamental unity (monism). Creation isn’t what it appears to the naked eye. It is in essence "illusion", "unreal" and "impermanent". There is one underlying ground of being (think "quantum field" in physics!) which unifies all beings and out of which and into which everything can be reduced.

What do these metaphysics have in common with our Eastern Orthodox faith? Not much, on the surface. But in the eastern non-Christian spiritual traditions, knowledge is not primarily about the development or dissemination of metaphysical doctrine or theology. This is one of the problems western Christians have communicating with eastern seekers. Eastern religion is never theoretical or doctrinal. It’s about the struggle for liberation from suffering and death. This "existential" emphasis is the first connection Eastern Orthodoxy has with these traditions, because Orthodoxy is essentially transformative in emphasis.

The second thing we agree on with Buddhists and Hindus is the corrupted state of humanity and human consciousness. The goal of the Christian life according to the Church Fathers is to move from the "sub-natural" or "fallen state" in which we find ourselves (subject to death), to the "natural" or the "according to nature state" after the Image (of God), and ultimately to the "supra-natural" or "beyond nature" state, after the Likeness (of God). According to the teaching of the holy fathers the stages of the spiritual life are purification (metanoia), illumination (theoria) and deification (theosis). This paradigm of spiritual formation and transformation is unique to Eastern Orthodox practice within Christendom. While we don’t agree with Buddhists or Hindus on what "illumination" or "deification" is, we agree on the basic diagnosis of the fallen human condition. As I once said to a practicing Tibetan Buddhist: "We agree on the sickness (of the human condition). Where we disagree is on the cure".

Eastern Orthodoxy – especially the hesychasm (contemplative) tradition – teaches that true "spiritual knowledge" presupposes a "purified" and "awakened" nous (Greek), which is the "Inner ‘I’" of the soul. For Eastern Orthodox the true theologian isn’t one who simply knows doctrine intellectually or academically, but one "who knows God, or the inner essences or principles of created things by means of direct apprehension or spiritual perception." As a well-known Orthodox theologian explains, "When the nous is illuminated, it means that it is receiving the energy of God which illuminates it..." This idea resonates with eastern seekers who struggle to experience – through non-Christian ascesis and/or occult methods – spiritual illumination. Most eastern spiritual seekers are not aware that the opportunity for profound spiritual illumination, which our hesychasm tradition calls "theoria", exists within a Christian context.

As part of their spiritual ascesis, Buddhist and Hindu dhamma (practice) emphasizes cessation of desire, which is necessary to quench the passions. Holy Tradition teaches apatheia, or detachment as a means of combating the fallen passions. Hindu and Buddhist meditation methods teach "stillness". The word hesychia in Holy Tradition – the root of the word for hesychasm – means "stillness"! Buddhism, especially, teaches "mindfulness". Holy Tradition teaches "watchfulness" so we do not fall into temptation! Hindus and Buddhists understand it is not wise to live for the present life, but to struggle for the future one. We Orthodox agree! Americans who become Buddhist or Hindu are often fervent spiritual seekers used to struggling with foreign languages and cultures (Sanskrit, Tibetan, Japanese) and pushing themselves outside their "comfort zones". Converts to the Eastern Orthodox Church can relate! Some Buddhist and Hindu sects even have complex forms of "liturgy" including chant, prostration and veneration of icons! Tibetan Buddhism, especially, places high value on the lives of (their) ascetics, relics and "saints".

The main difference in spiritual experience is that what the eastern non-Christian traditions recognize as "spiritual illumination" or "primordial awareness" – achieved through deep contemplation (Moksha, Samadhi) – Orthodox Holy Tradition understands merely as "self contemplation". Archimandrite Sophrony (Sakharov), who was experienced in yoga (‘union’) before becoming a hesychast – monk, and disciple of St. Silouan of the holy mountain, wrote this from personal experience: "All contemplation arrived at by this means (Yoga, etc.) is self-contemplation, not contemplation of God. In these circumstances we open up for ourselves created beauty, not First Being. And in all this there is no salvation for man." Clement of Alexandria, two thousand years ago, wrote that pre-Christian philosophers were often inspired by God, but he cautioned the Christian must be careful what to take from them!

So we acknowledge that while the eastern seeker may through ascesis or contemplative disciplines experience deep levels of created beauty, or created being, para-normal dimensions, even the 'non-being' from which we are formed, these are not the the Uncreated Divine Life!! Are these experiences what the eastern seeker is really struggling for? This is the key question! Only in the Eastern Orthodox Church, through its deifying mysteries will the seeker be brought into the province of Uncreated Divine Life. It is only in the Orthodox Church – of all Christian confessions - that the eastern seeker will find there is more to "salvation" than simply forgiveness of sins and justification before God. He will be led to participate in the Uncreated Energies of God and through them "be partakers of the divine nature." (II Peter 1:4). As a member of the Body of Christ he will join in the deifying process and be increasingly transformed after the Likeness! Deification is available to all who enter the Holy Orthodox Church, are baptized (which begins the deifying process) and partake of the holy mysteries. It is not just the monks, ascetics and the spiritual athletes!

Eastern Orthodoxy has much to share with eastern spiritual seekers. Life and death hangs in the balance in this life, not the millions of lives eastern seekers think they have! As the Apostle Paul soberly reminds us, "…it is appointed for men to die once but after this the judgment." (Heb. 9:27).

May God give us the vision to begin reaching out and sharing the "true light" of the Holy Orthodox faith with seekers of the eastern spiritual traditions.

source: http://stbarnabasonline.org/index.php/+-Articles/Can-Orthodoxy-Speak-to-Eastern-Religious-Seekers.html

Wednesday, October 14, 2009

Mark your calendars

Glory to Jesus Christ!

Mark our calendars for Friday November 12 through Sunday November 15, 2009.
Pack your bags and head for Plymouth, Indiana, It will be a weekend of
praying and celebrating and praising God. There will be speakers talking
about prayer and how Christ gave us an example of how to live our lives.
Christ not only taught but He showed us how to live. He had dinner with
lots of folks no one else would eat with. And that is what we are going to
do this weekend.

Friday evening will start with evening prayers at 6:00 pm and there will be
an open mike with poetry readings, music and lots more. And then some more
prayer.

Saturday morning will start with morning prayers at 9:30 am followed by
speakers and more prayers. After lunch there will be a prayer services for
jobs. Evening prayers will be celebrated in the evening at 5:00 pm

Sunday the Divine Liturgy will be celebrated with special prayers for jobs.
The Liturgy starts at 10:30 am. Lunch and fellowship will follow.

The Mor Gregorios Community Center, 1000 South Michigan Street, Plymouth,
Indiana, is located on the corner of Oak Hill and Michigan Streets, across
from the Webster Elementary School.

The Mor Gregorios Community Center and St. Mary the Protectress Syriac
Orthodox Church hope you are able to join us in a weekend of prayer,
worship, celebration and praise.

For more information, either email the center at monastery@synesius.com or
telephone 574-540-2048

Sunday, October 11, 2009

Stihirile Laudelor - Cântarile Sf. Cuv. Parascheva

Monasticism-Orthodox Church

"In afflictions and sufferings, endurance and faith, are concealed the promised glory and the recovery of celestial blessings."-St. Makarios of Egypt

Monasticism

Orthodox monasticism in video and music.

Foolishness for Christ

Peter Drobac



In the Orthodox Church, we generally classify saints into categories, based on the roles they assumed in life that led them on their paths of salvation to the gates of Paradise. We often hear of the holy martyrs who "fought the good fight and received their crowns of glory" for their witness to the Faith in the face of persecution; the holy ascetics are praised for the self-denial that brought them closer to our Saviour; the radiant hierarchs that grace the Church with their teachings and pastoral guidance are honored with hymns of praise; the glorious Apostles and virgins and confessors and prophets are commemorated every day in recognition of their union with God and their glorification of Him.



But there remains one group of saints that, at a casual glance, seems to stick out from the brave and noble figures mentioned above, and contradicts the characteristics that we would consider praiseworthy in many of them. These holy people received a calling from God, just as powerful as any calling to the priesthood or to martyrdom: to live a life of abject poverty and homelessness, to suffer ridicule and abuse, and to instruct those with a modicum of spiritual insight by their sometimes absurd actions.

St Nicholas Salos

St Nicholas Salos, for instance, taunted the Tsar Ivan the Terrible to eat a piece of raw meat during Lent (the tyrant refused to break his fast out of false piety), accusing his hideous actions towards his subjects equivalent to consuming human flesh. St Isaaky the Recluse, and many others like him, took on the yoke of feigned madness and stupidity. Countless others suffered spiteful accusations and gross injustice in complete silence, desiring to be shamed and mocked by the world with all their being, instead of defending themselves. In many cases, their holiness was only made manifest to those around them after their repose. They remain one of the least understood group of saints and, especially to us in the 20th century, the most troublesome. And if we are to be saved, we must, to some degree, emulate them.

These Fools for Christ's sake embody what the Orthodox consider to be a cornerstone of Christ's teaching - the abandonment of the wisdom of this world. They took upon themselves the same suffering and humiliation that Christ underwent for our sakes, since both they and He were rejected by the world in favor of earthly things. When the Jews claimed that they had "no king but Caesar" and that Christ should be killed, they demonstrated their profound abandonment of the Lord as their King. They sided with the wisdom of the world, which told them that it was expedient that One should die so that the Jewish nation should remain.

Christ was a scandalous figure for the Jews. He claimed to be the Messiah, but the Jews were expecting their Messiah to release them from the bonds of their political enemies, not their spiritual ones. Christ preached about the Kingdom of God, about the rewards that awaited those who did the will of His Father, rather than earthly rewards. His crucifixion was the ultimate act of willing self-abasement, a most profound example of fulfilling God's will in direct opposition to the desires and expectations of those opposed to Him. And so, the world rejected Him and His Gospel because they did not conform to its expectations based on fallen perceptions and ideals.

St. Paul's words to the Corinthians in defense of his teachings reveal this clearly: " [The] Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom; but we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumbling block, and unto the Greeks foolishness… God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise, and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty; and base things of the world and things which are despised hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to naught the things which are, that no flesh should glory in His presence" (1 Cor. 1:22-23,27-29).

Being baptized into Christ means putting Him on and living our lives according to His teachings and His example. If we have truly done so, then the same rejection and cries of ridicule await us as those that greeted His coming. When we look at the lives of the saints from this perspective, we can see, even in the most dignified of hierarchs and noblest of martyrs, the clear and unmistakable signs of Foolishness for Christ's sake. First by the pagan authorities, then by the apostates and heretics, and finally by the "faithful" themselves (even to this day!), those that remained as unyielding witnesses to the Truth faced punishment, exile and death. Rather than yield to God's infinite wisdom and mercy, His creation rejected those that bore them since they were incompatible with their goals.

But Fools for Christ went even further. They took upon themselves the difficult yoke of obedience to God's will in the absence of active persecution and presented the world, not obstinate centers of resistance, but spiritual barbs and jabs to reveal the extent to which it had deliberately strayed from God. Much like the Old Testament Prophets, who stood apart from society and spoke the word of God to His people so that they should faithfully return to Him, they could not both be a part of the world and at the same time its chastisers. In fact, the Prophets, who were the voices of God and did His will, were remarkably foolish in the eyes of their contemporaries - the Word of God they brought was rejected, and their actions, intended to convey in a physical way His word, were misunderstood, so that they were persecuted and killed by those they had intended to save.

And the Fools for Christ - who is it that railed against them and persecuted them for their rejection of the world? It was those whose minds had not been turned towards God, who had not yet accepted Him as King, and who had not accepted the rule and reign of His Kingdom in their hearts. It was those without spiritual discernment capable of distinguishing between things of this world and those of God. It was those who took pride and comfort in their imagined spiritual fruitfulness, but which were blind to the lives of these holy people, whose actions were in fact gifts from God to restore their persecutors' sight.

Brothers and sisters, let us be careful that we do not become like these, because living blindly in the world as we do, the temptation to scoff and condemn the works of God is ever-present. We must become the weak and foolish vessels of God that confound the strong and wise of the world. This, by no stretch of the imagination, means that we are required to take the burdens that the Fools for Christ took upon themselves, but rather, that we should look to them for reassurance. If the world rejects us in small ways for our small movements towards God, we can take comfort in the knowledge that they were once rejected for their great works - and before them, Christ. Let us be vigilant, so that we do not mistake the absurdity of this world's teachings for wisdom, and ignore the wisdom of God's word because we are told it is foolish, because it is the only road to eternal life.

source: http://www.pravmir.com/article_423.html

Saturday, October 10, 2009

On Saint Mary of Egypt

By Professor Susan Ashbrook Harvey, Ph. D.


"O Lord, open Thou my lips. and my mouth shall show forth Thy praise"

Today, the Fifth Sunday in Lent, is for the Orthodox Church the Sunday of Saint Mary of Egypt - she whose story has been called "an icon in words of the theological truth of repentancc" (Sr. Bcnedicta Ward). We have heard this story many times. It is a simple one: the sinful woman becomes the penitent, and the least worthy is revealed as God's chosen treasure. It offers us familiar words about the power of faith, and familiar inspiration in the heroic actions of St. Mary herself. But it is, above all, a disturbing story. In the end. it haunts me far more often than it comforts me. Today. I would like to explore where the heart of this story lies, and why it is given to us especially to remember it on the Fifth Sunday of Lent each year.
Three Stories
1. Mary's Life

The story of Mary of Egypt as it is written for the church is really three separate stories: The story of Mary's life, the story of the priest Zosimas, and the story of their experience together. Without doubt, the action and thrills come in Mary's story, which she tells to Zosimas when he finds her wandering in the desert. She had been a wanton harlot form her youth, not for money, she told Zosimas solemnly, but "out of insatiable desire". One day she saw the crowds of pilgrims preparing to go to Jerusalem, to celebrate the Feast of the Exaltation of the Cross. It sounded like fun. She went along, announcing to her fellow-travellers, "I have a body and that will serve as both fare and food for me". The trip rwas an eventful one, as Mary explored the outer limits of lust and passion with her companions (both those who were willing and those who were not, she added.)

In Jerusalem, when the day of the Feast came round, Mary too set off for the church, drawn by the energy of the crowds thronging to venerate the True Cross. But something happened. At the doors of the church, at its very threshold, Mary was driven back "by some kind of force". Trying as she might, she could not enter, although those around her went in with no difficulty at all. Then she understood: it was her own self that prevented her entrance, the sinfulness of her life that held her captive outside the church. Praying fervently to the Virgin Mary, with her heart open and clear, Mary begged forgiveness and again sought entry at the church. She remembered it like this, "A great terror and stupor came over me, and I trembled all over, but when I came to the door which until then had been closed to me, it was as if all the force that had previously prevented me from entering now allowed me to go in. So I was admitted without hindrance, and went into the holy of holies and I was found worthy to worship the mystery of the precious and life-giving Wood of the Cross. Thus, I understood the promises of God and realized how God receives those who repent.

Guided then by a vision of the Theotokos, Mary left at once for the desert beyond the Jordan river, for there, her vision told her, she would find rest. On the way, she stopped at a church built on the river banks; there she washed herself in the jordan, receiving thus her baptism, and partook of the Eucharist in that church, all the while utterly alone. From there, she came to the desert, led still by the vision of the Blessed Virgin Mary. Her new life was begun.

A powerful story, indeed! here was a woman ot true courage, a woman who had the courage to know herself. She lived life with a perfect freedom and a perfect love that few of us could match. Prior to her conversion, she embraced life with her whole heart, with her whole body, with her whole self - with the sheer power of her love for life (not for money, she had said, but for the love of it). Once an early bishop of the church had seen such a harlot in Antioch, and had lamented to his priests, "if only we would adorn our souls for the Lord with half the care this woman has shown in adorning herself for Satan!" (Bp. Nonnos, from the Life of Pelagia). hlary knew herself and understood herself in all of this, again in a way that few of us could match. Hers was a life of total honesty, in the sense of that old adage, "to thine own self be true." It was in fact her very honesty that brought her to her conversion.

At the doors of the church, Mary had hesitated - the first time in her life she had ever hesitated before doing exactly what she desired. At that moment, her honesty enabled her to see beyond herself. And there, beyond herself, she found God. Her conversion was immediate; but so, too, was the grace that answers genuine repentance. For in that single moment on the steps of the church, Mary was both changed in herself, and found worthy in the eyes of the Lord. Her response was entirely in character: with perfect freedom and perfect love, Mary turned the whole of herself to God - her heart, her body, her very life. With the huge courage that had once enabled her to lead her life of sin with clear self-understanding, she now lived her life in the presence of God. The desert became her home, the place where she found her rest. Her conversion and turn to the life of solitude were unknown to any other living being, until after forty-eight years the priest Zosimas came and found her.
2. Zosimas' Story

Now Zosimas' story is, alas, far more akin to our own lives. For we are all too glad to dissociate ourselves from Mary and her sinfulness. Hers is a story so different from our lives, after all. Here we are, in church on Sunday, in our ordinariness. We have our homes and families our spouses and children, our work, our life in the church and in the community. We try to be good Christians, to lead good lives. Even though we know our weaknesses, we know (faithfully) that at least we have nothing so spectacular as Mary's life for which to repent. Who among us could truly identify with her story, either the degree of her wickedness, or the degree of her repentance - for who among us would drop everything (everything) and turn to a life of ceaseless and solitary prayer? But this is exactly why we are so much like Zosimas.

Zosimas was a priest and a monk, sincere, devoted, and earnest. He sought to live a good Christian life, and he did. From his childhood he had pursued the monastic vocation, with piety and discipline: a man who early on had achieved an enviable sanctity. It would be hard to imagine a life more different than Mary's has been: the life of the monastery as opposed to the life of the city streets. But at the age of fifty- three, Zosimas came to a crisis in his life. "It was then that he began to be tormented by the thought that it seemed as if he had attained perfection in everything and needed no teaching from anyone. And so, as he himself said, he began to say to himself, "is there a monk on earth capable of affording me benefit or passing on to me anything new, some kind of spiritual achievement of which i either do not know or in which I have not succeeded as a monk?" Foolish man! For Zosimas had become a prisoner to his own idea of himself, a man who deceived himself about who he was, the life he lived and why he lived it in that way. He did not know himself honestly, and so he became captive to his own life. How far from the freedom with which Mary had lived, and loved, and lived again! But the Lord was compassionate with Zosimas, and spoke to him in a vision telling him to go to the desert beyond the Jordan, 'so that you may know how many and varied are the ways to salvation.'

Zosimas went, expecting to find a great and holy monk who would become his teacher. When he entered the desert, he walked for twenty days into its deepest and most desolate part, rwhere no sign of life could be found. Then he found Mary. The encounter was terrifying and wonderful. When first he saw her, the good priest could not tell whether she was an apparition, a Demon or an animal, and he crossed himself repeatedly to protect himself from the works of the devil. With a jolt, he realized this was a woman. She was naked, blackened by years of harsh desert sun, emaciated from her fasting, her hair short and pure white; and she fled from him, running away as fast as she could. Zosimas knew that here, in this utter wilderness, in this strange and frightening creature, he had at last met something he had never before known: the naked power and presence of God.

And so Zosimas, good man of God, found salvation and truth where he least expected it: in the life of a woman who had been as unashamedly sinful as he had been earnest in his life of devotion. And she, not he, was the Person in whom grace was found. Like the gospel story of the Pharisee and Publican, Zosimas' story is above all a plea for humility in our lives - for fighting against the complacency (both spiritual and social) which is the constant danger for us as we seek to live the life of faith. It reminds us vividly that appearances and actions deceive, that only God knows the intentions of the heart, and that the moment we think we have accomplished true Christian living we have lost our way. At such moments, the penitent sinner becomes our guide and our hope.

And so we come to the third story: The Story of Mary and Zosimas together. It is nbove all a story of giving gifts to one another. From the moment they met, their lives were found to be reversed. Mary, the sinful woman, became teacher and giver of grace; Zosimas, the venerable priest and monk, became disciple and suppliant.
3. Their Experience Together

When Zosimas first found Mary, she fled from him while he ran after her, begging for an audience. Finally, she stopped. He did not know who she was, and she had never seen him. But she knew him before he had even spoken to her, and addressed him by name, "Father Zosimas, forgive me." The priest was struck with dread: was she an angel? Mary, for her part, was alarmed because of her nakedness, and begged him to lend her his cloak so that she could stand in modesty before him. But it was not simply that she knew his name; with no word from him to explain who he was or why he had come, Mary new. She asked for his blessing, reminding him that this was his proper role and recalling his years of priestly service. Then, the story goes, "these words threw Zosimas into greater dread, and he trembled and was covered with a sweat of death. But at last, breathing with difficulty, he said to her, "O Mother in the spirit, it is plain from this insight that all your life you have dwelt with God and have nearly died to the world... But since grace is recognized not by office but by gifts of the Spirit, bless me, for God's sake, and pray for me out of the kindness of your heart." And so Mary gave the blessing.

Eventually, with great difficulty, Zosimas extracted her story from her. He was alternately terrified and wonderstruck as he watched and listened to her. She knew about him - about his life as a priest and the monastery in which he lived, and she clearly understood it all better than himself. When she prayed she levitated. Although illiterate and unschooled in Christianity (she had, after all, fled to the desert as soon as she converted) she quoted scriptural proofs for her teachings. But most of all, there was the enormity of her story. Zosimas drew out from her (much against her will) the details of her former life and her conversion; and he questioned her closely on the hardships of her desert life through those many years. She was as honest with him in the telling as she had been in her living. Not only was she blunt about her harlotry, she was also poignantly forthright about her life in the desert - how hard it had been, the suffering from cold and heat, hunger and thirst; temptation, longing for company and comfort; and yet her determination to live out her repentance in a manner suitable to her sin. She did not see, though Zosimas could, that she had attained a degree of sanctity that could only be measured by the degree of sinfulness she had known. For unlike him, she had no illusions about her accomplishments. She knew only the truth of God, and her love for him.

Then she asked a favor, for she understood that the Lord had sent Zosimas for a purpose. She asked him to return to his monastery and tell no one about her, but in a year's time return to her on Holy Thursday, the night of the Last Supper, and bring her the Eucharist, of which she had not Partaken since her conversion so many years before. Reluctantly, Zosimas left. He had become her disciple. Her presence and story renewed him, giving him life he had lost in the complacency of the monastery. At last he returned at the appointed time, yearning for her presence. She came to him, walking on water to cross the Jordan while he again gave way to awe. As he knelt to reverence her she reproved him, 'What are you doing, Father Zosimas, you who are a priest of God and carrying the holy mysteries?' And at once he obeyed her, resuming his priestly duties with fumbling fervor. Then, the story says, "Mary received the life-giving gifts of the sacrament, groaning and weeping with her hands held up to heaven, and she cried out, 'Lord now let your servant depart in peace, according to your word: for my eyes have seen your salvation."'

