The answer to the question “Who chooses a new bishop?” is “The Holy Spirit.” Christ has not abandoned His church, and continues to guide and govern her through the Holy Spirit. However, the Holy Spirit uses human beings to accomplish this. The process consists of two parts: identifying priests with the necessary qualities, and selecting the one who best fills a specific vacancy. We have to try to find the best candidate who fits the niche.
Identifying the Right Priests
The process of identifying priests with the qualities desired in a bishop is an ongoing process, even if there are no vacancies. The bishop of a diocese in the Indian Orthodox Church should give the Catholicos the names of priests they think would make good bishops. The candidates passed on by a bishop should usually be from his diocese or with whom he has served, since these are the priests he knows best. In my opinion, the process of 30 people having to sign a form and then getting the consent of the person to become a bishop is uncanonical. From when have we become a worldly and secular institution?
The Qualities of a Bishop
The church is very explicit about the qualities that must be present in a candidate to the episcopacy. He must be “a good pastor of souls and teacher of the Faith.” The church examines whether the candidates “enjoy a good reputation; whether they are of irreproachable morality; whether they are endowed with right judgment and prudence; whether they are even-tempered and of stable character; whether they firmly hold the Orthodox Faith; whether they are devoted to the Apostolic See and faithful to the Church; whether they have a thorough knowledge of dogmatic and moral theology and canon law; whether they are outstanding for their piety, their spirit of sacrifice and their pastoral zeal; whether they have an aptitude for governing.”
Consideration is also be given to “intellectual qualities, studies completed, social sense, spirit of dialogue and cooperation, openness to the signs of the times, praise-worthy impartiality, family background, health, age (40-50) and inherited characteristics.” By the way, celibacy is by no way the only criterion for episcopacy. There was a time when men ran away from wanting to become a bishop, nowadays, we have many running for it and setting their eyes on higher offices. We sing in Syriac: tow b’shlomo aboon d’rabyath rooho d’qudsho: w’ablaishoneh t’een laqleedai d’baith aloho – (Hail Bishop, whom the Holy Spirit did raise up, and, with his tongue, bears the keys to God’s house).
The List
Periodically, the bishops must meet under the chairmanship of the Catholicos to consider the names of priests who are possible candidates for the episcopacy. At such meetings, a list of candidates for the episcopacy must be assembled, voted on and forwarded to the Managing committee. While the Managing committee can nominate a priest for bishop not from this pool of candidates, most appointments must come from these lists. When the church needs bishops, the second part of the process must get underway i.e. the thorough screening for the best persons who will fill specific vacancies. Why should we wait till the next association to have a pool of good and able candidates? Why wait, start early!
During the investigation the Church must send out a confidential questionnaire on the candidate to people who know him. The questions must address the physical, intellectual, moral, spiritual, social, and priestly characteristics that one would hope for in a bishop. Those from whom a report is requested must include clergy and laity and also from secular and religious institutions…these must include the priest’s diocesan bishop, others should be diocesan officials the person has gotten to know personally and also people who have worked with him on secular and academic levels too. The laity consulted should be officers in diocesan lay organizations or on diocesan advisory committees. Each must be told to answer the questions without consulting others. They cannot tell anyone, especially the candidate, that they have received the questionnaire. If we already have a pool of able candidates, then these reports makes the selection of the best among the list much easier.
Church’s Report
After the Church has examined the responses to the questionnaires, a ‘bishop-electing panel’ should prepare a final list of qualified candidates and write a report extracting and synthesizing the content of the consultation and giving their own judgment. The report must be sent to the Holy Synod, and no bishop sees the report unless he attends the Holy Synod convened.
Holy Synod
When the report arrives at the Holy Synod, the members discuss the appointment under the chairmanship of the Catholicos. The Holy Synod should finalize the best candidates. If there are only five qualified candidates for the five positions, well and good, but if there are more than five able candidates, election should not be our option.
The Catholicos
In the case of more able candidates than positions, the Catholicos should send out a Church wide kalpana to all parishes to observe 3 days of fasting for the need to choose bishops. After three days, let HH the Catholicos request the faithful (men, women and children) and clergy to gather for a Holy Liturgy. During the Holy Qurbana the names of the able candidates should be in a vessel on the altar. In the midst of the liturgy, offer litanies and draw names from the cup. Why have we become a church where we talk about being so liturgical but we do not value the spirituality of our services? This is how at the end, the church, led by the Holy Spirit, makes the appointment. Our way of choosing bishops today is a mockery of democracy and church canons.