Again she sent him away, to return again the following year at the same time. But when the time came and Zosimas hastened on his journey, he found his beloved guide dead, with a letter to him written in the sand beside her body. From this he learned that she had died within an hour of receiving the sacrament the previous year - the fulfillment of her hope. He learned, also, for the first time her name: she signed herself "Mary the sinner." Grieving and marvelling, Zosimas buried the holy woman, helped by a lion who came to venerate the body of the saint. Then, he went back to the world to give the gift of her story to others, even as she had given it to him. And so we, too, know it.

Here we have a story in which the sinner knows the heart of the saintly monk: in which a humble woman gives blessing to the worthy priest because he has seen that her own gifts of the Spirit exceed the ranks of ecclesiastical office; in which sanctity is found outside the monastery more than within; in which the desert, the place of death, becomes the place of life; in which the peace of God's kingdom is restored as the lion and the man become partners in piety. It is a breathtaking story, and it moves us accordingly.



source: http://www.pravmir.com/article_567.html

Friday, October 9, 2009

A Comparison: Francis of Assisi and St. Seraphim of Sarov

During my prayer two great lights appeared before me (deux grandes lumibres m'ont ete montrees)—one in which I recognized the Creator, and another in which I recognized myself.

—Francis' own words about his prayer



He (Fr Serge) thought about the fact that he was a burning lamp, and the more he felt that, the more he felt a weakening, a quenching of the divine light of truth burning within him.

—L.N. Tolstoy, "Father Serge."



The truly righteous always consider themselves unworthy of God.

—Dictum of St Isaac the Syrian





Studying the biographical data of Francis of Assisi, a fact of the utmost interest concerning the mysticism of this Roman Catholic ascetic is the appearance of stigmata on his person. Roman Catholics regard such a striking manifestation as the seal of the Holy Spirit. In Francis' case, these stigmata took on the form of the marks of Christ's passion on his body.

The stigmatisation of Francis is not an exceptional phenomenon among ascetics of the Roman Catholic world. Stigmatisation appears to be characteristic of Roman Catholic mysticism in general, both before it happened to Francis, as well as after. Peter Damian, as an example, tells of a monk who bore the representation of the Cross on his body. Caesar of Geisterbach mentions a novice whose forehead bore the impress of a Cross. [1] Also, a great deal of data exists, testifying to the fact that after Francis' death a series of stigmatisations occurred which, subsequently, have been thoroughly studied by various investigators, particularly in recent times. These phenomena, as V. Guerier says, illuminate their primary source. Many of them were subjected to careful observation and recorded in detail, e.g.,, the case of Veronica Giuliani (1660-1727) who was under doctor's observation; Luisa Lato (1850-1883) described by Dr Varleman, [2] and Madelaine N. (1910) described by Janat.[3]

In Francis of Assisi's case, it should be noted that the Roman Catholic Church reacted to his stigmatisation with the greatest reverence. It accepted the phenomenon as a great miracle. Two years after his death, the Pope canonized Francis as a saint. The chief motive for his canonization was the fact of the miraculous stigmata on his person, which were accepted as indications of sanctity. This fact is of singular interest to Orthodox Christians, since nothing similar is encountered in the lives of the Orthodox Church's Saints—an outstanding exponent of which is the Russian Saint, Seraphim of Sarov.

It should be mentioned here, that the historical accounts of Francis' stigmatisation do not now give rise to any doubts in the scholarly world. In this regard, reference is made to Sabbatier who studied Francis' life, and especially his stigmatisation, in detail. Sabbatier came to the conclusion that the stigmata were definitely real. Sabbatier sought to find an explanation of the stigmatisation in the unexplored area of mental pathology, somewhere between psychology and physiology. [4]

Before proceeding with an explanation of Francis' stigmatisation from an Orthodox mystical standpoint—the primary purpose of this paper—an investigation of stigmata as physiological phenomena will be undertaken at this point, since such an investigation will contribute valuable information for a subsequent Orthodox evaluation of the "mysticism" of the Roman Catholic saint.

Guerier includes in his work on Francis the scientific findings of G. Dumas who analysed the process of stigmatisation from a psycho-somatic viewpoint. [5] The following are the conclusions Dumas came to concerning stigmatics:

1. One must recognize the sincerity of stigmatics and that stigmata appear spontaneously, i.e., they are not self-inflicted wounds, inflicted while the person is in an unconscious state.

2. The wounds on stigmatics are regarded as phenomena relating to the circulatory system (blood vessels) and are explained as effects of mental suggestion which does affect digestion, circulation of blood, glandular secretions. It can result in cutaneous injuries.

3. The wounds on stigmatics appear while they are in an ecstatic state which results when one is absorbed in some sort of contemplated powerful image, and surrenders control to that image.

4. The stigmata appear not only as a result of one's passive imaging of a wound on the body, but, according to the testimony of stigmatics, when the imaging is accompanied by the active action of the image itself—specifically that of a fiery ray or lance, seen as proceeding from a contemplated wound, which wounds the stigmatic's body. Often, this happens gradually, and not with the first vision, until the degree eventually is reached where the image contemplated during ecstasy finally gains control over the contemplating subject.

Dumas established the following general criteria for stigmatisation: all stigmatics experience unbearable pain in the affected parts of the body, no matter what form the stigmata take—imprint of Cross on the shoulder; traces of the thorns of a crown of thorns on the head; or, as with Francis of Assisi, as wounds on the hands, feet and on the side. Together with the pain, they experience great delight in the thought that they are worthy to suffer with Jesus, to atone, as He did, for the sins of which they are innocent. [6] (This, of course, is commensurate with the Roman Catholic "satisfaction theory," which is unknown to the Orthodox Church.) [7]

Dumas' generalizations are extremely interesting since they imply that in the process of stigmatisation, apart from the impassioned emotional state (an emotional ecstasy of the heart) a great role is also played by: a) a mental element; b) a mental imaging presenting acute suffering; c) auto-suggestion, i.e., a series of mental and volitional impulses directed toward translating the sufferings of the imagined image into; d) physical feelings—pain; and, finally, e) the production on the self of marks (wounds) of suffering—stigmata.

Dumas' observations recognize factors more than the emotional (which William James considers the source of mysticism) [8] which play an equal, if not greater role in the process of stigmatisation. These may be summarized as:

1. An intense labor of mental imagination,

2. Suggestion,

3. Sensual feelings, and,

4. Physiological manifestations.

The significance of these will be apparent later.

Following the brief scientific analysis concerning stigmaties in general, specific data, regarding Francis' ecstasy and vision, as contained in the work Fioretti, which will give the background leading to the vision, as well as a description of the phenomenon.

The stigmatisation of Francis of Assisi, due to the results of his vision, are ascribed to a singular prayer. The prayer is an intense pleading on his part that he may experience the sufferings of Christ in his body and soul. In the prayer, Francis desires Divine instigation of the experience and thirsts to experience this not just with his soul, but with his body. Thus, surrendering himself to ecstatic prayer, he did not renounce his body, but was inviting earthly, or bodily sensations, i.e., physical suffering.

Francis' prayer was answered. The chronicle says that, "Francis felt himself completely transformed into Christ." This transformation was not only in spirit, but also in body, i.e., not only in spiritual and psychological sensations, but also in physical ones. How did the vision actually occur?

First of all, quite unexpectedly for him, Francis saw something described as miraculous: he saw a six-winged Seraph, similar to the one described by the Prophet Isaiah, coming down from heaven to him. (First stage of vision). Then, after the Seraph approached, Francis, thirsting for Jesus and feeling himself "transformed into Christ," began to see Christ on the Seraph, nailed to a cross. In the words of the chronicle, "And this Seraph came so close to the saint that Francis could clearly and distinctly see on the Seraph the image of the Crucified One." (Second state of vision). Francis recognized in the image of the Seraph Christ Himself Who had come down to him. [9] He felt Christ's suffering on his body, whereupon his desire to experience this suffering was satisfied. (Third stage of vision). Then the stigmata began to appear on his body. His striving and fervent praying appeared to be answered. (Fourth stage of vision).

The amazing complexity of Francis' vision is startling. Over the initial vision of the Seraph, who had, apparently, descended from heaven for Francis, was superimposed another image—the one Francis thirsted to have above all, that of the Crucified Christ. The developing process of these visions leaves one with the impression that the first vision (that of the Seraph), so unexpected and sudden, was outside the realm of Francis' imagination, who longed to see the Crucified Christ, and to experience His sufferings. In this manner, it can be explained how such a complex conception, in which both visions, both images—that of the Seraph and of Christ —found room in Francis' consciousness.

The experience of Francis of Assisi is remarkable and of singular interest to Orthodox Christians, since as mentioned above, nothing similar is encountered in the experience of the Orthodox Church with a long line of ascetics, and equally long history of mystical experiences. As a matter of fact, all of the things Francis experienced in the process of his stigmatisation are the very beguilements the Church Fathers repeatedly warned against!

Recalling how the ascetics of the Orthodox Church understand the highest (spiritual) prayer as detailed in the Philokalia, it is to be emphasized here that they regarded this prayer alongside their own personal strivings, as a synergetic operation (man co-operating with God) to achieve detachment, not only from everything physical or sensory, but also from rational thought. That is, at best, a direct spiritual elevation of the person to God, when the Lord God the Holy Spirit Himself intercedes for the supplicant with "groanings which cannot be uttered." [10] As an example, St Isaac of Syria in his Directions says, "A soul which loves God, in God, and in Him alone finds peace. First release yourself from all your outward attachments, then your heart will be able to unite with God; for union with God is preceded by detachment from matter." [11] It is the plain speaking of St Nilos of Sinai, however, that slashes through with distinct clarity to present a serious juxtaposition to the alleged Divine visitation that Francis experienced. In the Text on Prayer, he admonishes: "Never desire nor seek any face or image during prayer. Do not wish for sensory vision or angels, or powers, or Christ, lest you lose your mind by mistaking the wolf for the shepherd and worship the enemies—the demons. The beginning of the beguilement (plani) of the mind is vainglory, which moves the mind to try and represent the Deity in some form or image. [12]

Francis' ecstatic prayer was answered, but in the light of both St Isaac's and St Nilos' counsels, clearly not by Christ. The chronicle says that "Francis felt himself completely transformed into Christ," transformed not only in spirit, but also in body, i.e., not only in spiritual and psychological sensations, but also in physical ones. While granting that Francis was fully convinced that he had been spiritually taken up to the Logos, the rise of special physical sensations cannot, according to St Isaac, be ascribed to the action of a spiritually good power.

Francis' physical sensations can be explained as the work of his own mental imagination moving parallel to his spiritual ecstasy. It is hard to say, in this given instance, which was dominant in Francis' beguilement (plani): his spiritual pride, or his mentalism (mental imaging); but, in any case, the mentalism was rather strong. This is confirmed by the substantive circumstances of the unusually complex vision which was presented to Francis after he felt himself completely transformed into Jesus which is clearly a very severe state of plani, having its roots, as St Nilos says, in vainglory.

The exaggeratedness of Francis' exaltation, which was noted in the description of his vision, is revealed very boldly when compared with the majestic vision of Christ which St Seraphim of Sarov experienced while serving as a deacon on Great Thursday of Passion Week.[13]

In contrast to Francis, St Seraphim did not seek to "feel himself transformed into Jesus" through his prayers and labors. He prayed simply and deeply, repenting of his sins. During the course of his prayer, and as a result of his great ascetic acts, the mystical power of Grace grew in him which he neither felt, nor realized. Standing before the throne (Holy Table) with a burning heart, as in the words of Elias of Ekdik "...the soul, having freed itself from everything external, is united with prayer, and that prayer, like a sort of flame surrounding the soul as fire does iron, makes it all fiery," [14] St Seraphim unexpectedly was stunned with the appearance of the Mysterious Divine Power. St Seraphim neither imagined, nor dreamt, nor expected such a vision. When it occurred, he was so stunned that it took two hours for him to "come to his senses." Later, he himself described what had happened. At first he was struck by an unusual light as if from the sun. Then he saw the Son of Man in glory, shining brighter than the sun with an ineffable light and surrounded "as by a swarm of bees" by the heavenly powers. Coming out of the North Gate (of the sanctuary) Christ stopped before the amvon and, lifting up His hands, blessed those who were serving and those who were praying. The vision then vanished.

Several items in the account of St Seraphim's vision are of interest in this study. Firstly, in direct contrast to prayer, St Seraphim's prayer is devoid of any element that would remotely suggest that he desired any visible (sensory) signs of the Divine Presence. Least of all, did he think in his life that he was ever worthy of being "transformed into Jesus," as Francis prayed. The key characteristic of the Saint's prayer is a profound humility, evidenced by his articulated confession of sinfulness which prompted him toward prayerful repentance. The significance of this, as the Church Fathers repeatedly point out, is that true humility effectively prevents one from falling into vainglory.

A second profound aspect of St Seraphim's prayer is the fact that no favor of Divine Manifestation is asked of God. Neither, of course, as mentioned previously, was anything extraneous to his repentance, thought or imaged while he prayed. This, of course, would be commensurate with St Seraphim's repentance, since his articulation of it indicates quite clearly that he himself was never deceived to think that he had achieved a level of worthiness where, in spite of his sins, he could boldly ask for Holy things. If he had thought about himself in this manner, he would have easily slipped into conceit. St Seraphim's prayer was intended for the exact opposite which did indeed make him worthy of the Divine Vision. St Maximos the Confessor in the First Century of Love expressed it thus, "He who has not yet attained to knowledge of God inspired by love, thinks highly of what he does according to God. But a man who has received it repeats in his heart the words of our forefather Abraham, when God appeared to him, 'I am earth and ashes' (Gn.18:27)."[15]

Concerning St Seraphim's vision, it should be noted that the highest spiritual state, attained through the way indicated by the ascetics in the Philokalia, develops in a person's heart outside the mental and sensual spheres, and, consequently, outside the sphere of mental imagination. Abba Evagrios in his Texts on Active Life—To Anatolios, says:

The mind will not see the place of God in itself, unless it rises above all thoughts of material and created things; and it cannot rise above them unless it becomes free of the passions binding it to sensory objects and inciting thoughts about them. It will free itself of passions by means of virtues, and of simple thoughts by means of spiritual contemplation; but it will discard even this when there appears to it that light which, during prayer, marks the place of God. [16]

The experience of man's mystical union with God is, therefore, usually very difficult to convey in human terms. It happens, however, that visions are allowed people who have cultivated passionlessness in themselves, but in the majority of these cases these visions are momentary, and they strike the inner being of the person—they come as if from within. St Isaac the Syrian elaborates: "If you are pure, then heaven is within you; and in yourself you will see angels, and with them and in them, the Lord of Angels." [17] The Fathers of the Orthodox Church teach that all these experiences are beyond any expectation of the humble man, for the ascetic in his humility does not feel himself worthy of this.

Recapitulating St Seraphim's experience, it can be seen that it bore the following characteristics:

1. Simplicity;

2. Repentance;

3. Humility;

4. An unexpected vision beyond sensory and rational categories;

5. Spiritual ecstasy or ravishment.

Emphasizing the last item, St Isaac, quoted above, explains: "...the contemplation of a hyper-conscious vision, granted by Divine Power, is received by the soul—within itself immaterialy, suddenly and unexpectedly; it is discovered and revealed from within, because, in Christ's words, 'the kingdom of heaven is within you'—This contemplation inside the image, imprinted in the hidden mind (the higher intellect) reveals itself without any thought about it." [18]

From the above points taken from a comparison of the two visions and of what Francis and St Seraphim experienced in these, there is a sharp difference in the mysticism of the two. St Seraphim's mysticism appears as a purely spiritual ecstasy, as something bestowed on the ascetic, as a gift of a spiritual vision, as an enlightenment of his higher intellect,[19] while Francis' spiritual experience is a mysticism induced by his will, and obviously darkened by his own imagination and sensuality.

A further distinctive difference between the two is the different relationship expressed by them toward Christ. In contrast to Saint Seraphim, who experienced Christ's spiritual power in his heart and accepted Christ within himself, Francis in his imaging, received his impression primarily from Christ's earthly life. Francis was absorbed in Christ's external aspect of suffering. This impression came upon him at Monte La Verna as if from without.

Concomitant with his very strong desire to experience Christ's suffering, was his compulsion to imitate other earthly aspects of Jesus' life. He not only sent his own "Apostles" to various regions of the earth to preach, giving them virtually the same instructions the Saviour gave to His Apostles, [20] but he even produced before his disciples not long before his death something similar to the great Mystical Supper itself. "He recalled," says his biographer, "that sanctified meal which the Lord celebrated with His disciples for the last time." [21] This presumption cannot be excused on the basis of his flamboyant life, regardless how severe his asceticism was or how many virtuous things he did. It stands as a prime indication, from an Orthodox point of view, of the severity of his fall into the condition of spiritual beguilement.

Before proceeding it is imperative to outline briefly the condition called plani. In general terms, according to Metropolitan Antony Khrapovitsky, plani (prelest, in Russian) usually results when the devil deludes the person by suggesting the thought that he has been granted visions (or other gifts of Grace). Then the evil one constantly blinds his conscience, convincing him of his apparent sanctity and promises him the power of working wondrous acts. The evil one leads such an ascetic to the summit of a mountain or the roof of a church, and shows him a fiery chariot, or some other such wondrous thing, which will bear him to Heaven. The deluded one then steps into it (that is, he accepts the delusion) and falls headlong into the abyss, and is dashed to death without repentance. [22]

What is clear from such a brief analysis of plani is that the subject who undergoes the experience usually has succumbed to some form of pride, usually vainglory, hence the presumption that one has finally achieved a state from whence he is deluded to think that he no longer must be watchful concerning the possibility of a fall into sin, or even blasphemy against God. It is, of course, the Luciferian sin, and by definition the most difficult to contend with, hence, the importance and constant emphasis in religious writing, concerning ascetic obedience and humility until the very end of one's earthly life.

It has already been shown above that Francis' vision contains strong marks of spiritual deception. What remains, therefore, is a characterization of Francis' work and acts which will stand as the prime characterization of his mysticism. Presenting a few incidents from Francis' life, and then, contrasting these with incidents from the life of St Seraphim of Sarov, it will be possible to draw a final conclusion regarding the mysticism of these two ascetics. It should be stated here that the example incidents chosen are generally characteristic of the subjects.

It is recorded in the Fioretti that Francis at one time failed to fulfil the rules of a strict fast because of an illness. This oppressed the ascetic's conscience to such a degree that he decided to repent and punish himself. The chronicle states:

... he commanded that the people be gathered on the street in Assisi for a sermon. When he had finished the sermon, he told the people that no one should leave until he returned; he himself went into the cathedral with many brethren and with Peter de Catani and told Peter to do what he would tell him to do according to his vow of obedience and without objecting. The latter answered that he could not and should not desire or do anything against his [Francis'] will either to him or to himself. Then Francis took off his outer robe and ordered Peter to put a rope around his neck and lead him half-naked out to the people to the very place from which he had preached. Francis commanded another brother to fill a cup with ashes and, having climbed up onto the eminence from which he had preached, to pour these ashes on his head. This one, however, did not obey him, since he was so distressed by this order because of his compassion and devotion to Francis. But Brother Peter took the rope in his hands and began dragging Francis behind him as the latter had commanded. He himself cried bitterly during this, and the other brothers were bathed in tears from pity and grief. When Francis had thus been led half-naked before the people to the place from which he had preached, he said, 'You and all who have left the world after my example and follow the way of life of the brethren consider me a holy man, but before the Lord and you I repent because during this sickness of mine I ate meat and meat drippings'. [23]

Of course Francis' sin was not so great and hardly deserved the dramatic form of penance in which Francis clothed his repentance, but such was a general characteristic of Francis' piety. He strove to idealize everything which an ascetic was obliged to do; he strove also to idealize the very ascetic act of repentance.

Francis' idealization of Christian acts of asceticism can also be noted in his relationship to the act of almsgiving. This can be seen in the way Francis reacted to beggars. In Francis' eyes beggars were creatures of a very high stature in comparison to other people. In the view of this Roman Catholic mystic, a beggar was the bearer of a sacred mission, being an image of the poor, wandering Christ. Therefore, in his instructions Francis obliges his disciples to beg for alms. [24]

Finally, Francis' idealized enthusiasm was especially revealed in his recollections of Christ's earthly suffering. In the biography of Francis it says that, "being drunk with love and compassion for Christ, blessed Francis once picked up a piece of wood off the ground and, taking it in his left hand, he rubbed his right hand over it as if it were a bow over a violin, while humming a French song about the Lord Jesus Christ. This singing ended with tears of pity over Christ's suffering, and with earnest sighs, Francis, falling into a trance, gazed at the sky...." [25]

There can be no doubt, as even Francis' biographers euphemistically attest, that this important founder of the Franciscan Order was demonstrative in his acts of repentance, revealing quite graphically the absence of a critical degree of watchfulness necessary in the ascetic life for the acquisition of true humility. As a matter of fact, whenever indications of Francis' humility are expounded upon in the Fioretti they are never lacking in a compromising presumptuousness whether God allegedly speaks to him, as an example, through the mouth of Brother Leon,[26] or when he presumes that he has been chosen by God "to see good and evil everywhere," when tested by Brother Masseo for his humility. [27] It is true that Francis describes his vileness and wretchedness, but there is lacking in all this any attendant remorse, or contrition that would indicate that he considered himself unworthy before God. Although he frequently spoke of the necessity of humility, and gave the Franciscan brethren useful instruction in this regard, he himself throughout his life experienced this only in isolated fits, albeit very strong ones; it came in fits not entirely free, as indicated above, from exaggeration and melodrama. Nothing can be so revealing in this matter, however, as his own statements to the brethren. At one time he was to say to his disciples, "I do not recognize any transgression in myself for which I could not atone by confession and penance. For the Lord in His mercy has bestowed on me the gift of learning clearly in prayer in what I have pleased or displeased Him." [28] These words, of course, are far from genuine humility. They suggest, rather, the speech of that virtuous man who was satisfied with himself (the Pharisee) who, in the parable, stood in the temple, while the Publican prostrated himself in a corner, begging God in words of true humility: "God be merciful to me a sinner."

When Francis' acts of "humility" are compared with St Seraphim's thousand day struggle on the rock, a stark contrast results. There, while in battle with his passions,[29] St Seraphim cried out the very words of the Publican over and over again: "0 God be merciful to me a sinner." In this feat there is neither exaltation, nor ostentatious display. Saint Seraphim is simply having recourse to the only possible means open to him for forgiveness after, a. recognition of his passions; b. a contrition welling forth from his remorse over his spiritual condition; c. a need to overcome the passions; d. his awareness of his inability and unworthiness to accomplish this alone and; e. his long and arduous appeal to God for mercy.

Even during his last years, when Saint Seraphim experienced many perceptions of extra-ordinary spiritual strength, as well as direct communion with God, he never succumbed to self-satisfaction, or self-adulation. This is quite apparent in his now famous conversation with N. Motovilov,[30] as well as during his talk with the monk John when he manifested, through the Grace of God, an unusual luminosity. Indeed, Saint Seraphim was unable to express the state of the latter luminosity in his own words. Also, it is well known that Saint Seraphim was the bearer of an extraordinary gift of clairvoyance as well as of prophetic vision. The hearts of people who came to him were an open book to him, yet not once does he compromise the extraordinary gifts he has received with any display of self-importance or conceit. His statements and acts (in contrast -to those of Francis of Assisi- Francis' consciousness was that he had atoned for his sins and was pleasing to God) are in consonance with what the ascetics detail in the Philokalia, about the humble man. In the words of St Isaac the Syrian:

The truly righteous always think within themselves that they are unworthy of God. And that they are truly righteous is recognized from the fact that they acknowledge themselves to be wretched and unworthy of God's concern and confess this secretly and openly and are brought to this by the Holy Spirit so that they will not remain without the solicitude and labour which is appropriate for them while they are in this life. [31]

Francis' emotional impulses toward humility, similar to the above mentioned incident in the square of Assisi, were in general rare manifestations. Usually his humility appeared not as a feeling, but as a rational recognition of his weak powers in comparison to the Divine Power of Christ. This was clearly stated in his vision on Monte La Verna when, "two great lights," as it says in the chronicle, "appeared before Francis: one in which he recognized the Creator, and the other in which he recognized himself. And at that moment, seeing this, he prayed: Lord! What am I before You? What meaning have I, an insignificant worm of the earth, Your insignificant servant, in comparison to Your strength?" By his own acknowledgement, Francis, at that moment, was submerged in contemplation in which he saw the endless depth of the Divine Mercy and the abyss of his own nothingness.

Needless to point out, it is the first declaration of the "two great lights," that manifestly bares the cognitive character of his subsequent query addressed to God which, in essence, is a very daring process of comparison. There appears, therefore, a severe contradiction in the passage that cannot be compared in any sense to the lucid scriptural or patristic accounts regarding humility.

St Seraphim's humility, as noted, was not so much a rational consciousness of his sins, but a constant deeply felt emotion. In his teachings, both oral and written, nowhere does it say that he compared himself to the Divinity, drawing conclusions from this regarding his spiritual status. He constantly gave himself up only to a single emotional impulse: the feeling of his own unworthiness (imperfection) which resulted in heartfelt contrition. Theophan the Recluse, a Russian ascetic of the Orthodox Church, expressed the sense of this thus: "The Lord accepts only the man who approaches Him with a feeling of sinfulness. Therefore, he rejects anyone who approaches Him with a feeling of righteousness." [32]

If, as a result of the above, one were to draw a conclusion about Francis' humility on the basis of the ascetic prescriptions for monastics regarding humility in the Philokalia, then the Latin mystic does not appear as the ideal of Christian humility. A substantial dose of his own righteousness was added to his consciousness that he was pleasing to God. Something similar, from an Orthodox analysis of Francis' mysticism, may be applied from Lev Tolstoy's story Father Serge: "He [the ascetic Serge] thought," says Tolstoy, "about how he was a burning lamp, and the more he felt this, the more he felt a weakening, a quenching of the spiritual light of truth burning in him."[33]

Recalling St Nilos' warning, mentioned before, this sad evaluation of the spiritual results of Francis' asceticism is corollary, or more to the point, is an antecedent plani to the severe beguilement he underwent on Monte La Verna, where he announced that he had become a great luminary.

Thus, Francis' consciousness that he also was "a light," that he had the gift to know how to be pleasing to God, meets with the dour pronouncement of the father of the ascetic life, Antony the Great, who states that if there is not extreme humility in a person, humility of the whole heart, soul and body, then he will not inherit the Kingdom of God. [34] St Antony's affirmation recognizes that only deep humility can root out the evil mental power leading to self-affirmation and self-satisfaction. Only such humility entering into the very flesh and blood of the ascetic can, according to the sense of the teaching of the Orthodox Christian ascetics, save him from the obsessive associations of prideful human thought.

Humility is the essential power which can restrain the lower mind with its mental passions,[35] creating in a man's soul the soil for the unhindered development of the higher mind,[36] and from there, through the Grace of God, to the highest level of the ascetic life—knowledge of God.

"The man wise in humility," says St Isaac the Syrian, "is the source of the mysteries of the new age."[37]
CONCLUSION

The chief cause which obfuscated the path of Francis' ascetic life may be attributed to the fundamental condition of the Roman Catholic Church in which Francis was nurtured and trained. In the conditions of that time and in the conditions of the Roman Church itself, true humility could not be formed in the consciousness of the people. The "Vicar of Christ on earth" himself with his pretensions not only to spiritual, but also to temporal authority, was a representative of spiritual pride. Spiritual pride greater than the conviction of one's own infallibility cannot be imagined.[38] This basic flaw could not but affect Francis' spirituality, as well as the spirituality of Roman Catholics in general. Like the Pope, therefore, Francis suffered from spiritual pride. This is very evident in his farewell address to the Franciscans when he said: "Now God is calling me, and I forgive all my brethren, both those present and those absent, their offenses and their errors and remit their sins as far as it is in my power."[39]

These words reveal that on his death bed, Francis felt himself to be powerful enough to remit sins like the Pope. It is known that the remission of sins outside the Sacrament of Penance and the Eucharist in the Roman Church was a prerogative of papal power. [40] Francis' assumption of this prerogative could only have been with the assurance of his own sanctity.

In contrast, the ascetics of Holy Orthodoxy never allowed themselves to appropriate the right of remitting sins. They all died in the consciousness of their own imperfection and with the hope that God in His Mercy would forgive them of their sins. It suffices to recall the words of the great fifth century Thebaid ascetic Saint Sisoe in support of this. Surrounded at the moment of his impending repose, by his brethren, he appeared to be conversing with unseen persons, as the chronicle relates, and the brethren asked: "Father, tell us with whom you are carrying on a conversation?" St Sisoe answered, "They are angels who have come to take me, but I am praying them to leave me for a short time so that I may repent." When the brethren, knowing that Sisoe was perfect in virtue, responded, "You have no need of repentance, father," the Saint answered, "Truly I do not know if I have even begun to repent." [41]

Finally, as evidenced in the preceding paragraphs, the mysticism of Francis of Assisi reveals that this highly regarded founder of the Franciscan Order moved progressively in his life in a growing condition of plani from the time he heard the command to renew the Roman Catholic Church, through the extraordinary vision of the Crucified Christ on Monte La Verna and until the time of his death. As startling as it may appear to some, he bore many characteristics which are prototypical of Antichrist, who will also be seen as chaste, virtuous, highly moral, full of love and compassion, and who will be regarded as holy (even as a deity) by people who have allowed carnal romanticism to replace the Sacred Tradition of the Holy Church.

The sad fact is that the attainment of a true spiritual relationship with Christ was never a possibility for Francis, for being outside the Church of Christ, it was impossible that he could have received Divine Grace, or any of the gifts of the Holy Spirit. His gifts were from another spirit.

Originally printed in Synaxis: Orthodox Christian Theology in the 20th Century, Vol. 2, pp. 39-56. Authored by the now-reposed George Macris, who was a Priest in the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad in Portland, Oregon at the time of this writing. Synaxis is published by the New-Ostrog Monastery in Canada.





[1] Guerier, V., Francis, pp 312-313.

[2] Seventeen year old Luisa Lato, usually enjoying complete good health, fell into a condition of ecstasy every Friday; blood flowed from her left side, and on her hands and feet were wounds exactly corresponding to the position of the wounds on the body of the crucified Saviour, in the form of the wounds depicted on crucifixes.

[3] Guerier, pp 314-315.

[4] Ibid., p 308.

[5] Dumas, G., "La Stigmatisation chez les mystiques cretiens," Revue des deux Mondes, 1 May 1907; in Guerier, pp 315-317.

[6] Guerier, p 315.

[7] According to the Orthodox, the Cross was not a necessity imposed on God, nor was the blood of the Only-begotten Son a source of satisfaction to God the Father, as the Latin Scholastics teach. The matter of "satisfying the Divine Justice of God" is a phrase nowhere to be found in the Scriptures, nor in the writings of the Church Fathers, but was a fabrication of Anselm of Canterbury (ca 1100) which was developed by Thomas Aquinas to become the official soteriological doctrine in the Latin West. (compare this with Athanasius the Great, The Incarnation of the Word of God).

[8] It will be evident from the comparison in this paper that "mysticism'' in the Orthodox Church is beyond all sensory as well as all rational categories. The normative for this in the ascetic life is dispassion, or detachment from all needs, feelings and even, ultimately, thoughts, positive or negative (compare, Abba Evagrios to Anatolios, cited above, p 9).

[9] See the life of St Isaaky the Recluse of the Kiev-Caves, God’s Fools. Synaxis Press, Chilliwack, B.C., Canada, 1976, p 21.

[10] Hyperconsciousness, p 292-293, 2nd ed.

[11] Kadloubovsky, E. and Palmer, G., Early Fathers from the Philokalia, "St Isaac of Syria, Directions on Spiritual Training," Faber and Faber, London, 1959. (hereafter referred to as Early Fathers).

[12] Early Fathers, p 140, paragraphs 114, 115, 116.

[13] Saint Seraphim of Sarov, pp 61-62 (Rus. ed.), cited in the notes translated from the Russian, see above.

[14] Philokalia, Vol 3, p 322, para 103 (Greek ed.).

[15] Early Fathers, p 297, 47

[16] Op. cit., p 105, para 71.

[17] Works of St. Isaac the Syrian, 3rd ed., Sermon 8, p 37.

[18] Philokalia, Vol 2, p 467, para 49. Here we must note that the quoted dictum of St Isaac the Syrian—that a spiritual vision is unexpected—should not be understood as an absolute law for all instances of such visions. By way of an exception to the cited dictum, but as completely exceptional phenomena, certain holy ascetics have had such unusual visions which were anticipated by them; but they had a presentiment as an unconscious prophecy, as a prophecy about what unavoidably must happen. Such an exceptional instance, as it were, a prophecy of a miracle which was going to happen, occurred with St Serge of Radonezh at the end of his life. This instance is described in detail in the Russian work, Hyperconsciousness, p 377. (The bibliography was not available to the author. It was cited in the notes translated from the Russian, see above.)

[19] See footnote 13, Ch 1, pp 13-22.

[20] "Go by two's to various regions of the earth, preaching peace to people and repentance for the remission of sins." Guerier, p 27 (cf Mk.6:7-12.)

[21] Guerier, p 115.

[22] Khrapovitsky, Antony, Confession: A Series of Lectures on the Mystery of Repentance. Holy Trinity Monastery Press, Jordanville, N.Y., 1975.



[23] Guerier, p 127 (our emphasis).

[24] Op. cit., p 129.

[25] Op. cit., pp 103-104.

[26] Brown, Raphael, The Little Flowers of St. Francis. Image Books, Garden City, N.Y., 1958, p 60.

[27] Ibid., p 63.

[28] Guerier, p 124.

[29] The word passions, as used here, denotes all the contranatural impulses of man (pride, vanity, envy, hatred, greed, jealousy, etc.) that resulted after the disobedience and fall of the forefathers.

[30] Motovilov, N.A., A Conversation of St. Seraphim. St Nectarios Press, Seattle, 1973 (reprint).

[31] Works of St. Isaac the Syrian, 3rd ed., Sermon 36, p 155.

[32] Collected Letters of Bishop Theophan, 2nd part, Letter 261, p 103.

[33] Posthumus Artistic Works of L. Tolstoy, Vol 2, p 30.

[34] Philokalia, Vol 1, p 33.

[35] Hyperconsciousness, On Mental Passions, 2nd ed., pp 65-74.

[36] See above, On the Lower and Higher Minds, pp 6-23.

[37] Works of St. Isaac the Syrian, p 37.

[38] Compare Dostoevsky, The Grand Inquisitor in The Brothers Karamazov.

[39] Sabbatier, p 352.

[40] In the 15th century, Luther protested against this prerogative as expressed in the practice of granting indulgences.

[41] Lives of Saints, Book 11, pp 119-120.

source: http://www.pravmir.com/article_687.html

St. Herman of Alaska

By Virginia Nieuwsma

In an obscure corner of what is now Alaska, on an Aleutian island called Spruce, a monk labored from the late 1700’s until his repose in 1837. Braving subzero temperatures, plagues and storms, ill treatment from fellow Russians who resented and misunderstood him, St. Herman lived a life marked by astonishing ascetic labor that gave birth to a deep love and concern for all with whom he came in contact. Strangely, despite the miracles associated with him not only throughout his life but also, after his death, he was all but forgotten after he reposed.

"Thirty years will pass after my death, all those who live now on Spruce Island will be dead, you alone will remain alive, and you will be old and poor; then they will remember me," Father Herman said to his Aleut follower, Ignatius Aliaga. As with other prophecies of the saint, this one too was fulfilled, as in 1867, Bishop Peter of Alaska began a formal investigation into his life. It wasn’t until 1894 that his story became known to the outside world, and then his glorification waited another 76 years, until August 9, 1970.

Born into a merchant family in the diocese of Moscow, St. Herman became a monk when he was still a teenager, first entering the Holy Trinity Sergius Hermitage near Petersburg, then later moving on to venerable Valaam Monastery. The saint grew to love Valaam with his entire being; monks there remembered him singing at the cliros in a pleasant tenor voice, while tears streamed from his eyes. For the rest of his life, St. Herman considered Valaam his spiritual home; indeed, he called his hermitage on Spruce Island “New Valaam.” In a letter to Abbot Nazarius, he once wrote, “Your paternal kindness to my lowliness will not be erased from my heart, neither the terrible impenetrable Siberian wilds, nor its dark forests, nor will the great rivers wash away the memory; neither will rough seas extinguish these feelings. For in my mind I imagine my beloved Valaam and look always at it across the great ocean.”

In the second half of the 1700s, explorers were expanding the boundaries of Russia, and Metropolitan Gabriel asked Valaam’s Elder Nazarius to choose ten men to evangelize the Aleutians. Sadly, after five successful years of founding schools and churches, the head of the mission, Archimandrite Ioasaph, and his entire entourage drowned. One after another, others working on the mission left, until St. Herman remained alone.

One time, St. Herman was asked, “How do you, Father Herman, manage to live alone in the forest, don't you get bored?” He answered “No, I'm not alone there! There is God, and God is everywhere! There are holy angels! How can one be bored with them? With whom is it more pleasant and better to converse, angels or people? Angels, of course!”

In addition to conversing with the angels throughout his hours of prayer and worship, St. Herman worked tirelessly. He ate and slept very little and when he slept, he used a bed that was a board and rested his head on a pillow of bricks. All his life, he wore the same simple clothing—a sleeveless deerskin shirt, his cassock and monk’s hat, a faded, patched mantle, and his shoes. In rain and storms, in the midst of winter snow or severe frost, he never changed his garments or added layers for warmth. His physical feats astonished those who knew him; one disciple saw him walking barefoot on a winter’s night, hauling a log that would have been difficult for four men to carry. With his own hands he built his cell and chapel, hauled baskets of kelp from the ocean to fertilize his garden, and in the midst of the labor meticulously kept the monk’s rule of services and prayers.

Tending his own garden and diligently observing his monastic rule didn’t keep St. Herman from reaching out with great love and concern to his Aleutian neighbors. On feast days and Sundays, he would gather them in the chapel next to his cell, and lead them in holy services; the people loved to listen to his spiritual teaching, and would visit him at all hours of the day and night, staying until early morning to absorb his instruction. The local Russian governor Yanovsky recalled, “To my amazement he spoke so powerfully, so sensibly, and argued so convincingly that it now seems to me that no education or earthly wisdom could withstand his words. We conversed every day until midnight, and even later, about the love of God, about eternity, about the salvation of the soul, and about Christian life. His sweet speech poured forth from his lips in an unceasing stream.”

St. Herman especially loved the Aleutian children, for whom he would bake cookies, and he watched over those who were weak and powerless. He started a school for orphans, tended the sick during a plague that decimated the population, and defended the native Aleuts before the Russian fur traders who were exploiting them. The people began to tell each other of miracles they’d seen. Fr. Herman would tell someone of a future event and it would come to pass; animals, even bears, would eat from his hands; he placed an icon of the Mother of God in the sand and a tidal wave receded back into the ocean.

People flocked to the elder for counsel and help. Affectionately, the Aleuts began to call him their “North Star,” referring to how his teaching guided and grounded them, or the even more intimate “Apa,” which meant grandfather. Couples with troubled marriages would seek his advice. With meekness, he would reproach people for their lack of sobriety or their cruelty. He himself for years refused any titles of elevation within the church, preferring the simplest designation, “monk.” His letters reflect his simplicity and tender disposition. "Our sins,” he wrote, “do not in the least hinder our Christianity... Sin, to one who loves God, is nothing other than an arrow from the enemy in battle. The vain desires of this world separate us from our homeland; love of them and habit clothe our soul as if in a hideous garment. We who travel on the journey of this life and call on God to help us, ought to divest ourselves of this garment and clothe ourselves in new desires, in a new love of the age to come, and thereby receive knowledge of how near or how far we are from our heavenly homeland.”

As the time of St. Herman’s repose drew closer, he began to tell his disciples to prepare, giving them specific instructions about his burial and services. Everything he prophesied related to his death came to pass, exactly as he had foretold, and so it was that on December 13, 1837, he leaned his head on the chest of his disciple Gerasim and reposed. “Glory to Thee, O Lord,” he pronounced with shining face, just before taking his last breath. In various Aleutian towns, people reported seeing a pillar of light, reaching from Spruce Island to the heavens. “St. Herman has left us,” one villager reportedly said.

Fortunately for the Aleuts and all Alaskans, St. Herman hasn’t ever left them. Miracles attributed to his intercessions have happened since his repose and are still happening today. Most Native Alaskans today are still Orthodox, and they honor his memory with prayers and pilgrimages. His relics rest in the Resurrection Church on Kodiak, and Orthodox faithful from all over the world come to venerate them and ask for his prayers.

source: http://www.pravmir.com/article_694.html

Thursday, October 8, 2009

Saint Martinian

Once upon a time, in a hot Palestinian desert, among gloomy livid mountains there lived saint Martinian the hermit. He was still young but filled with an ardent spirit and from a pure heart he wanted to preserve his chastity for God. So he often prayed to Him: "Put out the fire of my passions". God heard his prayer and granted him power over them. And when He saw the righteous one was ready, He put him to a test.

In the city of Caesaria there lived a woman famous for the beauty of figure she was greatly gifted with. But not only beauty gave her fame, for people knew about lewdness of hers. Once during an evening feast, everyone witnessed how with arrogance she said before their feet: "There is not a single man that can admire me enough, who does not want to make me theirs". "There lives a man in a desert of Caesaria, to whom your beauty is nothing, your gaze will not bewitch him". And once they said that, she laughed out loud and answered them with pride: "I will visit him in the desert and he will follow me wherever I go".

The evening was filled with scarlet colors and the enchanting sunset was ablaze. Beside a small bonfire a half-naked youth was sitting and singing praise to God for the day that passed and asked to send the holy night. He asked to grant him strength to fight and drive temptations off. But he was interrupted by Zoe who now stood infront of him. "Hello, my lord", - she said while clattering her rings. "Who are you and from where did you arrive at such an hour? Perhaps you're lost and cannot find your way to Caesaria?". "Your maid, my name is Zoe. I've heard thy labours and came to summon thee to rest, to give reward for thou toil. I brought some wine and food the two of us can share. I love thee and I am ready to stay here with my lord. I beg thee, cease your prayer and repentence for my love is very deep. And I am ready to obey whatever orders thee might have". The saint said to Zoe calmly: "I love you too and I'm rejoiced that you are ready to obey whatever orders I might have. Come stand with me so that we may give thanks to Christ for everything". And then he stepped into the midst of fire with his bare feet. "What are you doing?!" Zoe screamed, "what are you doing to your feet?". "I want to know what tortures God will grant me for my sins". "What torturure? When?" Zoe cried out in fear. And while standing on coals like on flowers the desert-dweller told her about souls, God, heaven, death and sins.

His speech flowed like water straight into heart of Zoe. And with some unearthly force it cured her ailment. The saint knew and continued his speech, filled with grace. The mind of Zoe became illumined, the fire of faith blazed up in her soul. The fire and coals under feet went out a long time ago but enlightened he stood and kept preaching Christ.

Zoe cried on her knees besides his feet. But he could only utter: "May God forgive you, Zoe. Go home and pray to Him". But she answered with love: "No, my lord, let me die here". For twelve long years she laboured in the desert and in Bethlehem was crowned by God.

Performed by the Old Believers of Oregon. The pictures are various monasteries in the desert of Palestine.

Wednesday, October 7, 2009

Chants and some pictures

When you are in a monastery you don 't have to be any place

Fr. Thomas Merton (1915-1968) in a lecture on the theology of St. Bernard of Clairveaux to novice monks at the Abbey of Gethsemani, near Bardstown, Kentucky. Merton was 'master' (the title of the monk responsible to educate novice monks) at the Abbey in the early 1960's.

Serbian Orthodox Monastery in Arizona

Here is a video tour of the Serbian Orthodox monastery in Arizona.

Encountering the Holy Mountain

The following is the account of an anonymous pilgrim's first visit to the Holy Mountain, made at the beginning of the year 2000. For those who have themselves been to Mount Athos, it is hoped that this recollection will serve as a reminder of the impact the place can have upon one who encounters it for the first time. For those who have not been to Athos, perhaps it will convey a small amount of the fervourr which the Holy Mountain instils in its visitors.


Monday, 27 March 2000 — Ouranoupolis, Greece.

The ferry was to leave at 9.45 a.m. the next morning. This was to be the hour when, should God grant it actually to occur, I would set foot on ‘the ship’ – as it is known from a small sign outside the Athos Pilgrim’s Office – that would deposit me, at last, on the Holy Mountain. I recall quite clearly that, as I lay my head down on the hotel pillow for a final night’s sleep before the journey, I did not believe I would actually see Athos the next morning. Too often I had dreamt about it, and now the great sanctuary of heavenly asceticism loomed somewhere off in the mist, just at bay, around the point. I had my papers, I had money for the boat, I had my bags packed and my alarm set for the morning. Yet somehow it did not seem real, did not seem possible, that in only a few hours I would touch that soil. It was the same soil upon which had trod the feet of so many great men: St Gregory Palamas, St Symeon, St Nikodemos, St Athanasius – all of whom had always seemed so distant in my studies, as if from another world, only marginally connected to my own. Now, as I contemplated my arrival on the Holy Mountain, these two worlds were about to come together. The same sights that had been seen by these great men, the same shores upon which they composed what have long since become many of the most enduring theological texts of Christian history, were now about to be beheld by someone who knew of these men as near-mythical ‘giants’ of the Christian tradition.