We are a liturgical church and we must chose names from the ‘final list of able candidates’ during the Divine Liturgy. Let us see how the former saintly Patriarch of Alexandria, Kyrillos VI, was chosen to become the Patriarch.
There was no patriarch on the See of St. Mark at the time of the election of Kyrillos VI, and therefore Metropolitan Athanasios was the locum tenens as Deputy Patriarch. There were many bishops under him. As a preparation for the election, Metropolitan Athanasios made a nomination list, and all nominations were on behalf of spiritually outstanding monk-priests who never knew they had been in the list of nominations. There were no bishops in the list. Nominations were submitted on behalf of Fr. Demian, Fr. Angelos, Father Timotheos, and Father Mina. Having later known about his nomination, Father Mina declined to be part of this process. Having heard about this the Deputy Patriarch called Fr. Mina and asked him:
“Father Mina, why are you not part of this election?”
“Your Holiness, … may the Lord choose a good shepherd to guide His people with piety and purity of heart.” Father Mina replied.
“You should not have missed this duty.”
“Who am I but a little worm, to even consider this glorious and serious responsibility, and carry its enormous trusteeship, which should be given to a divinely chosen person, and not to whomever wants it.”
“But, I still did not hear your answer as to why you did not allow yourself to be nominated and allow the Lord to choose according to His will.”
“Your Holiness, all my fathers, the monks, who were nominated, are suitable for this critical position. But as for me, I am content with the Lord’s grace that is with me.”
“Father Mina, I am submitting a nomination for you.” “ … but where would the lowly stand among kings?’ “The Lord can lift the poor man from the pits to seat him with the principals of His people.”
Later Father Mina conducted a campaign against himself like St Ephraim.
On April 17, 1959 the nominees were narrowed down to three monks, Fr. Demian, Fr Angelos, and Fr. Mina.
On Sunday, April 19, 1959 the Deputy Patriarch offered the Papal Election Liturgy, which was attended by high dignitaries of the country, including the late President Anwar Sadat, ambassadors and high-ranking delegates of other churches in the world. At the end of the Liturgy, a young deacon was appointed to draw one of the nominations from their container placed on the altar. He pulled out the nomination that has the name of Father Mina, a humble monk of St Demiana Monastery.
While this was going on Fr. Mina was celebrating his Sunday Liturgy at St. Mina’s Monastery in Cairo. The news of his divine election was broadcast all over the radio stations in Egypt, and it came to the attention of the participants of Fr. Mina’s Liturgy. Bells of all the Churches rang all over Egypt, but Fr. Mina refused to allow his beloved people to ring the bell of St. Mina’s Monastery Church. You should know what Fr. Mina did when he heard about it. He went up to the sanctuary and cried. The people forced him out of the sanctuary. He came out and addressed his people: “Glory be to God. The Lord has chosen to demonstrate His power and glory through my weakness. I tremble with fear in the glory of Your power. … From You we receive power and help, O our Lord and Redeemer.”
Here are some things that I believe Indian Orthodox Christians need to be asking as they choose their leaders.
1.It is now so much how this individual “came over” in a short exposure to the people, but whether this person’s record is of someone who not only is able to lead, but is able to lead through perillous waters in difficult times. What has been their record as a pastor, evangelist, missionary, leader? Whatever the future configuration of the church, these years ahead are going to be extraordinarily difficult, and will require a leader who is firm but flexible when it comes to guiding a group of congregations through rough seas.
2. We need to be asking whether any of these individuals understand what is going on in the culture, where the culture is leading us, and what the impact will be upon the churches. The 21st Century is profoundly different in almost every way from the 20th, and the church that does not understand this is in deep trouble. If we are looking for someone who will try to maintain the institution in its present form then we are already digging the grave into which most of just about any diocese will very quickly be dropped.
3. Choosing a bishop is a theological act, so we want to know what a person believes, what their relationship to God is through Jesus Christ, whether they are able to be the chief missionary of the diocese. When you are part of a church like ours that tends to defer to the culture rather than Scriptures and Christian tradition in shaping its values, this is a major, major set of questions that need to be asked. Failing to do so is a great danger.