To say that I would be seeing the same sights as these ancient personalities is, in fact, a surprisingly accurate statement. For Athos, like few places in the modern world, has marvellously escaped the renovationist tendencies of human society. Where all around it ancient cities are being modernised and landscapes transformed by the ever evolving urban creature known casually as ‘society’, Athos has passed through the centuries with a surprisingly small amount of physical change. The newest of the monasteries are hundreds of years old, and even some of the one-room hermitages that dot the countryside have histories far older than those of the New World nations of the West. While America was but a dream in the minds of her founding fathers, monks were praying and working in the same cells that their spiritual descendants inhabit to this day.

Even the more modern changes to Athos – the introduction of roads connecting the northernmost monasteries, the arrival of electricity and modern plumbing, and the advent of the fax machine, mobile phone and library computer in the monastery enclaves – have changed relatively little of the visible landscape. In a world where the physical matter of creation – the ground, the buildings, the countryside – are understood to have been sanctified by the holy lives of those who have lived on them for the past millennia, there is little motivation to alter what does not genuinely need altering. There is a preservationist sense on Athos that is motivated not simply by a desire to preserve an ancient ‘other-world’ still in use, but to do so because the very components of that world are holy and grace-filled, from the great monasteries themselves to the smallest ports and pathways. And so the past is guarded, and the modern-day visitor is able to behold the same sights seen by monks and pilgrims for an almost incomprehensibly long period of history.

I lay on my bed, pondering such thoughts. Perhaps most poignant was the knowledge that I would tomorrow behold the same landscape that had 700 years ago been seen and loved by St Gregory Palamas, the subject of much of my recent reading. His thought has shown forth as among the most influential in the Orthodox spiritual tradition, and his works on prayer had given motivation to the whole focus of my studies. Tomorrow, I would visit the community he called home. It simply did not seem real.

I fell asleep praying for the journey ahead.

***

Tuesday, 28 March 2000.

My alarm sounded at 7.50 a.m., and perhaps I have never had so easy a time getting out of bed. I had, the night before, laid out the clothes I would wear for the day, and had packed everything else into my two bags. I had only to get dressed and wash up, and I was ready to go.

It took so little time (I had been more efficient than I’d predicted, knowing my own morning habits) that I found myself with nearly half an hour to fill before the Pilgrim’s Office opened. I had a ‘breakfast’ of some of the bread I’d bought the night before, along with a bottle of water, and decided to walk to the point near the old tower of Ouranoupolis, the ‘Gate of Heaven’, to watch the mist roll off the ocean as morning sprang fully to life. I remember standing there, leaning on the top rail of an old wooden fence that separated the grass from the beach, looking out towards the Mountain. It was hidden in the mist, and of it I could see absolutely nothing. So amusing, I thought. Mt Athos had for years seemed to elude me: each time I thought I had the opportunity to visit, something arose that prevented the journey. Every time I seemed to come closer, it seemed to draw further away – as if it were insisting that I come all the way to its shores if I were ever to know it at all. I laughed as I leaned against the wooden railing at the edge of heaven, and said aloud, ‘So, dear Athos, you hide yourself even now, until I actually place my feet upon your soil.’

***

As the doors of the Pilgrim’s Office opened at 9.00 a.m., I was the first to walk through them. It took only moments for my paper from Thessaloniki to be examined and replaced with a formal diamonitirion. 4,000 drachmas to receive it (I received the educational price). Only £7 to fulfil a long dream. I looked at the diamonitirion as it was handed to me: a standard sheet of paper, slightly brown, with my details printed legibly. A colourful seal of the community was in the upper right-hand corner, and a blue stamp of the Mother of God formed a sort of letterhead.

Like so much else in this journey, this small notice seemed unreal, slightly outside the realm of the actual. Surely I could not be holding this paper. Surely I could not be about to board the boat. Surely I could not be about to visit Athos.

Less than an hour later, I boarded the boat. At shortly before noon, this same ferry reached the port of Daphne. At 12.03 p.m. –I remember the time precisely– I planted my feet on the Holy Mountain.

***

There was confusion at Daphne. Amidst the strong, surreal atmosphere that seemed to pervade this little port village, there was a great deal of motion – a lot of ... noise? The ferry unloaded, people scrambled about. There were cars, shops, workers, even a café. New arrivals on the mountain scuttled about to their destinations, while another group hustled for the boat, headed back into the world.

I remember being startled by the commotion. It was not what I had expected, having long ago framed in my mind a picture of Athos the Silent, Athos the Somber, Athos the Noble Hesychast. Here things were far from silent. Apart from its smaller size, there was little about Daphne that was too visibly or audibly different from Ouranoupolis. Suddenly I had a great and terrifying fear: it seemed that my worries of not actually making it to the Holy Mountain were over, but might I now be faced with something far, far worse - that having arrived on the Mountain, I would find it overrun with secularisation, not so holy as I had long envisioned it to be?

The thought made me shudder, then made me angry. This was not how I should be thinking. I had been on Athos for all of five minutes; who was I to be pouring out judgements upon her? ‘Shame on you’, was all I could say to myself.

It was then time to do something I had long planned to do. Disappearing around a corner, behind one of the port buildings, I did what so many have done before me and kissed the ground of the Holy Mountain. God had granted me to come this far, and even should the world have crumbled to dust at that very moment, I would still have set foot on Athos. I venerated the earth, and thanked God for the blessing.

***

Confusion was next to come. Somehow, I had to get to the holy monastery of Simonopetra, where a friend had already informed the fathers that I would be arriving that day. Yet one thing that hadn’t registered with me before the ferry trip was now becoming quite clear: the sheer size and severity of the Holy Mountain. What looked on my map like a short jaunt between Daphne and Simonopetra was, in actuality, at least a two-hour hike over exceptionally steep terrain. Moreover I had my bag, and the sun shone hot through a heavy, wet, ocean air.

I had thought –or rather I had been told– that there would be a car travelling to the monastery. Later I would learn that this was actually the case; but at this point, amidst the bustle of the new landing and my generally overwhelmed, confused state, I could not discover it. Few people spoke English, and those who did seemed never to have heard of such a car. Suddenly the bus for Karyes and a small fleet of automobiles departed up a winding road, and Daphne was relatively quiet. I realised that I had no idea what to do next.

A kind monk, who looked to be of about middle age, was walking the shoreline road in front of the shops, weaving small crosses from coloured twine. I approached him for assistance, to learn quite swiftly that he spoke no English whatsoever. But he did have a warm smile, an evidently warm heart, and worked with me through the Greek (hand-motions were here, and elsewhere, to play a great part in my communications on the Holy Mountain) until I understood that a smaller ferry, the ‘Aghia Anna’, would soon leave to make the rounds of the southern monasteries of which Simonopetra was one. I thanked the father as best as I could with my poor Greek accent (a faint echo of Erasmus, for I had not yet learned modern Greek pronunciation), and walked to the boat.

The St Anne was, indeed, exactly where I needed to be. At around 12.30 the ferry pulled away from the port at Daphne and turned south. A kind English-speaking pilgrim informed me that Simonopetra would be our first stop, and that there I should depart. I thanked him and moved outside to the front of the boat. It would be only minutes before we arrived.

It was then that I saw Simonopetra with my own eyes for the first time. From the water it sits towering high above, clinging to the top of a rock, draping itself over the sides as over a sheer cliff. High on the hill, it is surrounded on both sides by deep valleys, which only add to its majestic presence as it seems to float in mid-air. My breath stopped at the sight of this holy place of which I had seen so many pictures and heard so many stories, now actually here before my own eyes, so far above the level of the sea that I had to crane my next back entirely to look upon it. I was overwhelmed.

The view, however, was short lived. The St Anne soon rounded a small point, and as quickly as it had come into view, Simonopetra was gone. It was replaced by the vision of a small port straight ahead, toward which our boat fast approached. Only a few moments later would my rising anticipation of an impending entrance into the monastery gates be subdued by the realisation that this port was not in fact that of Simonopetra, but of its neighbouring monastery, Greghoriou. The two ports themselves are rather close by one another, with only a single jetting peninsula separating the shore between them into two small bays. But for all their closeness, a stop at the latter meant a journey of an additional hour to make it to the first monastery; and as inviting as the cloister of Greghoriou now looked, only a short ten-minute walk from the landing upon which I and my bags had been deposited, I knew that it was to Simonopetra that I must make my way, for it was there that I was expected.

And then the next great realisation of the morning: I hadn’t the faintest idea how to get from the port of Greghoriou to the holy monastery of Simonopetra. I hadn’t purchased a map of Athos in Ouranoupolis (still having been under the innocent delusion that its short distances weren’t interrupted by massive mountains and ravines, and far-off sights would be easy to spot), and I knew only the general direction toward which the monastery must lie. But all that stood before me as I faced in that direction was a horrifyingly steep wall of shrubs and small trees, not so much a hillside as a cliff face, forming a more than a bit intimidating obstacle.

It would turn out to be a young Russian monk, whose name I would never learn, who would help me out of my predicament. The Aghia Anna had deposited him at the same landing upon which I, looking quite confused, currently stood, and he made use of some rudimentary hand gestures to inform me that he lived in a small skete, or collection of hermitages, in the valley between Greghoriou and Simonopetra. I managed to convey that it was to this latter monastery that I wished to walk, and he agreed to lead me as far as he could before having to turn off on his own. Without a further word, I picked up my bag, slung it over a jacketed shoulder, and began to follow my nameless benefactor.

***

What I saw along that journey can hardly be described. There is something about the landscape of the Holy Mountain that injects wonder into the mind and heart of whosoever sets foot upon it. One is captivated, almost drawn in by the beauty of the land on which he walks. Cacti grew almost as tall as the trees, towering amidst bright gold and purple flowers whose scents were as poignant as those of a perfumerie. These cast shadows upon our cobble-stoned walk, perfected in its form by a thousand years of loving maintenance at the hands of generations of monks. We walked in total silence, the young monk no less overwhelmed by the sight than I, hearing only the harmonious commixture of birdsong and waves gently breaking against the rough, Athonite coast which, as we walked, loomed ever further below us. Having heard symphonies and operas, musicals and concerts my whole life through, I can honestly say that the silence of that walk was one of the most beautiful sounds I had ever heard. God spoke loudly in the stillness and quietness of that footpath.

Few places in the world can produce the silence of Mt Athos. It is not just the technological solitude of the place that gives it such resonance (south of Simonopetra, where I currently walked, there are no roads, and hence no cars); it is the knowledge that one stands in the silence of over a thousand men – a population whose size would, almost anywhere else in the world, produce a fair amount of noise. But even as one walks through a desert ‘neighbourhood’ that houses hundreds, the loudest sound one hears is the crunch of the earth beneath his feet. It is when one realises this fact that he is reminded of the truth that a life of genuine communion with God and man does not necessitate a heavily laden arsenal of words and discussion, but a true connection of the heart and person with Him to Whom they speak and commune. The silence of such communion, when experienced for the first time, is entirely overwhelming.

***

I continued on with the nameless monk, shuffling a prayer rope through the fingers of my left hand as I used the right to steady the large bag I had hoisted over my shoulder. I could have done better than to have worn a jacket for this walk: the sun beat down with a squelching heat, made only more intense by the wetness of the ocean air and the speed with which my guide led me along. The path from Greghoriou is not one that would qualify for an ‘easy ambler’ rating anywhere in the world; the same kind of curt practicality that has been the trademark of monastic theology for centuries seems to have influenced monastic trailblazing as well. When one stands at the bottom of a hill and sees his destination at the top, what better route to follow than a straight line between them? So up the mountainous slope we went.

The steepness of the trail, as well as its length, inspired us to take several breaks on our journey, to sit on a stone or log and catch our breath before continuing on. It was during one of these breaks that the monk communicated to me –again through a form of sign language invented as we went along– that he must here depart and head inland, up the narrow valley at whose mouth we currently sat, to his hermitage. I should continue on, he said, and turn uphill whenever the opportunity arose. I was about two-thirds of the way to Simonopetra.

The monk and I exchanged the best farewells we could, and I asked his blessing before he headed off into the woods. He was the first monk I had met on the Holy Mountain, and though I still do not know his name, he has since remained a poignant symbol of Athonite spirituality alive in the human individual. To someone he had never met, about whom he knew nothing at all, with whom he could not even speak, this young man –perhaps only a few years older than I– exemplified the notions of hospitality, Christian love, and true devotion to his calling. May I have his blessing.

***

I continued on without my guide, doing as he had said and taking the high road whenever the increasingly narrow path divided along its course. It was perhaps 40 minutes after we had parted ways that I rounded a hairpin corner at the top of a small peak and beheld, for the first time since the ferry ride, the form of Simonopetra. It now loomed deceptively near: the sheer size and daunting shape of the monastery made it seem far closer than the three-quarters of a mile between us would allow. I looked up, no longer having to crane my next as steeply as I’d done aboard the Aghia Anna, and marvelled at the sight of such a structure.

Apart from all else, the monastery of Simonopetra is a remarkable piece of architecture. It is said to have been built in the mid-13th century upon the precipice of a finger-like stone that rises out of a deep valley, several hundred feet into the air. The actual peak of the stone monument, upon which the katholikos, the monastery church, now stands, does not provide much in the way of level surface area upon which to build. So to accommodate this landscaping challenge Simonopetra is built not so much on top of, but around the top of this massive stone pedestal. The result is a structure that quite literally droops over the sides of sheer cliffs, with row upon row of wooden balconies protruding several feet further out over the ravine below than does the building itself. And the same architecture which allows the monastery to sit so uniquely upon its perch also gives Simonopetra the illusion of being far bigger than it actually is; for when one beholds the exterior of the monastery, he sees an enormous complex which looks to be a remarkable 15 stories tall and cover the space of a solid city block. It is only when one enters through the gates that the truth is revealed: the centre of the monastery is actually quite small, most of the space being taken up by the great rock upon which it is perched. The massive edifice visible from the outside wraps around a core of stolid stone, not creating an exceptional amount of interior space.

This knowledge, though, does not alter the impact received upon seeing Simonopetra for the first time, especially from below. The old folktale of the three trees, in which the third desired nothing more than to grow tall and point to God, could easily have been modelled upon the desire of the workers hired by St Simon the Myrrh-Bearer, patron saint of the monastery, for the structure seems to point –even to reach up and come into contact with– heaven itself. As I stood at the top of a small ridge, still quite a distance below the great house, I somehow felt that much nearer the divine.

I would learn later –once I had come to know a few of the community– of the tradition surrounding the foundation of Simonopetra. On my second day at the monastery I spent a few hours visiting with one of the fathers, then the ekklesiastikos, or church-warden, also studying to become the community’s dentist. A friend in London had arranged our meeting, himself quite familiar with the monastery and its residents. My friend had chosen this pairing with the knowledge that this father, unlike many of the monks, speaks fluent English. He is, in fact, originally from America - Chicago, to be most precise. But having lived on the Holy Mountain for many years his identity is truly Athonite, and one senses in speaking to this man that he is encountering a true representative of the lifestyle of Athos.

After some time spent in introductions and personal histories, this dear father led me a short distance from the monastery’s main entrance, into a small structure built into the side of a rock face. There were two icons on the interior: one of the Nativity of Christ and the other of a solemn ascetic with whom I was not familiar, though the Greek inscription revealed him to be one ‘Simon the Myrrh-Bearer.’ Once we had venerated the icons and said a short prayer, the father lit a candle from the lamps in front of the icons and led me upwards through what appeared to be nothing more than a crack in the rock. The passageway through which we travelled was small, so much so that both of us needed to crouch to pass through, and after a few winding steps it opened into a small cave. The entire ‘room’ formed by this cave could have been no more than six feet by four, with the ceiling so low that, while seated, I still had to rest my chin on my chest to prevent hitting it on the rock above. It was here, in the shimmering candlelight of this small earthen space, that I was told the story of Simonopetra.

St Simon, sometime in the thirteenth century, had moved out of his residence in one of the larger Athonite monasteries in order to seek a more definitive solitude in one of the Holy Mountain’s many caves. That in which we now sat was the cave that had most met with his approval, and here he had spent the entirety of three years in prayer and contemplation, being disturbed only every few weeks by his spiritual father, who would bring him bread and water.

‘St Simon lived in this cave for three years,’ stressed my dear father, ‘three years in this little cave, where we can’t even sit up straight. Imagine that!’

I could not. I had long read of ascetics who endured such conditions for the mortification of their passions and the taming of their bodies and minds for prayer; but actually to sit in the cave, to feel the dark, to hear the silence, to know the solitude... I could not imagine such a discipline.

‘At the end of three years,’ the father continued, ‘Simon heard a voice telling him to come out of his cave and look atop the nearby rock. But Simon thought this was the voice of the devil, attempting to draw him away from his prayer, and he ignored it. Yet the voice came day after day, and eventually he discerned that it must be from God, and he obeyed.’

What Simon saw when he came out of his cave, I then learned, was a glowing star resting above the surface of the nearby stone massif; and the voice of Mary came to him and said, ‘Build here a house, and call it New Bethlehem, for in it shall be born many soldiers for Christ.’ And by these signs St Simon knew he was to construct a monastery on the impossible peak near the mouth of his cave. This he attempted to do by recruiting the hands of some worker laymen visiting on Athos, yet seeing the task before them, they instructed what they believed to be an ageing and perhaps senile old monk that such a feat was impossible on such terrain. But Simon insisted, and after some time and what must have been some impassioned pleading, he secured their assistance.

Sometime later, while the monastery that would become Simonopetra was in the midst of its construction, these same workers were resting on the top of its foundations with St Simon and an assistant. The latter was bringing water to refresh the workers, who grumbled on about how ridiculous and dangerous the project was, insistently informing their patron that someone was bound to get hurt if work continued. And, as if on cue, Simon’s assistant tripped on the construction equipment and, water pitchers in hand, toppled off the side of the building and fell down the cliff to the bottom of the deep ravine below.

‘The workers were furious!’ recounted the father sitting next to me in the cave, as if all this had happened yesterday and he had been there personally to witness their rage. ‘"We told you this would happen!" they cried, and announced that they would no longer have anything to do with Simon’s project. But,’ he added, ‘they felt they ought to hike down to the ravine and find whatever was left of the assistant’s body, to give him a proper burial.’

So the troop of men, followed by Simon himself, made the sombre hike down the slope to retrieve the body of their fallen comrade. But when they arrived at the bottom of the ravine, they were greeted by the youthful assistant, still carrying his pitchers of water. Amazed, they asked him what had happened. ‘It was as if an angel caught me and carried me down to the ground,’ he said.

‘At that moment,’ the Simonopetrite father continued, ‘the workers not only told St Simon that they would complete the construction of his monastery, but that they desired to become its first monks. And that is how Simonopetra was born’.

And it was to this very building that I now approached: one divinely inspired from its foundation, divinely used since its consecration, still divinely serving God through the devotion and humility of its inhabitants. The connection of so much history, united through the holy ties of sanctified lives that have blessed its walls and hallowed its floors, makes Simonopetra a place of amazing wonder and true holiness. To see it from afar in books and histories had intrigued me. To hear of it in personal stories had captivated me. To see it from the shore on the bow of an Athonite ferry had enthralled me. And now, as I arrived at its gates, it was time for Simonopetra to change me.

source: http://www.monachos.net/content/monasticism/athos/86-encountering-the-holy-mountain

The History of Mount Athos

Introduction: This is Part I of a four-part history of Mt Athos.

Pre-Christian History

The Holy Mountain of Athos has a long and elaborate history. It seems that from the first, human culture had marked out this spot to be one of wonder, amazement, and religious dedication.

The penninsula known today as Athos did not always bear this name. Ancients called the whole protrusion Akte, and so it was known for centuries. The name Athos (a word of prehellenic origin) is the that of a Thracian giant whose legend is intimitely interwoven with that of the history of the penninsula itself. One account records that the giant Athos hurled the entire rocky mass (now the peak of Mount Athos) at Poseidon in a gigantomachic clash of god and man. In another account, it was Poseidon who came out the victor, burying the defeated Athos under the penninsula's peak.

Another legend brings Athos' early history into a more human realm. This account, recorded by Strabo and Plutarch, tells of the lofty ambitions of Deinocrates, chief architect to the Macedonian king Alexander the Great, who purportedly wished to transform the whole of Mt Athos into an immense figure of the Macedonian king - rather along the lines of a classical Greek 'Mount Rushmore.' The intended sculpture was to be grandiose indeed: one of the king's hands would hold a city filled with his subjects, while the other offered a continual libation to the gods by pouring out a great stream of water into the adjoining Aegean. Alexander declined his architect's offer. It it likely that this rejection was based not so much on a sense of personal modesty (for which Alexander was not well known), as on a desire to avoid being remembered by history as a man quite so arrogant as Xerxes.

Xerxes, the famed Persian king, had carved a canal through the beginning of the Athonite penninsula in 481 BC, joining the Ierissos (on the north) and Singitic (on the south) gulfs and providing safer passage than the journey around Athos' southern point (Cape Akrothoos). Some historians doubt that this canal was ever finisihed, some that it was ever begun. Yet present-day visitors to the Holy Mountain can still see remnants of this canal, long since filled in with sediment, but still clearly evident as a long, narrow, and obviously artificial valley in precisely the location attributed to Xerxes' project.

Information on the following centuries is sparse at best. Historians of the age record small settlements on Athos, among which we know of Thissos, Kleonae, Sane, Olofixos, Akrothooi, Dion and Apollonia - though the precise locations of these are unknown. It is certain, however, that they had been abandoned by the time the first monks arrived, for they report an abandoned, solitary place of a most rugged character. The perfect 'desert' for an ascetic life.

But before the monks established themselves on Athos, the Holy Mountain was to be blessed by the Mother of God, to whom it would ever after be dedicated.

The Theotokos Visits Athos

We are told, through an apocryphal account, of the Virgin's visit to the Holy Mountain in 49 AD. The story varies slightly from tradition to tradition, but its heart is the same in each.

Upon the death and resurrection of Our Lord, the Apostles 'cast lots' to determine who would travel abroad to spread the Gospel throughout the known world. Some would remain in Palestine to further the Church there, but others would set off on the burgeoning missionary movement. It is reported that the Theotokos asked to join those who made their way through the world - her heart ever ready to share the news of her Son. The lots having been case, her was to Georgia and Athos.

Yet before she could set out on her journey, the Theotokos received a visitation from the archangel Gabriel. His instruction was that she remain in Jerusalem for a time, thus delaying her departure. She obeyed the call for delay, and remained in the city. A short time later she received word from Lazarus --earlier raised from the dead by Christ and now bishop of Cyprus-- who asked to receive her in his hospitality before dying once again. She agreed to his request, and he sent a ship to retrieve the Mother of God from the holy city.

Our Lady set sail with St John the Evangelist, to whom she had been entrusted by Christ upon the cross. The journey began uneventfully, but soon their ship was blown off course and instead of reaching Cyprus, they came upon the imposing summit of Athos. The words of the Theotokos upon first seing the Holy Mountain are fondly remembered there today: 'This mountain is holy ground. Let it now be my portion. Here let me remain.'

Her vessel shored in a bay at Clementos. There stood in that place (now the site of the Holy Monastery of Iviron) a temple and oracle of Apollo, revered deity of the Greeks. Tradition records that as the Virgin set foot upon Athonite soil the air resounded with the sound of loud crashing, as its pagan altars fell and the oracle of Apollo proclaimed its own false nature. All who lived on Athos were converted and baptized by the Mother of God, who then resumed her voyage to Cyprus.

This visit is understood to have been alluded to in the 12th chapter of Revelation, wherein a woman clothed with the sun and with the moon beneath her feet, after her son had been carried away up to the throne of God, fled to the desert where a place had been prepared for her. This desert is understood as Athos.

St Peter the Athonite and the Earliest Hermits

The first definite account of the beginnings of the eremitical life on Athos is the story of the 9th-century monk and saint, Peter the Athonite. Having broken a vow to become a monk by joining the Byzantine army, Peter found himself imprisoned by the Arabs in what he viewed as divine displeasure for his disobedience. Peter renewed his vow under the invocation of St Nicholas, at whose intercession he was released from captivity and sailed to Rome to be ordained by the Pope. Later he headed for the Levant by ship, and during the journey dreamed that he saw St Nicholas and the Theotokos conversing. The Mother of God told the saint of her reception of Athos as her own, and informed him that Peter would there spend the rest of his days in her protection.

Peter, now believing himself to be under the direct guidance of the Mother of God, abandoned the vessel at Athos, the crew sailing on without him. Thence he began his eremetical life on the rugged Athonite peaks. His hagiographer records that within two weeks of Peter's arrival, the Enemy appeared to attack him with his demons, but was repulsed. 50 days later he tried again, but once more was rebuked by Peter. The same was true after a year had passed. Finally, seven years later, Satan again ferociously attacked the saint, this time disguised as an angel of light; but by this time Peter had attained true humility and purity, and Satan was defeated. Peter had emerged triumphant.

St Peter the Athonite is commonly regarded as one of the first hermits of Athos, which had its beginning as a collection of eremitical monastics and later sprouted forth into cenobitic monasticism. Yet there may have been monks on the Holy Mountain far earlier than Peter. One tradition states that Constantine the Great, first Christian emperor and equal-to-the-Apostles, himself came to the mountain in the fourth century and built three churches there (though they were later destroyed by his anti-Christian successor, Julian the Apostate). More reliable evidence exists to show that there was a notable collection of iconophile monks on Athos in the 8th century, as ascetics from Athos are noted as having taken part in the Ecumenical Council of 843.

source: http://www.monachos.net/content/monasticism/athos/113-a-history-of-mount-athos

St. Mary's Orthodox Bookstore: An Orthodox Interpretation of the Gift of the Spirit

St. Mary's Orthodox Bookstore: An Orthodox Interpretation of the Gift of the Spirit: "Clark Carlton writes that since his conversion to Orthodoxy, he has continued to dialogue with Protestants. While he says he has not had a problem answering Protestant notions such as sola scriptura or predestination. However, he has always had trouble dealing with questions of tongue and other gifts of the Spirit. According to Carlton, Father Alexis' book, In Peace Let Us Pray to the Lord, gave him a truly Orthodox answer."

Fr. Moses Berry - Who's on Your Blacklist Video

Fr. Moses Berry - Who's on Your Blacklist Video

Shared via AddThis

Tuesday, October 6, 2009

Orthodox Prayer

Bishop Christodoulos of the Holy Metropolis Greek Orthodox Church discusses the purpose of Orthodox Christian prayer.



In this video, the young man discovers the Coptic Orthodox monks praying as do today and as they have for centuries.



Arise, you, O children of the light, to praise the Lord of Hosts, that He may grant us the salvation of our souls. When we stand in the flesh before You, take away from our minds the sleep of forgetfulness, and grant us alertness, in order that we understand how to stand up before You at the time of prayer, and send up to You the appropriate doxology, and win the forgiveness of our many sins.

This video shows how a Christian should pray as the video's author was taught from his Father of Confession.



Probably the last recording of the Elder Cleopa, in which he talks about the stages of the prayer.

syrian orthodox church

a visual journey to the syrian orthodox church...created by MOR IGNATIUS YOUTH ASSOCIATION PRAKKANAM,PATHANAMTHITTA.

The Orthodox Prayer Rope

How to make an Eastern Christian prayer rope: "chotki" in Russian & "comboschini" in Greek. Used for praying the Jesus Prayer "Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me a sinner."



Mother Apolinaria of the Dormition of the Mother of God Orthodox Monastery in Michigan makes a mătănii (prayer rope).

The chanting is the prokeimenon, troparion, and kontakion for the Feast of the Protection of the Mother of God.


Vladika Lazar continues his discussion of the use of the Prayer Rope and the prayer for the guarding of the minf


True Joy

True joy comes from seeing God in all things, knowing God in all things. To know of God in the wisdom of the mind, this brings shimmers of peace and a foretaste of joy. Yet such joy is bounded, able to be swayed; for he who knows God's presence but in part, still is able to imagine His absence. One who sees God only in this place or in that, sees Him missing from those places in between. His joy is fleeting, for as in a moment it arises in the perception of God's presence, so it retreats in the illusion of His absence.

The one whose joy is stable, solid and penetrating, is he who knows of God's presence among all things, with all things, and in all things. Even as in the temple, so, too, in the school. Even as in the Church, so, too, in the field. From the brightest star to the smallest blade of grass, he sees the beautiful mystery of Christ present as all in all. He beholds the leaf with reverence, as the vessel of his direct encounter with the grace of God. He beholds his sister with love, seeing in her the energies of the blessed Divinity. He begins to see God present in more and more, and absent from less and less; until he comes to the divine realization that there is no place that God is not, that the whole of creation around him shimmers in radiance with the presence of the Most Holy. He understands that perceptions of God's absence are but an illusion in which there is no truth.

Then is joy most full, most pure. Then it is unfailing, for in all things is God encountered; and where God is, there true joy also abides. Even in sorrow, joy is known; for the earth itself cries out in witness of Christ's presence in the sorrow -- of the divine love that pervades even the deepest human grief. In loneliness, one too finds joy: for all creation sings of the Creator's grace, and through it the Creator Himself is present, reaching out to His children.

Behold God the all-present, all-loving, all-merciful Father, everywhere existing and ever the same. Behold the source and giver of joy, abounding in this world of life. Behold God indeed, who has the power to save and the compassion to redeem.

source: http://www.monachos.net/content/monasticism/monastic-spirituality/95-true-joy

A Gospel motivation for the monastic life

Written by M.C. Steenberg

Revised edition. The original version of this text was first published on Monachos.net in February, 2001. It has since been updated and revised by the author in July 2008.

But one thread alone can give our story [of the development
of monasticism] its true meaning—the search for personal
holiness, the following of the Lord Jesus, whether in the solitary
cell or on the abbot’s seat, or in all the menial works of
the monastery.

— Derwas J. Chitty

The great question of the ‘why?’ behind the monastic venture is one that has, in its course, provoked a wide variety of different responses.

Douglas Burton-Christie, in the introduction to his work The Word in the Desert: Scripture and the Quest for Holiness in Early Christian Monasticism, lists several -- some more practical than inspirational: the quest for knowledge (gnosis), a flight from taxation, a refuge from the law, a new form of martyrdom, a revival of earlier ascetical movements, etc.1 Others have had their lists also, both positive and negative in their perceptions of the early monastic movement. W.H. Mackean explored the contours of a longstanding ascetic ‘atmosphere’ in Egypt, and laid great weight on the formative influence this would have had on the development of a Christian spirituality in the region—presenting overall a quite positive perception of monasticism. At the other end of the spectrum was E. Gibbon, who, in a text that Chadwick would later call ‘one of the most strident specimens of sustained invective and cold hatred to be found in English prose’,2 attributes the early monks’ eagerness to adopt the strict ascetic life of the desert to wild delusion and cold disregard for the teachings of the Church.3

A more balanced view has emerged in the modern scholarship, by and large. There is among scholars today a basic agreement that the rise of the ascetic life in the early Church cannot be attributed to any single cause, positive or negative, but rather to a mixture and commingling of several elements at play in the Egyptian and Palestinian worlds of the age.4 The forces that drove the monastic venture to become a central structure of the Church are, like the circumstances of its origins, many and diverse.

Yet if there has arisen a better sense of nuance to the complexities of monastic origins, studies into the rise of monasticism still tend to suffer from a certain imbalance. In the large majority, such studies deal with monasticism principally as an institution—as a body or collective of Christian society, with its own drives, leaders, histories, politics, and historical progressions. Studies that emerge from this context of approach regularly imitate it, and the ‘why’ behind monasticism is over and again explored from the perpective of its social aspects.

However, a close reading of certain texts—principally the Apothegmata Patrum and Historia Monachorum in Aegypto, but also the modern works of scholars such as Burton-Christie, Ward, Bloom, and others—reveal another equally (and indeed more) important aspect. Early monasticism was the eager living-out of the scripturally-enjoined quest for personal holiness and the pursuit of Jesus’ model of life, and this perception of living the Gospel was then -- and remains today -- a key aspect of monastic culture.

Background: Holy scripture as a principal inspiration for the monastic life.

Douglas Burton-Christie writes, in what might be taken as the thesis of his work:

I suggest that, given what we know of the social tensions in Roman Egypt, the presence of an emerging culture of asceticism, and the growth of a church in which Scripture figured prominently, the impact of Scripture on early monastic acts of renunciation should not be underestimated.5

This comment is revealing of a trend in scholarship. The very fact that he feels the need to make explicit mention of something seemingly so foundational to monasticism as scripture, bespeaks a noticeable lack of scriptural discussion in the discipline of monastic history. Burton-Christie rightly reacts to a path this field of study has traditionally taken: the continual drive to explore the motivations for monastic renunciation in almost every area except creative, ascetical scriptural application. But this trend to see the scriptures as a lone element, perhaps even a side-element used to give 'holy cover' to more practical, worldly motivations for leaving the cities for the deserts, reads modern-day biases into the evidence of history. As Burton-Christie notes,

all the motivations that [the desert fathers] themselves revealed to us in their writings came from Scripture. Do we have a right to pretend we know their secret motivations better than they did?6

This observation is certainly borne out in the texts passed down from those early monastics. To take the most famous collection of early monastic sayings, the Apothegmata Patrum ('Sayings of the Desert Fathers'): an open reading, made without the encumbrances of too many theories on oriental influences, 'gnostic' tendencies, political and economic fears and the like, discoversa remarkably consistent witness to lives lived of and in the testimony of the scritpures. Behind the diverse examples and teachings of these Egyptian ascetics lies a central, simple call to action, expressed nowhere better than in the experience of St Anthony the Great in his hometown church. ‘If you would be perfect,’ he heard the Gospel proclaimed, as if it were spoken directly to him, ‘go, sell all you have and give to the poor, and come and follow me.’7 It was this call, this scriptural invitation to personal perfection through renunciation, that inspired Anthony's remarkable departure from the world and ascent in holiness—a journey which, recorded in St Athanasius' Life of St Anthony, has remained a foundational testimony to monastic life ever since. It was this same call, born of the Gospel itself, to which the individual monks of the fifth century attributed their adoption of the ascetic life. These men and women did not join the monastic ranks as an ‘experiment’ into a new kind of society, culture, or commune, but as a life-consuming and life-creating journey toward the perfection offered in the Gospel proclamation.

Of course, this very idea requires a widespread familiarity with that Gospel—with the Scripture of the Church. Whether or not such a familiarity was actually present in Egypt during the first centuries of the Christian era has been the subject of considerable debate, and it is in this discussion that Burton-Christie’s work is of great importance. His investigation into the presence of books and written texts in the desert, as well as the translation of the Scripture into the various Coptic and other Egyptian dialects, is both thorough and convincing.8

It is possible, though, to discover the extent of Scriptural familiarity in the Egyptian desert without the use of such detailed archaeological and anthropological evidence as Burton-Christie takes up: the very sayings of the Apothegmata, imbued as they are with a ‘Scriptural aura,’ betray the great extent to which the inhabitants of even the remotest areas of the desert knew and lived the Scripture of the Church. A short saying concerning Abba Sisoes is perhaps one of the most obvious examples:

A brother asked Abba Sisoes the Theban, ‘give me a word,’ and he said, ‘What shall I say to you? I read the New Testament, and I turn to the old.’9

And also from a saying concerning Antony:

Someone asked Abba Anthony, ‘What must one do in order to please God?’ The old man replied, ‘Pay attention to what I tell you: whoever you may be, always have God before your eyes; whatever you do, do it according to the testimony of the holy Scriptures.’10

In these two injunctions alone, we are able to discover both the relatively ready availability of Scripture in the desert (else how would Sisoes so often read it?), and an assumed familiarity with its teachings among the general population of monks. Yet our evidence for the deep influence of Scripture on the lives of the monks is not limited to those passages which mention it directly, or quote from its pages (though such passages abound). Even those sayings which give no direct mention to Scripture per se, often betray so strong a Scriptural influence that the connection is easily seen. Abba Agathon, by way of example, is remembered as saying, ‘If someone were very specially dear to me, but I realised that he was leading me to do something less good, I should put him from me’,11 and a connection to the thought of Mark 9.43-48 seems readily apparent. Isidore the Priest said, ‘It is impossible for a man to live according to God if he loves pleasures and money’,12 and again we hear the strong and unmistakable echoes of Scripture—this time of Luke 16.13.

And so the writings of the Desert Fathers themselves, evidence the extent to which Scripture was present and prevalent in the desert: not only was it read, but it was absorbed and infused into the lives and teachings of the monks so deeply that they could ‘speak a word’ to their disciples and have it be so in-line with Scripture that it almost seemed a paraphrase.

The Gospel Call of Christ: Repentance that Leads to Perfection.

The above will hopefully provide us with the groundwork to investigate the inner calling of the early monastics, from their own perspective. For at its deepest, simplest, and most basic level, these men and women saw their adoption of the ascetic life, with its often violent and always dramatic renunciation of the world, as their own sacrificial attempt at heeding the call of the Gospel. ‘Take up your Cross and follow me,’ Christ spoke, and the whole monastic life might be seen as a response to this fundamental command. It is a personal injunction: Christ does not speak it to some collective or whole, but to the individual—to the person. Monasticism, however it has traditionally been seen by outside observers and scholars, has always been for the monastic, not an institution of the far-off ‘they’, but of the personal ‘he’ or ‘she’, or more properly, ‘I’. I hear the call of Christ; I must respond; I must take whatever steps necessary, no matter how austere or severe, to live the life of personal holiness and growth commanded of Christ, as my own response to the gracious outpouring of His love.

Abba Arsenius discovered this while living the royal life in Rome:

While still living in the palace, Abba Aresenius prayed to God in these words, ‘Lord, lead me in the way of salvation.’ And a voice came saying to him, ‘Arsenius, flee from men and you will be saved’.13

This is not the story of a man who entered the ranks of the monks as one engaging in some symbolic, renunciative act, but of one who yearned for his own salvation, despaired of it in his current setting, and was willing to make whatever sacrifice was required to obtain it. To once again quote Abba Isidore the Priest, ‘If you desire salvation, do everything that leads you to it’.14

That this everything would require a renunciation of the world seemed only appropriate to the early Fathers of the desert, for practical rather than symbolic reasons. Abba Poemen is recorded as saying that one who lives among the sensual pleasures of the world is as one who stands on the edge of a lake, easily pushed in by the demons; whereas one who stands afar off from the water’s edge, is protected from falling in.15 Why might one flee the comforts of life to adopt such as harsh life as that of the early monks and nuns? we often ask, probing for some deep, psychological motivation. But the Fathers’ response is as simple as it is practical: we flee, for in fleeing, we abandon the many distractions that surround us in the world. Worldly renunciation is a tool to compensate for personal weakness, as Abba Matoes clearly states: ‘It is not through virtue that I live in solitude, but through weakness; those who live in the midst of men are the strong ones’.16

But the renunciation of the true monastic life was more than just renunciation of the world, it was equally a renunciation of self. The Apothegmata is filled with references to the great lengths to which the Fathers would go, to control their wills and inclinations; as well as the great physical labours in which they would engage, in order to tame the passions and habituations of the body. The modern reader is posed again with driving question of ‘why?’ Perhaps the answer is best given by the experience of Abba Alonius:

If I had not destroyed myself completely, I should not have been able to rebuild and shape myself again.17

Again we see the characteristic, common-sense practicality of the Fathers’ approach to the ascetic life. Its austerities are not ‘sacred rituals’ or prized gems of the religious culture, but useful aids in the struggle for that great goal of the Christian faith: perfection in Christ through a rebirth into the new life given by God. In this deeply Scriptural light, we are able to better understand the various experiences and teachings of the Apothegmata from their intended perspective.

‘The soul prospers in the measure in which the body is weakened’—a ‘word’ spoken by Abba Daniel18—is not an injunction to physical asceticism for its own sake, but as a tool for improving the spiritual health of the individual. Even Abba Poemen’s teaching that one purposefully seeks out affliction in the desert19 possesses this core of utility: it is in affliction that the body is tamed and the will of man is transformed into the will of Christ, and it is for this reason—and not for some underlying self-hatred—that the monks sought it out.

Other Cases.

There are, of course, cases in which the motivations for taking up the monastic life varied or expanded upon this central ideal of following Christ and the injunctions of Scripture. The story of Abba Apollo comes to mind, with its terrible gore and his personal motivation in compunction and repentance. Yet it is interesting that even here, it is upon hearing the Scripture (the monks chanting Ps 90.10) that he is eventually driven to the depths of self-inspection that lead him to take up the monastic life as a means of growth and purification.20 Repentance, one of the great calls to personal action and a motivation for many early monks, is not extrinsic to, but a refinement of the Gospel ideal that we have discussed above. Indeed, as so many of the Fathers are remembered for saying, it lies at the very heart of the Christian life itself.

Concluding Thoughts.

In the final analysis, D. Chitty’s words in the Epilogue to his great work come again to mind. There are many factors for, many reasons behind the eager flight of thousands into the Egyptian deserts; yet if we are to discover the truest and most fundamental answer to the question of ‘why?’, we must seek for it in ‘the search for personal holiness, the following of the Lord Jesus’ in the life of the individual Christian.21 Perhaps the most succinct statement to this effect comes from Paul the Great:

Abba Paul said, ‘Keep close to Jesus.’22

This is the goal of the monastic, both of ancient Egypt and of the modern day.

In closing, a short story from my own experience. I met with an old monk and spiritual mentor some years ago, and our conversation quickly turned to the monastic life. I said to him, ‘Father I don’t know if I am ready to become a monk; I don’t know if I can so easily run away from the world.’ He replied, ‘No, indeed you are not ready. No one is ready for the tonsure until they stop seeing it as running away from the world, and start seeing it as running toward Jesus Christ.’



Select Bibliography

Primary Sources

Burton-Christie, D., The Word in the Desert: Scripture and the Quest for Holiness in Early Christian Monasticism (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993).

Chitty, D.J., The Desert a City: An Introduction to the Study of Egyptian and Palestinian Monasticism under the Christian Empire, 3rd printing (New York: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1999 [originally 1966]).

Mackean, W.H., Christian Monasticism in Egypt—to the Close of the Fourth Century (London: Society for the Promotion of Christian Knowledge, 1920).

Secondary Sources

Binns, J., Ascetics and Ambassadors of Christ: the Monasteries of Palestine, 314-631 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1994).

Guillaumont, A., Aux origines du monachisme Chrétien: pour une phénoménologie du monachisme (Abbaye de Bellefontaine: Collection SPIRITUALITE ORIENTALE ET VIE MONASTIQUE, 1979).

Knowles, D., Christian Monasticism (London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1969).

Scott-Moncrieff, P.D., Paganism and Christianity in Egypt (Cambridge: The University Press, 1913).

Workman, H.B., The Evolution of the Monastic Ideal (London: Charles H. Kelly, 1918).

Texts

Ward, B., The Sayings of the Desert Fathers – the Alphabetical Collection, revised edn. (Kalamazoo: Cistercian Publications, 1984).

Ward, B. (introduction) & Russell, N. (trans.), The Lives of the Desert Fathers: the Historia Monachorum in Aegypto (Kalamazoo: Cistercian Publications, 1980).

Ward, B., The Wisdom of the Desert Fathers: Systematic Sayings from the Anonymous Series of the Apothegmata Patrum (Oxford: SLG Press, 1975, 1986, 1995).


1. Burton-Christie, p. 4. [back]
2. Henry Chadwick, 'The Ascetic Ideal in the Early Church', in W.J. Sheils (ed.), Monks, Hermits, and the Ascetic Tradition (Oxford: Blackwell, 1985), p. 6. [back]
3. E. Gibbon, The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, 7 vols., ed. J.B. Bury (London: Methuen, 1896-1900), 4.57-75. [back]
4. Cf. Mackean, p. 26; Burton-Christie, p. 4. [back]
5. Burton-Christie, p. 47. [back]
6. Veilleux, Monasticism and Gnosis in Egypt, p. 306. [back]
7. Cf. Vita Antonii, 2; Matthew 19.21. [back]
8. Cf. Burton-Christie, pp. 43-48. [back]
9. Apothegmata, Sisoes, 35. [back]
10. ibid., Antony the Great, 3. [back]
11. ibid., Agathon, 23. [back]
12. ibid., Isidore the Priest, 3. [back]
13. ibid., Arsenius, 1. [back]
14. ibid., Isidore the Priest, 6. [back]
15. Cf. ibid., Poemen, 59. [back]
16. ibid., Matoes, 13. [back]
17. ibid., Alonius, 2. [back]
18. ibid., Daniel, 4. [back]
19. ibid., Poemen, 44. [back]
20. Cf. ibid., Apollo, 2. [back]
21. Cf. Chitty, p. 181. [back]
22. Apothegmata, Paul the Great, 4 (noted in Ward’s volume as an addition from J.-C. Guy’s text, p. 32). [back]

source: http://www.monachos.net/content/monasticism/monastic-studies/90-a-gospel-motivation-for-the-monastic-life

The origins and motivations of monasticism

From its inception, Christianity produced many who, while remaining fully part of their local parish, were inspired to pursue rigorous ascetic lifestyles. Indeed, even the most primitive expressions of Christianity, such as St. Paul's letters, contain strong ascetic emphases. However, the emergence of monasticism as a distinct ascetic movement, separated from the larger Christian community, does not appear straightaway. Rather, it emerges, in diverse forms and various regions, only around the fourth century AD. In this paper, I will trace the origins and depict the motivations of this movement, primarily as it appeared in the Christian East, and I will argue that monasticism should be understood as an organic outgrowth of the Christian kerygma -- that in the development of the monastic practice the Christian community changed its outer structure precisely to preserve its inner essence.