4. Furthermore, we need to be asking if this individual has a vision for the future. Vision is a key component to leadership, for as Scripture says, without a vision the people perish. We have been prone in the church to elect managers and administrators, who at times make compromises, and the result is that we have not had the kind of leadership that will take us to the places where God might want us to go.
5. While a person’s charm, wit, and social abilities are important, they ought not to be at the top of the list. Some of the greatest bishops in history would not have been the life and soul of a cocktail party -- indeed, a good number of those who do have such skills have been disasters. The election of bishops must not be a popularity contest.
6. While managerial and administrative skills ought not at the top of the list, it helps if someone knows themselves well enough that in leading they are able to guide an entity forward and fill the gaps in their own skill mix. We have to elect people who have a mix of administrative skills, management and above all the humility to serve.
7. A bishop should be someone with staying power. The stress of the office is so great these days. A bishop is someone who is involved in the leadership of a spiritual conflict, and therefore needs to be spiritually, physically, emotionally, up to the task.
8. Good bishops are people of prayer and study of the Word. They are individuals who keep themselves spiritually alert and fresh. They lead from grace that is centered on Jesus Christ, and not out of ego, personal gratification, or in pursuit of any specific political agenda.
9. Good bishops have an inner humility. This is a spiritual grace that tends to get overlooked in our push-and-shove age. This humility allows them to be honest to God and honest with themselves. A terrific place to start when thinking about who might be a bishop for a diocese is Paul's teaching in 1 Timothy 3.1ff.
10. A good bishop is someone who knows how to listen to and take good advice and wise counsel from Godly priests and laity.
11. We are a Church that focuses on the worship so much…if a bishop is present he tends to lead the service. This is not the top priority, but we need bishops who know the rubrics of the service and who can lead a service beautifully. I am not saying that they all should be melodious singers and chanters, but it helps.
A lot more can be said, but these are just some of the qualifications that we need to be looking for in those who are called to lead us, and we need to deliberately set the bar high. I expect those who lead to reflect Christ’s grace transparently -- this should be so of priests and certainly of bishops. Many of our problems in the past generations have resulted from setting the bar too low. The sort of bishop that a diocese needs today is someone for whom Christ is their all in all, someone who is determined that the Gospel is not about the Church as an institution, but about the Kingdom of God.
May the Holy Spirit guide our Church and move our leaders to discern and chose the best men for the episcopate. Hab moryo l’eeto deelokh qadishto shayno w’shlomo – (Grant, O Lord, Your Holy Church peace and tranquility).
Thursday, December 24, 2009
Sunday, December 20, 2009
Christmas Reflection 2: Prepare the Way for the Lord
Meditational Text: Malachi 3:1-4, Baruch 5:1-9, Luke 1:68-79, Philippians 1:3-11 and Luke 3:1-6
Preparing is hard work and preparing the way for the Lord is harder. The prophet Malachi calls us to a time of preparation during the Advent season as we anticipate the coming of Christ. Malachi has good news—God will indeed appear. As a spokesman for the Lord, the prophet begins this particular chapter by saying, “Behold, I send my messenger to prepare the way before me, and the Lord whom you seek will suddenly come to his temple; the messenger of the covenant in whom you delight, behold, he is coming, says the LORD of hosts.” (Malachi 3. 1, RSV). In this season of preparation, we await the coming of Jesus into his temple – and into our hearts again at Christmas.
But, Malachi also has a warning: “But who can endure the day of his coming, and who can stand when he appears? For he is like a refiner's fire and like fullers’ soap.” (Malachi 3. 2, RSV). In other words, the coming of the Lord means judgment.
That is precisely why it is imperative that we prepare for the Lord’s return. Preparing for the Lord’s coming is a matter of purification. True spiritual preparation involves repentance and change of heart. That is what getting ready for Christmas is about — preparing the way for the Lord’s arrival into our lives.
Like Malachi, John the Baptist tells us to prepare, but he also admonishes us to repair the path into our hearts. The crooked areas need straightening and our souls that have been bent and turned by too many false hopes need to return to God. The only way for us to get our souls made right with God is for us to turn our hearts toward the coming Savior.
John said it best when he quoted the prophet Isaiah, saying, “Prepare the way of the Lord, make his paths straight.” (Luke 3.4, RSV).