Understanding Asceticism and Monasticism: Preliminary Observations

I shall be using monasticism to refer to that ascetic movement characterized by anachoresis, or withdrawal from the Christian community and the rest of society. Monasticism does not have a monopoly on asceticism, as asceticism is a characteristic of many non- and pre-monastic Christians (as well as non-Christians). All monasticism is ascetic, but all asceticism is not monastic. What distinguishes monasticism from the broader category of Christian asceticism -- at least as I propose to use the terms -- is monasticism's emphasis on withdrawal.

Before continuing, however, I would like qualify what I have said in two ways. First, I would like to emphasize that the withdrawal which characterizes monasticism need not be seen as signaling a complete disconnection from society. The monk may still be strongly connected with the rest of the Church (and society) through his prayers. Some of us might think prayer a negligible connection, but in characterizing the motivations of the monks we must realize that they certainly did not share this assumption. And we must also realize that the personal success of the monk possessed communal consequences. When Anthony defeats the devils in the Desert, it is not only his own victory, but ours as well. There exists a profound solidarity, then, among all humans and especially among all Christians.

Moreover, in some cases the physical withdrawal is not permanent. After time apart, some anchoritic monastics resume contact with the rest of the community. St. Anthony is a prime example of this pattern: fortified by the freedom and insight which his withdrawal helped him obtain, he was enabled to help countless others find their own freedom. Indeed, many continue to find his life, words and prayers profoundly helpful even today, sixteen centuries after his death. Yet, what enabled him to be so helpful to society was precisely his withdrawal from society.

Second, I would like to emphasize that asceticism need not denote dualist motivations or a hatred of the body or the world. While no doubt certain ascetics, Christian as well as non-Christian, may have had a pessimistic estimate of the human body and of the physical world -- the monk Dorotheus's explanation of why he taxes his body being a fine Christian example: "It kills me, so I kill it" -- the dominant view that we find among orthodox Christian monastics is more in line with Poemen's remark: "We were taught not to kill the body, but to kill the passions." The great battle is against spirits and principalities, not flesh and blood; and the battle line is drawn not between the physical and the immaterial, but between godliness and ungodliness. The passions can be as much spiritual as physical. As Peter Brown observes,

In the desert tradition, vigilant attention to the body enjoyed an almost oppressive prominence. Yet to describe ascetic thought as "dualist" and as motivated by hatred of the body, is to miss its most novel and its most poignant aspect. Seldom, in ancient thought, had the body been seen as more deeply implicated in the transformation of the soul; and never was it made to bear so heavy a burden.1

Indeed, the great burden the monks placed upon the body was evidence of the great expectations they had for it. The body along with the soul was to be saved, and this is why not only the soul but the body, too, must be brought under a strict discipline. "Against all types of Dualism, pagan or pre-Christian, Antony's perfection is shown reflected in his bodily condition, retained right up to his death fifty years later, when he was still sound in all his senses and vigorous in his limbs, with even his teeth complete in number, though worn down to the gums".2

In the case of Syrian monasticism, however, some scholars have assessed the motivations of the monks to be extremely dualist.3 While a more thorough analysis of the Syrian monastic tradition must be deferred for now, at this point it is sufficient to note that this is not the only possible interpretation of the motivations of Syrian monasticism; and it is certainly not descriptive of the great sage of Syria, St. Ephrem, who, although not a monk in the more Egyptian sense of the word, was nevertheless an ascetic and had much to say on this question. "They greatly afflict their bodies," he wrote, "not because they do not love their bodies; rather, they want to bring their bodies to Eden in glory".4

The Struggle for Freedom

If the austere fasts, the minimal amounts of sleep and the austere lifestyle of the monk are not to be taken as a rejection of the body as such, how then are they to be taken? They should be taken, I would argue, as having a more positive aim: the acquisition of freedom. One who is addicted to wine does not enjoy wine. It is only when one can say "no" to wine that one can truly enjoy it. Christian asceticism is in a sense concerned with producing precisely this sort of freedom. Asceticism enables us to say no, without which ability we can never truly say yes. In the end, asceticism is therefore the true hedonism; without asceticism, pleasures are lost in the sea of necessity.

Asceticism is also able to cultivate our uniqueness and creativity. Slavery to the passions is an assault on one's unique identity and creativity. What is more boring and predictable than the behavior of a chap addicted to the affirmation of his ego? You can almost always anticipate what he is going to say, because it is usually.5 Unlike the one who is enslaved to a passion and who is thus in a category along with countless other similarly enslaved victims, the ascetic is one of a kind.

Thus freedom from the tyranny of the passions, or apatheia, is a fundamental aim of Christian asceticism and monasticism. Freedom from a tyrant can be brought about in two ways. One can either alter the character of the relationship with the tyrant, or simply get rid of him. Similarly, ascetic and monastic theology tends to approach freedom from "the passions" in two ways. One can see the passions in Aristotelian terms, as neutral capacities capable of being put either to evil or to good use, in which case the aim would be to transform or to educate them so that they may work for our benefit. Or one may see the passions in Stoic terms, as fundamentally diseased qualities, intrinsically evil, in which case the aim is simply to get rid of them.

Either way, however, both approaches agree that the common aim of the ascetic struggle is freedom from the passions, called apatheia, whether this 'freedom' implies reform or complete eradication. It should be noted that this state is not merely "apathy" or indifference,

still less a condition in which sinning is impossible, but it is on the contrary a state of inner freedom and integration, in which we are no longer under the dominion of sinful impulses, and so are capable of genuine love . . . It is no mere mortification of the passions, but a state of soul in which a burning love for God and for our fellow humans leaves no room for sensual and selfish impulses."6

Finally, it should be emphasized that Christian asceticism and monasticism are to be distinguished from other forms of ascetic practice by their strong conviction that the ascetic struggles, while free, are effected not merely by one's own labor, but by God's grace. We must always bear in mind the monk's conviction that it is Christ who is at work in him, and that without him he can do nothing. But with him, there is nothing worth doing which he cannot do.

The Different Kinds of Monasticism and the Different Regions in which they Emerged

We shall consider four major categories of monasticism: the hermitic, the coenobitic, the semi-hermetic and the native Syrian proto-monasticism. We shall also look briefly at the way in which these different forms of monasticism existed in the following four regions in the Christian East: Egypt, Asia Minor, Palestine and Syria.

The Hermit

First, there is the unmitigated life of withdrawal and seclusion: the eremitic life. This is found in particular in Lower Egypt, as well Syria, but there only after the fifth century. The great father of this form of life is St. Anthony. At about twenty years of age (c. 269), he heard Christ's words, "Go, sell all you have and give to the poor and come and follow me" read aloud in Church. He thus freed himself of the confines of his possessions -- although not without first securing a stable existence for his sister, for whose care he was responsible at the time (he entrusted her to a Parthenon, showing that community life for women already existed) -- and followed Christ into the Desert. His withdrawal was a gradual one: he moved further and further away from human society until, c. 285, he reached the deep desert, the outer mountain at Pispir, where he struggled day and night to liberate his true self from the 'zombiefying' delusions of the passions and the demons. Around 305, having attracted a number of followers who were inspired by his discipline and holiness, he came out of his seclusion to advise others in their own struggles.

In what sense is it characteristic of following Christ to flee to the desert? The answer to this may be found in considering Christ's own departure to the desert prior to his ministry, as well as his departure to the desert after the death of St. John the Baptist. Our Lord's decision to withdraw into the desert -- in the mind of the hermit -- is certainly not a meaningless accident, an arbitrary selection of a place without significance. St. Anthony is thus following Christ's model; indeed, he is following Christ himself. For, as Fr. Georges Florovsky brilliantly explains, while Christ, as the Second Person of the Trinity, is everywhere present, filling all things, there is something unique about the desert and the solitude which it symbolizes (and effects) that makes Christ's presence more easily realized:

By following out Lord into the desert, St. Anthony was entering a terrain already targeted and stamped out by our Lord as a specific place for spiritual warfare. There is both specificity and type in the desert. In those geographical regions where are no deserts, there are places which are similar to or approach that type of place symbolized by the desert. It is that type of place which allows the human heart solace, isolation. It is a type of place which puts the human heart in a state of aloneness, a state in which to meditate, to pray, to fast, to reflect upon one's inner existence and one's relationship to ultimate reality -- God. And simultaneously where the opposing forces to spiritual life can become more dominant. It is the terrain of a battlefield but a spiritual one. And it is our Lord, not St. Antony, who has set the precedent. Our Lord says that "as for what is sown among thorns, this is he who hears the word, but the cares of the world and the deceit of riches choke the world, and it becomes unfruitful." The desert, or a place similar, precisely cuts off the cares or anxieties of the world and the deception, the deceit of earthly riches. It cuts one off precisely from "this worldliness" and precisely as such it contains within itself a powerful spiritual reason for existing within the spiritual paths of the Church. Not as the only path, not as the path for everyone, but as one, full authentic path of Christian life.7

The Coenobitic Life

In many ways, the anchoritic life is the most potent. Yet, precisely for this reason, it is the most dangerous, with great spiritual risks. As Fr. Florovsky indicates at the end of the above quotation, it is not for everyone. For others, a more moderated form of withdrawal and seclusion is more suitable. One such alternative form of monasticism, possessing great inherent safeguards against delusion, is the communal life. Here a group of monks live together, under a common rule and in a common monastery, mutually supporting and encouraging one another. There are two great fathers of this form of monastic life: St. Pachomius of Egypt (286-346) and St. Basil the Great (c. 330-379).

This form of monasticism became common primarily in Egypt and Asia Minor. Within the former, it was popular in Upper Egypt, a part of the country less remote than St. Anthony's area. Pachomius's communities were found around Tabbennisi in Thebaid, near the Nile. Pachomius himself attracted a number of followers; at his death he was ruling over a nine monasteries for men and two for women.

In Asia Minor, Basil also strongly encouraged this form of monasticism as being more suitable for most people than the hermetic style. However, it is unlikely that Basil's inspiration came from Pachomius; it seems to have come instead from Syria. At any rate, Basil feared that the hermetic life, among other pitfalls, could lead to a neglect of the evangelical call to charity and philanthropy, and so his monasteries were also concerned directly with issues of social justice. "Basil adds to the mystical and inner emphases of monasticism, a strong emphasis on external acts of charity and philanthropy".8 He also insists on monastic obedience as a check on the "excess, the competitiveness, and the ostentation of histrionic individuals who were bringing the monastic movement into disrepute." Basil was also careful to insist that monks remain mindful of the normal worshipping life of the Church and they remained connected and obedient to the local bishop.9

The Skete and the Lavra

Third, there is the semi-hermetic form of monasticism, which is intermediate between the two already mentioned. In this situation, the monks did not live in complete separation, like the hermits; nor did they live in complete community, like coenobitic monks. Rather, there existed a number of independent groups of monks, each of which varied greatly in size, but which would all come together for a common liturgy or meal, especially on Sunday. "The great centres of the semi-eremitic life in Egypt were Nitria and Scetis, which by the end of the fourth century had produced many outstanding monks -- Ammon the founder of Nitria, Macarius of Egypt and Macarius of Alexandria, Evagrius of Pontus, and Arsenius the Great".10 Nitria was nearer to Alexandria and formed a natural gateway to Scetis. It was meeting place between the world and the desert where visitors, like John Cassian, could first make contact with the traditions of the desert. Here, we may suspect that the monasticism was more of a more learned sort, and that a more Greek-influenced type of monasticism evolved around an educated minority, of whom Evagrius Ponticus is an outstanding example.

This "semi-hermetic" model can also be found in Jerusalem, which became a great monastic center later in the fifth century. In the Judean wilderness, and especially around the desert of Gaza, there were great spiritual fathers of the Egyptian tradition. Indeed, in the fifth and sixth centuries, leadership in the monastic movement shifted to Palestine through the influence of such figures as St. Euthymius the Great (died 473) and his disciple St. Sabas (died 532). Judea became the home of the "Lavra".11 Here, a number of individual monks would have their own cells in proximity to a main leader and would meet on special occasions, just as in Nitria and Scetis. This sort of model preserved a greater level of solitude than was common in a coenobium. Another difference between the semi-hermetic and the coenobitic models is that the semi-hermetic arrangement often functioned as a preparatory phase for the anchoritic life, and seemed to tacitly presume that the anchoritic life was the superior. "This is in marked contrast with the ideal of Pachomius, or of Basil, for whom the coenobium is a lifelong vocation".12

Syria

Finally, there is the complicated situation of Syria. In order to understand the history of monasticism in Syria, we must realize that there were two phases in Syrian monasticism. The first phase we may call "proto-monasticism," and it is the phase dominant prior to the fifth century differing considerably from the Egyptian monastic traditions. The second phase is the one that receives the most attention among historians no doubt in part because it is also the one in which all the remarkable accounts of stunning acts of self-mortification are found. This second phase reflects a fundamental shift toward the Egyptian model, which had gained an irresistible prestige and momentum throughout Christendom.

There is very little direct information concerning the first phase of Syrian monasticism. The primary sources for this period are Aphrahat and Ephrem. To understand the distinctive characteristics of Syrian "proto-monasticism," two phrases need to be understood: ihidaya (literally: solitary, monk) and Bnay Qyama (literally: sons of the covenant). These phases are used almost interchangeably, especially by Aphrahat; but they do seem to convey different nuances. The ways in which they are used, primarily by Aphrahat, give us a glimpse of the character of Syrian "proto-monasticism," and so it is worthwhile to pursue this matter in detail.

Let us begin with the ihidaya (plural, ihidaye). This term refers to single persons who were committed to serving God. Griffith parallels them to the biblical widows and virgins. We know that the ihidaye occupied a special status in the church. But while they could occasionally be found among the clerical orders (particularly the lower ones), this was rare. They were primarily lay persons, whether male or female. The term ihidaye, more specifically, seems to have been used with three major senses in mind, and accordingly tells us three main things about the monastic movement: The first sense is that of "monochos", conveying the sense of unmarried or continent; second, "monozonos" or "monotropos", conveying the sense of single-mindedness; third, "monogenes", conveying the sense of union with the Monogenes (the Only-begotten Son), the Ihidaya. Griffith thinks that this last sense, with its connection between the individual ihidaya and the Ihidaya (the Only-begotten), was the most prominent in the minds of the Syrians. As Aphrahat explains:

"For those who do not take wives will be served by the Watchers of heaven: the observers of consecrated holiness will come to rest at the sanctuary of the Exalted One. The Ihidaya who is from the bosom of the Father will gladden the ihidaye. There will be neither male nor female, neither slave nor free, but all are sons of the Most High. These things are befitting the ihidaye, those who take on the heavenly yoke, to become disciples to Christ. For so it is fitting for Christ's disciples to emulate Christ their Lord."13

Another important term that helps us understand native Syrian monasticism is Bnay Qyama. Qyama refers primarily to the sense of covenant, though it also connotes "station" and possibly "resurrection"; it was even used by Aphrahat to denote the whole Church. Accordingly, the Bnay Qyama (Sons of the Covenant) refers to a group of celibates who took upon themselves a special "station" in the life of the community. They assumed this station by covenant, or solemn pledge, at baptism, at which time they put on the Ihidaya and became ihidaye. They also accepted to follow Christ's lifestyle in a uniquely uncompromising way, and in so doing they were revealing the life that would be lived in the age to come (and that which was lived in the pre-fallen state) -- the life to which all the baptized are called. Through their celibacy and uncompromising pursuit of holiness, they stood among their community as anticipatory images of the Resurrection to come. "Their status in the community served as a type for the expectations of all the baptized." Thus, they represented for the Church, what the Church was called to be.

It is difficult to say very much more about this movement. We can surmise that it was carried out neither in a strictly hermetic form, nor in a coenobitic form, although there may have been a proto-rule that the Bnay Qyama followed. Thus, it is difficult to pinpoint the differentia of this movement and to fit into the taxonomic system I have been employing thus far. Indeed, I wonder if perhaps it may not be better to call this movement simply a Syrian expression of pre-monastic asceticism. Why do we want to call it 'monasticism', if we define the differentia of monasticism as the emphasis on withdrawal, and we do not find such an emphasis among the Syrians? This phase of Syrian monasticism seems rather similar to the accounts of pre-monastic asceticism in other regions chronicled in Susana Elms's Virgins of God. On the whole, this first phase of native Syrian monasticism is still understudied, with many scholars disagreeing over its character and motivations; and perhaps, owing to the dearth of evidence, it is likely to remain in this state of enigma.

But by the fifth century, this ascetic tradition --whatever its characteristics-- quickly becomes displaced by the Egyptian variety. There is a greater emphasis now placed on many of the monastic themes, such as martyrdom, that were prevalent in Egyptian thought; and withdrawal is certainly more emphatically pursued. In the case of the Ihidaye and the Bnay Qyama, while some might have pursued withdrawal, most did not. After the fifth century, however, the opposite is true.

By this time, "in the Syriac speaking world the term ihidaya came to have the same range of meanings as did the Greek term monachos, the very Greek term that, if some modern scholars are correct in their surmises, writers of the early fourth century had first used in a Christian context to render the Syriac term ihidaya!".14 And it is during this period

that one begins to find the appearance in inner Syria of institutions typical of the "Great Church," including one that would uniquely mark Christian life for centuries to come, the institution of monasticism. This institution was easily as powerful and significant at the time as the institution of the hierarchical episcopacy, which also appeared in Syria in the fourth century."15

Nevertheless, the Syrians did not simply import Egyptian monasticism; they incorporated it into their region in a creative way that reflected their own idiosyncrasies. We find that these idiosyncrasies were expressed in a range of behaviour that might strike the modern reader as deeply disturbing, even deeply un-human. Chadwick describes the situation:

"In Syria and Mesopotamia asceticism occasionally took bizarre forms. The majority of the monks were simple Syriac speaking people, ignorant of Greek. Their recorded mortifications make alarming reading. A heavy iron chain as a belt was a frequent austerity. A few adopted the life of animals and fed on grass, living in the open air without shade from the sun and with the minimum of clothing, and justifying their method of defying society by claiming to be 'fools for Christ's sake.'16

However, I think Chadwick and many historians who similarly characterize the Syrian monks, fail to keep in mind that their austerities were not simply motivated by their simple-mindedness or personal imbalances. Peter Brown captures well their view of the fall, which I believe possesses the key to understanding their unique behaviour:

According to the author of the Book of Degrees, Adam had fallen because he had looked around him in Paradise with a hot lust for the land. He had wished to possess its rich soil. He had wished, through property, to replace God as Creator. He had set about creating economic wealth by labour, and had wished to pile up the physical wealth of progeny by intercourse. He had turned from the contemplation of God to build the society that we now know, a society ruled by the iron constraints of the "law of Adam."

The righteous might live decently in this society by the simple code of fallen Adam -- tilling their fields, doing good to their co-religionists, caring for the local Christian poor. God, who had shown mercy on Adam by allowing him to live by that law, would not deny the righteous their reward. But for those who had regained the first, Spirit-filled eyes of Adam, the present social world, the social structures of town, village, and the family, must seem, forever, unaccountably strange. The power of the "present age," made manifest in the care-worn state of organized society, and, only tangentially, the present state of human sexuality.17

Thus, many of the structures and customs of human society are understood as fundamentally the result of the fall. Such a conviction may indeed shed light on the curious behaviour of a Symeon of Emesa, who "would enter the women's section of the public baths, stark naked, with his robe on his head as a turban; and he would dance the jig with the townsfolk in the local tavern".18

We may disagree with the premises of the Syrian monks. But we should realize that if one starts with their premises and assumes that majority of the present structures of society are purely the product of the fall, then it makes good sense to flout the present structures of human society so conspicuously. Doing so would be the truly human thing to do, since the present state of affairs is supremely subhuman.

Syrian monasticism should therefore not be seen simply as a more extreme form of monasticism stemming from either a greater degree of dualism or intellectual simplicity, but rather as a form of monasticism stemming from a different theological emphasis. We may not accept their paradigm, but we should see its internal integrity and conceptual sophistication.

From Pre-Monastic Asceticism to Monasticism: Changing in Order to Stay the Same

Prior to the emergence of monasticism in the fourth century, the practice of asceticism was widespread, and a number of church fathers, East and West, had already developed an ascetical theology. Indeed, asceticism goes back to the New Testament, and less dramatically to the Old Testament. On the level of practice, many celibates or consecrated virgins could be found, be they widows choosing to remain in their bereaved state, young virgins choosing to consecrate their lives to God, clergyman choosing to pursue their ministry in a state of celibacy (or, if already married, choosing to live with their wives in continence), married couples among the laity similarly choosing to live together in continence, or even in some cases unmarried men and women choosing to live together as brother and sister (although this particular practice would quickly fall into disfavor).

"Anthony and the monks of the fourth century inherited a revolution; they did not initiate one. In the century that had elapsed between the youth of Origen and the conversion of Constantine, the horizons of the possible had already been determined, silently and decisively, in a slow folding of the moral landscape of the Christian world. Total sexual renunciation had become a widely acclaimed feature of the Christian life."19

No doubt Peter Brown is correct in emphasizing the continuity between pre-monastic asceticism and monastic asceticism. Asceticism was certainly no revolutionary idea; but Anthony's emphasis on withdrawal was, in some sense, revolutionary. Prior to Anthony, all examples of pre-monastic asceticism were undertaken within the milieu of the larger Church community and human society. We do not yet hear of specific cases of formal, systematic withdrawal. This is precisely, I think, the differentia of monasticism.

On the level of theology, however, there is not much in the way of innovation to be found. There is rather a profound continuity between the monastic and pre-monastic ascetic theology. "In the Writings of Clement of Alexandria and especially of Origen all the essential elements of an ascetical theology may already be found".20 Clement, for instance, emphasizes that "the aim of the Christian life is not to trouble ourselves with what lies outside, but to purify the eye of the soul and to sanctify the flesh," and that "Jesus heals the whole human person, body and soul." Clearly, for Clement, salvation is not merely the extrinsic imputation of righteousness; salvation is far more than merely a juridical declaration of righteousness. It is ontological: the Christian is to be made righteous. In addition, we see a very holistic emphasis present in monastic theology: the whole person, body and soul is to be healed. Indeed, here we already find a framework that can happily support Chitty's observation: "One thing can be certain. This making a City of the Wilderness was no mere flight, nor a rejection of matter as evil (else why did they show such aesthetic sense in placing their retreats, and such love for all of God's animal creation?)".21 In Origen, too, there is a strong emphasis on the importance of martyrdom, and a very well developed understanding of the "senses of the soul" and the injunction to personal sanctification. Both Origen and Clement speak of mystical union with God. Such emphases would certainly figure prominently in subsequent monastic theology.

In understanding the motivations of the various monks, I should like to highlight two fundamental themes. First, there is the ideal of martyrdom, the recognition that nothing -- family, possessions, even our own life -- is more important than union with the Lord. From this point of view, ascetic life is indeed a renunciation of the present world, a sober recognition of its secondary status. Secondly, the monastic life is centered on another ideal: that of returning to (if not surpassing) the state prior to the fall. By returning to the pre-fallen state, the monk seeks not only his own redemption but also that of the created world around him. Since through man that the created world fell, through man the created world can be restored. While full restoration will occur only at the Parousia, the monks partially anticipate this restoration here and now. From this point of view, asceticism is indeed an affirmation of the created world; while the monks renounce the world, they are renouncing only the fallen state of the world. Their willingness to die to the world reflects their conviction that the world is not as it should be, a recognition with which the created world, itself, would certainly agree as it groans in anticipation of its redemption. Thus, the created world rejoices in the monk's striving for salvation, for it knows that its own salvation is tied to the monk's success. The monks are carrying out a supreme act of love for the world, striving to restore it to its true vocation and state. And so the monk's partial anticipation of the final redemption of all things is prophetic: it provides a glimpse of the world as it should be and will be.

"The denigration of marriage and sexuality may be the negative expression of the desire to return to the original blessings of paradise and the original, blessed condition of humanity and body. (And of course early Christian ascetic theorists understood both the similarities and differences between these two notions, and went to great lengths to distinguish the orthodox affirmation of the value of chastity, fasting, and other ascetic disciplines from the heretical -- namely, Manichean, Encratite -- condemnation of marriage and meat eating.)22

The themes of monastic theology were not innovations. They had their roots in the earliest expressions of Christianity and were articulated by many, well before the emergence of monasticism itself. Why, then, does monasticism emerge only in the fourth century and not before? If we cannot point to a new shift in theological understanding that could account for this new lifestyle, might we point to a shift in external circumstances?

After Constantine's conversion, the Christian situation became ripe for monasticism. Persecutions had ceased, and Christianity had become rather more socially acceptable. It was becoming possible, in a sense, to convince yourself that you were serving God when you were really serving Mammon. The Church was becoming increasingly influential in high society. Bishops had become increasingly important figures in the secular sphere. Many local churches had obtained considerable wealth, becoming substantial landowners. Although there is nothing inherently contradictory between the Christian gospel and such developments, these developments nevertheless changed the character of the challenge facing the Church.

From its beginning, Christianity was a call to self-denial, to a life of the cross. Without such willingness to part with one's old self, the new, true self could not arise. During the persecutions this call was often put before the Christian unambiguously: Do you have the discipline to accept the pain of parting with the familiarity of your fallen life for the sake of your true life in Christ? Christians could seldom hide behind a nominal acceptance of the faith. There were no secular advantages that might provide ulterior motives for becoming a Christian. Persecution kept sharp the line between being for Christ or against him.

After Constantine's peace, however, this line was no longer so sharp. With peace between the City of God and the City of Man, there was a danger of forgetting Christ's injunction that "My Kingdom is not of this world." The call to self-denial for Christ's sake was no longer being put before the Christian with such unmistakable directness. The invitation was becoming quieter, and had to come from within. "The monks with their austerities were martyrs in an age when martyrdom of blood no longer existed; they formed the counterbalance to an established Christendom".23 Monasticism, a formal life of internally imposed self-renunciation, emerges in response to the diminishing presence of externally imposed self-renunciation.


1. Brown, The Body and Society, 235. [back]
2. Chitty, The Desert A City, 4. [back]
3. Voobus's History of Syrian Asceticism is the primary proponent of this view. However, there is no consensus on the validity of his analysis, and others, like Dr. Sebastian Brock, would question the universal applicability of his assessment. [back]
4. St. Ephrem, On Hermits and Desert Dwellers in the Fathers of the Church series, by Catholic University of America. [back]
5. Evdokimov, The Sacrament of Love, 55. [back]
6. Asceticism, 12. [back]
7. Collected Works of Georges Florovsky, vol. X: The Byzantine Ascetics and Spiritual Fathers. [back]
8. Henry Chadwick, The Early Church (Penguin), 178-9. [back]
9. ibid., 178-9. [back]
10. Kallistos (Timothy) Ware, The Orthodox Church, 37-38. [back]
11. Chitty, The Desert A City, 15: "The word lavra does not occur in the fourth-century Egyptian records, and its monastic use seems to originate in Palestine. Perhaps the sense of market that comes instantly to mind when we connect it with the Arabic suq is not inappropriate. Here the ascetics brought together their produce on Saturday mornings, worshipped and fed together, and transacted any necessary business, taking back with them to their cells on Sunday evenings bread, water, and raw material for their handiwork for the coming week." [back]
12. Chadwick, The Early Church, 178-9. [back]
13. Wimbush and Valantasis, Asceticism. [back]
14. ibid., 238. [back]
15. ibid., 221. [back]
16. Chadwick, The Early Church, 180. [back]
17. Brown, The Body and Society, 336. [back]
18. ibid., 335. [back]
19. ibid.., 208-209. [back]
20. Chadwick, The Early Church, 177. [back]
21. Chitty, The Desert A City, xvi. [back]
22. Wimbush and Valantasis, Asceticism, 78. [back]
23. Ware, The Orthodox Church, 37. [back]

source: http://www.monachos.net/content/monasticism/monastic-studies/92-the-origins-and-motivations-of-monasticism

Monday, October 5, 2009

On prayer as the source from which all good comes

Often has the Church proclaimed, 'Prayer is the act from which all other good comes.'1

It may seem strange that, in this statement, the source of all good is ascribed to the act and state of prayer. Certainly, all good comes from God! There is only one source of Good, and of the identity of this source there is no question. Lest any be tempted to forget, it is proclaimed at every Liturgy in the prayer before the ambo: 'Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from Thee, the Father of Lights'.2 Certainly, there is no other fount from which goodness flows than God Himself, the very essence and heart of Goodness. Good gifts are good only insomuch as they come from Him, for 'whatever is not God, is nothing'.3

Why, then, the exalted status given to prayer? If all good gifts are from God and Him only, how can we then say, 'Prayer is the act from which all other good comes'? How is it possible to hold to the divine truth here stated, and still proclaim, as the holy Abba Agathon does in regard to prayer, that

by its action it is the reconciliation of man with God, the mother and daughter of tears, a bridge for crossing temptations, a wall of protection from afflictions, a crushing of conflicts, boundless activity, the spring of virtues, the source of spiritual gifts, invisible progress, food of the soul, the enlightening of the mind, an axe for despair, a demonstration of hope, the release from sorrow.

Would it not be better for us, if we were to ascribe these gifts to God and set prayer aside as another among them?

The answer we must give--that which I am sure you will have determined I will give, based on the manner in which I posed all of the above--is certainly 'no'. There is a mystery to prayer, or perhaps better, prayer is a great mystery, by which all other gifts are made known in their true natures, and through which they in fact come. Prayer, as the holy Church teaches, is the very source of our participation in the good gifts of God; while He remains ever the giver and one true fount of all blessings, it is only by prayer that we are brought into communion with and possession of these very blessings. St Symeon of Thessalonica writes, concerning the primacy of prayer,

It is an excellent task for the servants of Christ above all others, for the other things are ministries and secondary ... truly this is the task entrusted to us by God, and the crown of all else.4

If, then, this great task of prayer, this 'crown of all else', is the source of our possession of all that is good and blessed, what must be its nature? Surely the initial reaction had by many toward this idea, namely that our petitionary prayer must be that from which we receive all good, is negative for the very reason that a notion of prayer ultimately as spoken discussion with, or even fervent supplication to God, is itself a flawed understanding. Prayer of this sort, though it is good and holy, certainly cannot be the ultimate form and character of prayer, for it is a temporal and designated act within the scope of the 'rest of life'. To pray in this manner is to set aside whatever predetermined (or undetermined) duration of time for prayer, to speak petitions, to offer adoration and thanksgiving, and so on. Yes, this is a holy act, and one to which we are called, one and all! But it cannot be the only form of prayer, especially not the ultimate, because it is simply impossible to engage in this kind of prayer at all times if one is truly to live a human life in this world; and the exhortation to 'pray without ceasing' comes directly from the great Apostle (1 Thess 5.17). If our method of prayer is such that we cannot keep the commandment of God, handed down through His elect, then we must admit a greater reality to prayer which we have yet to approach. Our prayer is good and holy by virtue of its being prayer, but there are depths we have not sounded and heights to which we have not yet climbed. These are to be found in a profound inward prayer to which we are all summoned by Christ Himself.

It is this deeper, inner prayer to which we must turn if we are to understand how prayer is genuinely the source of our communion with the blessings of God. The nature of this deeper reality is first explained by Evagrios the Solitary,5 writing in the fourth century: 'Prayer is the communion of the intellect with God'.6 Abba Agathon, already encountered in this discussion, expanded upon Evagrios in stating that 'Prayer by its nature is communion and union of man with God'.

Here we begin to see the true essence of deepest prayer as it has always been proclaimed by the Church. Far beyond the discourse of thought and speech with our Divine Saviour which prayer is in certain of its forms, it is much more deeply the actual union of humanity with God in Trinity, a state of being in constant communion with Him who is the Source of all. Such prayer goes beyond a mere act of the intellect, to a deep state of constant awareness of the presence of God, of dwelling with Him in all places and times, no matter what the outward activities of the body or mind. 'He who loves God is always communing with Him as his Father'.7

Thus we can see how all the outward acts of discipline, rigour and asceticism that lead to true prayer, are indeed the means by which we attain to all things good, not because these acts somehow 'purchase' good things for us (God forbid!), but because by them we are drawn ever closer to God Himself; that same God who is, in His essence, the very fullness of Goodness. The acts of attaining to prayer form our great motion of continual service, our personal leitourgia, by which we come into all joy; for 'to serve God is bliss itself'.8

Scripture itself proclaims the importance of prayer, the exhortation to which often seems confounding when prayer is viewed as primarily an act of petition before God (for surely He knows all our needs!),9 but which is only sensible when it is understood as the continuous communion of our person with God. The book of Sirach lists much that must be sought after in life, yet capstones its list thus: 'But above all, pray to the Most High, that He may direct your way in truth' (Sirach 37.15). The holy Paul, as we have already said, commands not only that we pray, but that we pray 'without ceasing' (1 Thess 5.17). Long before the Incarnation of Christ, His prophet had proclaimed that ceasing to pray--especially for others--is a sin against the Lord (1 Samuel 12.23). Yet the importance of prayer is also witnessed clearly in the fact that our Saviour Himself prayed, both in the desert where He met the demons (Matthew 4.1-11), as well as in His fatigue (Mark 1.35) and throughout the whole of His life, often with loud cries and tears (Hebrews 5.7).

None has prayed so purely as the man Jesus Christ, nor has any known more of the blessedness of divine communion. Christ incarnate, as the very embodiment of the union of man and God, is in His person the icon of the goal of prayer; there can be no greater communion with the divine than the actual union of divine and human natures in the person of the incarnate God, Jesus Christ. And even as the Father was well-pleased with the life of prayer of His Only-Begotten Son, so will He be pleased with us when we come to pray truly, for 'God rejoices when a man offers Him a wise prayer'.10

What else could prayer be, apart from the act by which all other good comes, if prayer is, itself, our communion with the Good One? It is the source, the only source, of our possession of the blessings of God, for through it the Holy Spirit joins us together with the Giver of every gift. Unless we are united to God, we can know no blessings, we can experience no good, we can comprehend no real joy. But we are not despondent of these things, for the Spirit does indeed call us to the communion which provides them, to the prayer which makes them real in us.

The fruits of prayer are thus those of the Holy Spirit--love, joy, peace and many others11 -- for it is only through the Spirit that we ever come to true prayer. It is He who cleanses us from every impurity, and prays within us, joining our minds and hearts to God.12 He thus makes us capable of receiving all the goodness of God, and our prayer gives rise to the good gifts that God grants. Should we ever doubt, St James the Brother of Our Lord reminds us, 'The prayer of the righteous is powerful and effective. Elijah was a human being like us, and he prayed fervently that it might not rain, and for three years and six months it did not rain on the earth. Then he prayed again, and the heaven gave rain and the earth yielded its harvest' (James 5.16-18). Christ also spoke to us of the power of prayer, when He reminded all the faithful that 'whatever you ask for in prayer, believe that you have received, and it will be yours' (Mark 11.24). If we are in truth united to God, then our will also is united to His and the things for which 'we ask' are the very gifts of His divine power--far exceeding the limitations of the world in which we dwell. Mountains can be moved and seeds turned into forests; cold and stony hearts can be warmed; the dead can be raised; light stronger and more radiant than the sun can shine forth from the souls of those with a humble and prayerful heart.13

But we should not pray in order that we might receive such gifts, or any gifts at all. This was the great sin of Simon the Samaritan, who thought that the gifts of God were of more importance than God who gives them.14 Our prayer is to be contrite, inward, hopeful, and the fruit only of our intense love of God. It is true that all good comes to us from prayer, but it is not for our reception of the good that we pray, but only for communion with God. We must never consider ourselves worthy of God's gifts, for then we evidence greed, and this greed leads to prayer becoming an act of pride. St Macarius reminds us,

Pray simply. Do not expect to find in your heart any remarkable gift of prayer. Consider yourself unworthy of it. Then you will find peace. Use the empty cold dryness of your prayer as food for your humility. Repeat constantly: I am not worthy, Lord, I am not worthy!15

If we approach prayer with such a sense of personal unworthiness (after all, who is 'worthy' of having communion with the immortal and all-powerful God of the universe!), and view it not as an access to divine gifts but simply and profoundly as our source of fellowship with Christ, then He shall provide for us, through our prayers, those good things of which we have need.

When tomorrow comes, it will supply what you need, if you seek above all else the kingdom of heaven and the righteousness of God; for the Lord says: 'Seek the kingdom of God and His righteousness; and all these things as well will be given unto you'.16

In such a state, we will find ourselves pleasing to God, who works wonders in the hearts of His faithful, for

the beginning of every action pleasing to God is calling with faith on the life-saving name of our Lord Jesus Christ ... together with the peace and love which accompany this calling. These two, peace and love, not only make the prayer propitious, but are themselves reborn and shine forth from this prayer, like inseparable Divine rays, increasing and coming to perfection.17

Love and peace go into our prayer (for it is impossible to attain to communion with God if we do not love Him); but they come forth from it far more profoundly. The good which we bring to prayer is only the fruit of what God has already brought to us through our prayer; it is this relationship of exchange that brings us together with the Source of Life and calls us to the possession of every good and perfect gift that comes down from above. In prayer, in our constant communion with the Holy Trinity, we find that beautiful flower of gentleness and of freedom from anger, of joy and all thankfulness, of remedy for every gloom and despondent thought18 -- indeed, we find Christ Himself in the very depths of our hearts. There is no better gift than this. There is no other gift that does not come from this.

Prayer is thus the true nature and character of human life. It is that which has been made possible by the salvation granted in Christ, and that to which Christ calls each of us as heavenly children of the Father. Joining us to God, it becomes our all, and the state for which we strive with every breath.

If, when praying, no other joy can attract you, then truly you have found prayer.19


1. I have as yet been unable to identify a specific patristic source for this commonplace saying. By the onset of the modern era, it had become so commonplace as to be mentioned, in most texts, without any specific attribution of authorship. Reference to a known or posited source would be warmly received by the present author. [back]
2. Prayer Before the Ambo, The Divine Liturgy of St John Chrysostom. [back]
3. Attributed to St Frideswide of Oxford. [back]
4. St. Symeon of Thessalonica, On Prayer. [back]
5. That is, first explained from within the Patristic witness. The character of inner prayer as communion can be extrapolated--as it was by the Fathers--from the Gospel and Scriptures; cf. 1 Samuel 12.13; Romans 8.26, Romans 12.12; Sirach 37.15; Revelation 5.8; Mark 11.24. [back]
6. Evagrios the Solitary, On Prayer, 3. [back]
7. Evagrios the Solitary, On Prayer, 55; emphasis mine. [back]
8. St John of Kronstadt. [back]
9. Cf. Psalm 139: 'O Lord, Thou hast searched me an known me ... Thou discernest my thoughts from far away... Even before a word is on my tongue, Thou knowest it completely'. Passages such as this are often sources of confusion for those who seek to understand the Scriptural exhortation to prayer, as they would seem to make prayer a redundant act. Yet when prayer is understood as communion rather than only petition, such passages rather reinforce its power and call. [back]
10. St. Isaac the Syrian. [back]
12. Cf. the opening prayers of the Hours. [back]
13. As it did from St Seraphim of Sarov; cf. the account of Nicholas Motovilav, A Wonderful Revelation to the World. [back]
14. Cf. Acts 8. [back]
15. St. Macarius of Optina. [back]
16. Evagrios the Solitary (cf. Matthew 6.33). [back]
17. Attributed to Sts Ignatius and Callistus Xanthopoulos. [back]
18. Cf. Evagrios the Solitary, On Prayer, 14-16. [back]
19. Evagrios the Solitary, On Prayer, 153. [back]

source: http://www.monachos.net/content/monasticism/monastic-spirituality/109-on-prayer-as-the-source-from-which-all-good-comes

Monasticism

In the Orthodox Christian tradition, monasticism is often called the 'barometer of the spiritual life of the Church.' So great has the influence of and appreciation for this way of life been, that its existence and status have been equated with those of the Church as a whole. As flourishes the monastic life, so flourishes the Church.

That so great an influence would be granted to the monastic life bespeaks something of the importance in which it is viewed by the Church. Monasticism is not just a 'part' of the greater scope of Orthodox life; it is the very centre and heart of the Church, in relation to which other aspects of her life are born and grow. The monastics (both men and women) are those who choose to follow with singular devotion and obedience the call of Christ, who live the life of the Church in a direct and immediate manner. They are thus the models in which the Church sees her perfect icon: a communion of souls wholly living the life in Christ.

It is sometimes said that monasticism is 'built in' to humanity: that a nature which has been torn from the intimate communion with its Creator—the communion for which it was fashioned—naturally longs to return to that better state. The outward expressions of monasticism—the life set apart, the rigorous asceticism—are manifestations of that deep inward desire of the human soul to unite itself to God through Christ.

St Athanasius of AlexandriaChristian monasticism took its practical roots in the early fourth century, though there were individuals and communities living austere, solitary and ascetic lives long before this time. Nonetheless, it was in this era that St Anthony of Egypt lived and had his story recorded by St Athanasius, bishop of Alexandria, in the classic text, the Life of St Antony of Egypt. This book recorded the saint's departure into the solitary deserts of Egypt to live a life wholly devoted to God, modelled on a daily routine of prayer and manual labour born of the scriptural call to follow the Lord. And what St Anthony did for the solitary life, so did St Pachomius for the communal (after the Greek, cenobitic) monastic way. They were two manifestations of a life that spread throughout the Christian world like wildfire. Within the lifetimes of these two founders, thousands of men and women began fleeing the cities for the solitude of the desert, and the recognizable conception of the monastic life was born.

That life has continued throughout the whole of Christian history, giving rise to great saints—both men and women—who modelled a life of devotion to and union with Christ. And it continues today, in the ongoing monastic life of the Orthodox Church throughout the world. As it has been for over a thousand years, Mount Athos (the 'Holy Mountain') in Greece serves as the spiritual centre of Orthodox monasticism, which reaches into the furthest corners of the globe. In these monasteries, from the greatest lavra to the most humble of hermitages, the life of Christ continues to become, day by day, the life of man.

source: http://www.monachos.net/content/monasticism

Orthodox Christian Monasticism

Orthodox Christian Monasticism

Part I

The innermost spiritual sense of Orthodox Monasticism is revealed in joyful mourning (gr. harmolipi). This paradoxical phrase denotes a spiritual state in which a monk in his prayer grieves for the sins of the world at at the same time experiences the regenerating spritual joy of Christ's forgiveness and resurrection. A monk dies in order to live, he forgets himself in order to find his real self in God, he becomes ignorant of worldly knowledge in order to attain real spiritual wisdom which is given only to the humble ones. (Ed.)


Monastery Service in Decani Monastery

Holy Service in Decani Monastery
The life of prayer and obedience - Decani Monastery photo galleries

With the development of monasticism in the Church there appeared a peculiar way of life, which however did not proclaim a new morality. The Church does not have one set of moral rules for the laity and another for monks, nor does it divide the faithful into classes according to their obligations towards God. The Christian life is the same for everyone. All Christians have in common that "their being and name is from Christ"1. This means that the true Christian must ground his life and conduct in Christ, something which is hard to achieve in the world.

What is difficult in the world is approached with dedication in the monastic life. In his spiritual life the monk simply tries to do what every Christian should try to do: to live according to God's commandments. The fundamental principles of monasticism are not different from those of the lives of all the faithful. This is especially apparent in the history of the early Church, before monasticism appeared.

In the tradition of the Church there is a clear preference for celibacy as opposed to the married state. This stance is not of course hostile to marriage, which is recognised as a profound mystery 2, but simply indicates the practical obstacles marriage puts in the way of the pursuit of the spiritual life. For this reason, from the earliest days of Christianity many of the faithful chose celibacy. Thus Athenagoras the Confessor in the second century wrote: "You can find many men and women who remain unmarried all their lives in the hope of coming closer to God"3.

Orthodox Convent in California
A monastery in the forests of California, US

From the very beginning the Christian life has been associated with self denial and sacrifice: "If any man would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me"4. Christ calls on us to give ourselves totally to him: "He who loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me, and he who loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me"5.

Finally, fervent and unceasing prayer, obedience to the elders of the Church, brotherly love and humility, as well as all the essential virtues of the monastic life were cultivated by the members of the Church from its earliest days.


One cannot deny that the monk and the married man have different ways of life, but this does not alter their common responsibility towards God and His commandments. Every one of us has his own special gift within the one and indivisible body of Christ's Church 6. Every way of life, whether married or solitary, is equally subject to God's absolute will. Hence no way of life can be taken as an excuse for ignoring or selectively responding to Christ's call and His commandments. Both paths demand effort and determination.

A solitary cell
A solitary hermitage in Mount Athos


St Chrysostom is particularly emphatic on this point: "You greatly delude yourself and err, if you think that one thing is demanded from the layman and another from the monk; since the difference between them is in that whether one is married or not, while in everything else they have the same responsibilities... Because all must rise to the same height; and what has turned the world upside down is that we think only the monk must live rigorously, while the rest are allowed to live a life of indolence" 7. Referring to the observance of particular commandments in the Gospels, he says: "Whoever is angry with his brother without cause, regardless of whether he is a layman or a monk, opposes God in the same way. And whoever looks at a woman lustfully, regardless of his status, commits the same sin". In general, he observes that in giving His commandments Christ does not make distinction between people: "A man is not defined by whether he is a layman or a monk, but by the way he thinks" 8.

Christ's commandments demand strictness of life that we often expect only from monks. The requirements of decent and sober behaviour, the condemnation of wealth and adoption of frugality 9, the avoidance of idle talk and the call to show selfless love are not given only for monks, but for all the faithful.

Therefore, the rejection of worldly thinking is the duty not only of monks, but of all Christians. The faithful must not have a worldly mind, but sojourn as strangers and travellers with their minds fixed on God. Their home is not on earth, but in the kingdom of heaven: "For here we have no lasting city, but we seek the city which is to come" 10. The Church can be seen as a community in exodus. The world is its temporary home but the Church is bound for the kingdom of God. Just as the Israelites, freed from bondage in Egypt, journeyed towards Jerusalem through many trials and tribulations, so Christians, freed from the bondage of sin, journey through many trials and tribulations towards the kingdom of heaven.

St. Basil's hermitage
St. Basil's Hermitage - near the Serb Monastery of Hilandar on Athos


In the early days this exodus from the world did not involve a change of place but a change of the way of life. A man does not reject God and turns towards the world physicaly but spiritually, because God was and is everywhere and fulfills everything, so in the same way the rejection of the world and turning towards God was not understood in physical sense but as a change of the way of life. This is especially clear in the lives of the early Christians. Although they lived in the world they were fully aware that they did not come from it nor did they belong to it: "In the world but not of the world". And those who lived in chastity and poverty, which became later fundamental principles of the monastic life, did not abandon the world or take to the mountains.

Physical detachment from the world helps the soul to reject the worldly way of life. Experience shows that human salvation is harder to achieve in the world. As Basil the Great points out, living among men who do not care for the strict observance of God's commandments is harmful. It is extremely difficult, if not impossible, to answer Christ's call to take up one's cross and follow Him within the bounds of worldly life. Seeing the multitude of sinners, one not only fails to see his own sins but also falls into temptation to believe that he has achieved something, because we tend to compare ourselves with those who are worse than we are. Furthermore, the hustle and bustle of everyday life distracts us from the remembrance of God. It does not only prevent us from feeling the joy of intense communion with God, but leads us to contempt and forgetfulness of the divine will.

Vatopediu brotherhood
The brotherhood of the Athonite monastery of VATOPEDIOU
with their Abbot - Archimandrite EPHRAIM

This does not mean that detachment from the world guarantees salvation, but surely does help us a lot in our spiritual life. When someone devotes himself wholly to God and His will, nothing can stop him from being saved. St. Chrysostom's says: "There is no obstacle to a worker striving for virtue, but men in office, and those who have a wife and children to look after, and servants to see to, and those in positions of authority can also take care to be virtuous" 12.

Saint Simeon the New Theologian observes: "Living in a city does not prevent us from carrying out God's commandments if we are zealous, and silence and solitude are of no benefit if we are slothful and neglectful" 13. Elsewhere he says that it is possible for all, not only monks but laymen too, to "eternally and continuously repent and weep and pray to God, and by these actions to acquire all the other virtues"14.

Athonite monk
Athonite monk - an icon of harmolypi (joyful mourning)

Orthodox monasticism has always been associated with stillness or silence, which is seen primarily as an internal rather than an external state. External silence is sought in order to attain inner stillness of mind more easily. This stillness is not a kind of inertia or inaction, but awakening and activation of the spiritual life. It is intense vigilance and total devotion to God. Living in a quiet place the monk succeeds in knowing himself better, fighting his passions more deeply and purifying his heart more fully, so as to be found worthy of beholding God.

The father of St Gregory Palamas, Constantine, lived a life of stillness as a senator and member of the imperial court in Constantinople. The essence of this kind of life is detachment from worldly passions and complete devotion to God. This is why St Gregory Palamas says that salvation in Christ is possible for all: "The farmer and the leather worker and the mason and the tailor and the weaver, and in general all those who earn their living with their hands and in the sweat of their brow, who cast out of their souls the desire for wealth, fame and comfort, are indeed blessed" 15. In the same spirit St Nicolas Kavasilas observes that it is not necessary for someone to flee to the desert, eat unusual food, change his dress, ruin his health or attempt some other such thing in order to remain devoted to God 16.

The monastic life, with its physical withdrawal from the world to the desert, began about the middle of the third century. This flight of Christians to the desert was partly caused by the harsh Roman persecutions of the time. The growth of monasticism, however, which began in the time of Constantine the Great, was largely due to the refusal of many Christians to adapt to the more worldly character of the now established Church, and their desire to lead a strictly Christian life. Thus monasticism developed simultaneously in various places in the southeast Mediterranean, Egypt, Palestine, Sinai, Syria and Cyprus, and soon after reached Asia Minor and finally Europe. During the second millennium. however, Mount Athos appeared as the centre of Orthodox monasticism.

a cenobitic monastery
A coenobitic monastery - refectory


The commonest and safest form of the monastic life is the coenobitic communion. In the coenobitic monastery everything is shared: living quarters, food, work, prayer, common efforts, cares, struggles and achievements. The leader and spiritual father of the coenobium is the abbot. The exhortation to the abbot in the Charter of St Athanasius the Athonite is typical: "Take care that the brethren have everything in common. No one must own as much as a needle. Your body and soul shall be your own, and nothing else. Everything must be shared equally with love between all your spiritual children, brethren and fathers".

The coenobium is the ideal Christian community, where no distinction is drawn between mine and yours, but everything is designed to cultivate a common attitude and a spirit of fraternity. In the coenobium the obedience of every monk to his abbot and his brotherhood, loving kindness, solidarity and hospitality are of the greatest importance. As St Theodore of Studium observes, the whole community of the faithful should in the final analysis be a coenobitc Church 17. Thus the monastic coenobium is the most consistent attempt to achieve this and an image of Church in small.

Grigoriou Monastery, Athos
An Athonite coenobitic monastery of St Gregory - Mount Athos


In its "fuga mundi", monasticism underlines the Church's position as an "anti-community" within the world, and by its intense spiritual asceticism cultivates its eschatological spirit. The monastic life is described as "the angelic state", in other words a state of life that while on earth follows the example of the life in heaven. Virginity and celibacy come within this framework, anticipating the condition of souls in the life to come, where "they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven" 8.

Many see celibacy as a defining characteristic of monastic life. This does not mean, however, that celibacy is the most important aspect of the monastic life: it simply gives this distinctiveness to this way of life. All the other obligations, even the other two monastic vows of obedience and poverty, essentially concern all the faithful. Needless to say, all this takes on a special form in the monastic life, but that has no bearing on the essence of the matter.

Manasija Monastery
Serbian Orthodox Monastery Manasija, eastern Serbia


All Christians are obliged to keep the Lord's commandments, but this requires efforts. Fallen human nature, enslaved by its passions is reluctant to fulfill this obligation. It seeks pleasure and avoids the pain involved in fighting the passions and selfishness. The monastic life is so arranged as to facilitate this work. On the other hand the worldly life, particularly in our secular society, makes it harder to be an ascetic. The problem for the Christian in the world is that he is called upon to reach the same goal under adverse conditions.

The tonsure, with cutting of hair, is called a "second baptism" 19. Baptism, however, is one and the same for all members of the Church. It is participation in the death and resurrection of Christ. The tonsure does not repeat, but renews and activates the grace of the baptism. The monastic vows are essentially not different from those taken at baptism, with the exception of the vow of celibacy. Furthermore, hair is also cut during baptism.


St. Sava's Orthodox Monastery near Betlehem, Israel


The monastic life points the way to perfection. However, the whole Church is called to perfection. All the faithful, both laymen and monks, are called to become perfect following the divine example: "You, therefore, must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect"20. But while the monk affirms the radical nature of the Christian life, the layman is content to regard it conventionally. The conventional morality of the layman on the one hand and the radical morality of the monk on the other create a dialectical differentiation that takes the form of a dialectical antithesis.

NEXT PAGE


Chant of Serbian Orthodox Monks from Kovilj Monastery
(traditional Serb-Byzantine chant)


Monastery of St. Atanasios of Meteora, Greece


Meteora, Greece

source: http://www.kosovo.net/monasticism.html

Some of the beginnings

one those many claim as founding forces of new monasicism is John Skinner. He he talks about the beginnings.







The New Monastic Movement

This is a documentary short on the New Monastic movement conceived of as another voice within Christianity, a counterpoint to the voice of fundamentalism. The video was filmed at a School(s) for Conversion event in Springfield, MA on May 10, 2008. It was produced by Ryan Metzger and Glen Rectenwald for Prof. Harvey Cox's "Religion and Politics in Current Fundamentalist Movements".

Sunday, October 4, 2009

A Brief Biography of Thich Nhat Hanh

This is a brief video biography of Buddhist monk Thich Nhat Hanh. And yes, I know he is not a Christian. He does have something to offer if we are engage in a study of monastism. And he is one of the most peaceful people I have ever met and study with.

Community or a Cloud in a Virtual World?

Modern technology has permitted many to withdraw more and more from any community. Home is left behind. Church becomes a place to go less and less. We can stay in our room, type on the computers keys, and think that we have friends. But this is only a virtual world. We have become centered on ourselves. Tell us that we can make a difference in the lives of our friends and neighbors, and we may just look into the computer monitor at a picture of our virtual friends. There is nothing real.

But we are created as spiritual men and women. We are driven to find the truth.

While this pastor in this video is promoting his Indianapolis church with real words, the true spiritual places, the place he says that many are looking for is with the Church, the Orthodox Church.

It is good to listen to his words, and to determine if we are answer the inter call is being answered. Then find an Orthodox Church and discover the true faith of our fathers, the faith of Christ, the faith of the Apostles, the faith of the early church fathers and mothers, the faith of the Acts.

Discover the Church, discover how you can really make a difference in the lives of real friends and neighbor. Visit the Mor Gregorios Community Center, or call us at 574-540-2048, or email us at monastery@synesius.com. May God's blessing be upon you and your family, now and forever.

Saturday, October 3, 2009

Archbishop LAZAR

There is Archbishop LAZAR's latest teaching from the monastery in Canada. He talks about the law of God. You need to listen carefully since it was recorded outside the the wind makes lots of noise.

Met. KALLISTOS Ware - The Eucharistic Sacrafice - Who Offers What to Whom?

Gregory Palamas: Divine Energies

St. Gregory Palamas (14th century) brilliantly explained the Holy Scriptures as interpreting Holy Scriptures from the Greek text. St. Paul uses the word "energies" throughout his epistles, usually translated (KJV) as "Power". However, energies describe more adequately that Divine power that energizes us with the power of Christ's resurrection bringing us to Life in Him as we put the "old man" to death with Him on the Cross. As St. Paul tells us "His death is active ("energizes") us but energizes Life to you all"! In PART ONE, Presbytera Irene Matta, MTh simplifies St. Gregory's teachings with Rev. Father James in the PART TWO. PART THREE reveals the life's testimony of a Franciscan Spanish monk who discovered the Ancient Orthodox Faith when delving into the heinous documents of the "Inquisition".




Friday, October 2, 2009

letter from taybeh


Dear Friends of St. George Taybeh,

I have written this letter

especially for Taybeh people abroad

and I wanted to share it with you,

in Christ's love, maria

----

Dearly Beloved people of Taybeh abroad, locally and internationally,

My Brothers and Sisters, I greet you with the Love and Peace of Christ our Lord and Savior,

I sincerely thank you very much for the amazing solidarity and support you have shown by your phone calls to my husband David, mayor of Taybeh following the tragic attack at the municipality on Monday evening, Sept 28, 2009 at 8:15 pm where the mayor’s car was put on fire and extensive damage done to the municipality doors, windows, telephone lines forcing us to spend so many days cleaning up and replacing public property instead of inviting people to our beloved village for a day of solidarity for the Oktoberfest which has become a major event in Palestine and has developed Taybeh into the iconic image for most locals and internationals specifically since David Khoury become mayor, (www.taybehmunicipality.org <http://www.taybehmunicipality.org/> )  For those who are not familiar, last Oktoberfest received more than eighteen ambassadors from around the world strongly placing Taybeh on the psychological map of people’s heart since the awful Israeli occupation steals our identity and only illegal Israeli settlements appear on tourist maps and on road signs.

I have been emotionally hurt by this recent attack and completely burned out from community service since it follows four other attacks on my husband personally and Khoury property.  I can only say that my whole life in Taybeh since my first visit, 1983, I have only known to be loyal and obedient to my husband who loves Taybeh so much.   I have given of myself, my heart, my soul, my skills and knowledge to promote the village, Church, our family business and worthy projects in Palestine for education and art.  After my husband and I neglect our own family and personal time with our children to serve others, I have only learned that good guys finish last. But my late father-in-law, Canaan David Khoury, instilled this deep love for Taybeh in us because he was very appreciative of his roots and he had great vision that Palestine would one day be free and he taught all of us to be leaders in positive thinking, entrepreneurship endeavors, and contributing to society.

On behalf of my husband David, the honorable Mayor of Taybeh, we sincerely appreciate your support and solidarity in all ways you help Taybeh.  And I truly believe and trust that my husband’s life was saved from the candles people light for us around the world and the prayers they say daily by remembering us to God.  A sincere thank you for your prayers and good wishes!

With fear in God I will work for Taybeh until the day I die. The only thing I learned growing up as a Greek in America is that one person can make a difference.  With the help of others we have fundraised over $147,000.00 for the Taybeh Orthodox Church Housing Project and also established an education endowment fund for St. George Greek Orthodox Church of Taybeh currently at $33,000.00 for college students to receive a scholarship each year of at least $300 for local university education in Palestine following the wonderful role model of Mr. Yusef Nawas in California who has already sponsored 35 students for partial and full tuition at Birzeit University and someone should thank him on his 94th birthday this November.

In Christ’s service, Maria C. Khoury, Ed. D.                                                                                                 ___

A sincere personal thank you for the letter received by the Taybeh Municipality, Sept 30, 2009 from United Taybeh American Association, 14215 Ramona Ave, Hawthorne, California, 90250; (310) 259-9159; www.taybeh.org <http://www.taybeh.org/>

Dear Mr. Daoud Khoury, Mayor of Taybeh,

Dear Members of the Municipality Council,

On behalf of the Board of Directors and the members of the United Taybeh American Association and myself, I condemn, and with the strongest terms, the cowardly act of burning the vehicle of the Mayor of Taybeh, Mr. Daoud Khoury.

The United Taybeh American Association finds this act cowardly and evil and considers its perpetrators despicable and deplorable.

We stand in solidarity with our Mayor and the Municipality Council and our honorable citizens of Taybeh in Palestine and abroad, and together we reject and condemn this act of evil and any such act perpetrated against our symbols and institutions.   

Sincerely,

Faiq M. Ady

UTAA President & Board of Directors


Thursday, October 1, 2009

Can Orthodoxy Speak to Eastern Religious Seekers?

Print

By: Kevin Allen

Former Hindu devotee

I recently had a conversation with an Eastern Orthodox priest, whose twenty-six year old son recently left home for an indefinite stay at a Buddhist monastery. The priest was heart broken. His son was not a stranger to Eastern Orthodoxy or to its monastic tradition either, having spent time at several Orthodox monasteries, and even two months on the holy mountain of Mt. Athos. His son’s journey to a non-Christian Eastern religious tradition is not an isolated event. Eastern religions in North America are a growing and competing force in religious life with Christianity. Buddhism is now the fourth-largest religious group in the United States, with 2.5 - 3 million adherents, approximately 800,000 of whom are American western "converts". There are more Buddhists in America today than Eastern Orthodox Christians! The Dalai Lama (the leader of one of the Tibetan Buddhist sects) is one of the most recognized and admired people in the world and far better known than any Eastern Orthodox hierarch. Look in the magazine section of Borders or Barnes and Noble. You will find more publications with names like "Shambala Sun", "Buddhadharma", and "What is enlightenment?" than Christian magazines!

In addition to losing seekers (many of them youth) to non-Christian eastern spiritual traditions, eastern metaphysics have seeped into our western culture without much notice. For example, think of how often one hears the phrase "that’s good (or bad) karma". Karma is a Hindu word that has to do with the consequences of deeds done in a previous life (reincarnation)! They are doing a better job (sadly) "evangelizing" our culture than we Eastern Orthodox Christians are!

The Lord Himself commands us clearly "that repentance and remission of sins (baptism) should be preached in His name to all nations" (Luke 24:47). Buddhists (of which there are many sects) and Hindus live among us in America in ever-growing numbers right in our own backyards -- in our college classrooms, on our soccer fields, shopping in our "health foods" stores. They are a rich, potential "mission field" for the Eastern Orthodox Church in the United States. Unfortunately with few exceptions, like the writings of Monk Damascene [Christensen] and Kyriakos S. Markides, we are not talking to this group at all.

As a former Hindu and disciple of a well-known guru, or spiritual teacher, I can tell you Orthodox Christianity shares more "common ground" with seekers of non-Christian spiritual traditions of the east than any other Christian confession! The truth is when Evangelical Protestants attempt to evangelize the eastern spiritual seeker they often do more harm than good, because their approach is culturally western, rational, and legalistic-juridical with (generally) little understanding of the paradigms and spiritual language (or yearnings) of the seekers of these eastern traditions.

There are three "fundamental metaphysical principles" that Buddhists and Hindus generally share in common:

1. A common "supra-natural" reality underlies and pervades the phenomenal world. This Supreme Reality isn’t Personal, but Trans-personal. God or Ultimate Reality in these traditions is ultimately a "pure consciousness" without attributes.

2. The human soul is one in essence with this divine reality. All human nature is divine at its core. According to these traditions, Christ or Buddha isn’t a savior, but simply a paradigm of self-realization, the goal of all mankind.

3. Existence is in fundamental unity (monism). Creation isn’t what it appears to the naked eye. It is in essence "illusion", "unreal" and "impermanent". There is one underlying ground of being (think "quantum field" in physics!) which unifies all beings and out of which and into which everything can be reduced.

What do these metaphysics have in common with our Eastern Orthodox faith? Not much, on the surface. But in the eastern non-Christian spiritual traditions, knowledge is not primarily about the development or dissemination of metaphysical doctrine or theology. This is one of the problems western Christians have communicating with eastern seekers. Eastern religion is never theoretical or doctrinal. It’s about the struggle for liberation from suffering and death. This "existential" emphasis is the first connection Eastern Orthodoxy has with these traditions, because Orthodoxy is essentially transformative in emphasis.

The second thing we agree on with Buddhists and Hindus is the corrupted state of humanity and human consciousness. The goal of the Christian life according to the Church Fathers is to move from the "sub-natural" or "fallen state" in which we find ourselves (subject to death), to the "natural" or the "according to nature state" after the Image (of God), and ultimately to the "supra-natural" or "beyond nature" state, after the Likeness (of God). According to the teaching of the holy fathers the stages of the spiritual life are purification (metanoia), illumination (theoria) and deification (theosis). This paradigm of spiritual formation and transformation is unique to Eastern Orthodox practice within Christendom. While we don’t agree with Buddhists or Hindus on what "illumination" or "deification" is, we agree on the basic diagnosis of the fallen human condition. As I once said to a practicing Tibetan Buddhist: "We agree on the sickness (of the human condition). Where we disagree is on the cure".

Eastern Orthodoxy – especially the hesychasm (contemplative) tradition – teaches that true "spiritual knowledge" presupposes a "purified" and "awakened" nous (Greek), which is the "Inner ‘I’" of the soul. For Eastern Orthodox the true theologian isn’t one who simply knows doctrine intellectually or academically, but one "who knows God, or the inner essences or principles of created things by means of direct apprehension or spiritual perception." As a well-known Orthodox theologian explains, "When the nous is illuminated, it means that it is receiving the energy of God which illuminates it..." This idea resonates with eastern seekers who struggle to experience – through non-Christian ascesis and/or occult methods – spiritual illumination. Most eastern spiritual seekers are not aware that the opportunity for profound spiritual illumination, which our hesychasm tradition calls "theoria", exists within a Christian context.

As part of their spiritual ascesis, Buddhist and Hindu dhamma (practice) emphasizes cessation of desire, which is necessary to quench the passions. Holy Tradition teaches apatheia, or detachment as a means of combating the fallen passions. Hindu and Buddhist meditation methods teach "stillness". The word hesychia in Holy Tradition – the root of the word for hesychasm – means "stillness"! Buddhism, especially, teaches "mindfulness". Holy Tradition teaches "watchfulness" so we do not fall into temptation! Hindus and Buddhists understand it is not wise to live for the present life, but to struggle for the future one. We Orthodox agree! Americans who become Buddhist or Hindu are often fervent spiritual seekers used to struggling with foreign languages and cultures (Sanskrit, Tibetan, Japanese) and pushing themselves outside their "comfort zones". Converts to the Eastern Orthodox Church can relate! Some Buddhist and Hindu sects even have complex forms of "liturgy" including chant, prostration and veneration of icons! Tibetan Buddhism, especially, places high value on the lives of (their) ascetics, relics and "saints".

The main difference in spiritual experience is that what the eastern non-Christian traditions recognize as "spiritual illumination" or "primordial awareness" – achieved through deep contemplation (Moksha, Samadhi) – Orthodox Holy Tradition understands merely as "self contemplation". Archimandrite Sophrony (Sakharov), who was experienced in yoga (‘union’) before becoming a hesychast – monk, and disciple of St. Silouan of the holy mountain, wrote this from personal experience: "All contemplation arrived at by this means (Yoga, etc.) is self-contemplation, not contemplation of God. In these circumstances we open up for ourselves created beauty, not First Being. And in all this there is no salvation for man." Clement of Alexandria, two thousand years ago, wrote that pre-Christian philosophers were often inspired by God, but he cautioned the Christian must be careful what to take from them!

So we acknowledge that while the eastern seeker may through ascesis or contemplative disciplines experience deep levels of created beauty, or created being, para-normal dimensions, even the 'non-being' from which we are formed, these are not the the Uncreated Divine Life!! Are these experiences what the eastern seeker is really struggling for? This is the key question! Only in the Eastern Orthodox Church, through its deifying mysteries will the seeker be brought into the province of Uncreated Divine Life. It is only in the Orthodox Church – of all Christian confessions - that the eastern seeker will find there is more to "salvation" than simply forgiveness of sins and justification before God. He will be led to participate in the Uncreated Energies of God and through them "be partakers of the divine nature." (II Peter 1:4). As a member of the Body of Christ he will join in the deifying process and be increasingly transformed after the Likeness! Deification is available to all who enter the Holy Orthodox Church, are baptized (which begins the deifying process) and partake of the holy mysteries. It is not just the monks, ascetics and the spiritual athletes!

Eastern Orthodoxy has much to share with eastern spiritual seekers. Life and death hangs in the balance in this life, not the millions of lives eastern seekers think they have! As the Apostle Paul soberly reminds us, "…it is appointed for men to die once but after this the judgment." (Heb. 9:27).

May God give us the vision to begin reaching out and sharing the "true light" of the Holy Orthodox faith with seekers of the eastern spiritual traditions.

source: http://stbarnabasonline.org/index.php/+-Articles/Can-Orthodoxy-Speak-to-Eastern-Religious-Seekers.html