This Advent season, may we have the courage to ask God to repair our hearts so that we are truly prepared for the coming of the King of Kings, our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. Amen.
Preparing is hard work and preparing the way for the Lord is harder. The prophet Malachi calls us to a time of preparation during the Advent season as we anticipate the coming of Christ. Malachi has good news—God will indeed appear. As a spokesman for the Lord, the prophet begins this particular chapter by saying, “Behold, I send my messenger to prepare the way before me, and the Lord whom you seek will suddenly come to his temple; the messenger of the covenant in whom you delight, behold, he is coming, says the LORD of hosts.” (Malachi 3. 1, RSV). In this season of preparation, we await the coming of Jesus into his temple – and into our hearts again at Christmas.
But, Malachi also has a warning: “But who can endure the day of his coming, and who can stand when he appears? For he is like a refiner's fire and like fullers’ soap.” (Malachi 3. 2, RSV). In other words, the coming of the Lord means judgment.
That is precisely why it is imperative that we prepare for the Lord’s return. Preparing for the Lord’s coming is a matter of purification. True spiritual preparation involves repentance and change of heart. That is what getting ready for Christmas is about — preparing the way for the Lord’s arrival into our lives.
Like Malachi, John the Baptist tells us to prepare, but he also admonishes us to repair the path into our hearts. The crooked areas need straightening and our souls that have been bent and turned by too many false hopes need to return to God. The only way for us to get our souls made right with God is for us to turn our hearts toward the coming Savior.
John said it best when he quoted the prophet Isaiah, saying, “Prepare the way of the Lord, make his paths straight.” (Luke 3.4, RSV).
This Advent season, may we have the courage to ask God to repair our hearts so that we are truly prepared for the coming of the King of Kings, our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. Amen.
Wednesday, December 16, 2009
Christmas Reflection 1: NATIVITY: WAITING WITH HOPE AND EXPECTATION
Meditational Texts: Jeremiah 33:14-16, Psalm 25:1-10 , 1 Thessalonians 3:9-13 and Luke 21:25-36
The LORD Our Salvation
The Nativity of Christ marks a wonderfully exciting time in the church year. The change of season proclaims - Jesus Christ is coming! We sing “O come, O come, Emmanuel” as we await Christ Jesus’ arrival. In announcing his nativity, all the readings echo the word COMING:
• The LORD said: I made a wonderful promise to Israel and Judah, and the days are COMING when I will keep it. (Jeremiah 33:14)
• When our Lord COMES with all of his people, I pray he will make your hearts pure and innocent in the sight of God the Father. (1 Thessalonians 3:13)
• Then the Son of Man will be seen, COMING in a cloud with power and great glory. (Luke 21:27)
The message of Nativity is God’s reassurance to us of his faithfulness to his promises. The promise is that Jesus Christ will be present among us and the Holy Spirit will guide and counsel us. Advent also is a summons to watch and pray. Watch for signs of the kingdom of God, for signs of love and forgiveness, for signs of hope and joy, for peace. Be alert for opportunities to reach out to others. Pray for the coming of the kingdom and the fulfillment of God’s will. We are called to grow in holiness as we prepare for the coming of the Lord.
God will overcome and change the world by pouring out, in self-sacrifice and love, his unrestricted force and flood of divine life. This life can be brought into being by making real in human affairs the depth of divine life and love; by showing ‘glory’ – the intensity and radiance of unqualified joy, eternal self-giving. Only in the heart of the ordinary vulnerability of human life can this be shown in such a way, so that we are saved from the terrible temptation of confusing it with earthly power and success. This is an assurance from the LORD, as recorded by Jeremiah, that God truly is the LORD, our salvation.
We have begun the new church cycle; we start over again, and we have the opportunity to review and recommit ourselves to the disciplines of faith. We will again receive the invitation and call, “Come, for all things are ready!” Let us respond with faith, in preparation of Jesus Christ’s coming! Amen!
The LORD Our Salvation
The Nativity of Christ marks a wonderfully exciting time in the church year. The change of season proclaims - Jesus Christ is coming! We sing “O come, O come, Emmanuel” as we await Christ Jesus’ arrival. In announcing his nativity, all the readings echo the word COMING:
• The LORD said: I made a wonderful promise to Israel and Judah, and the days are COMING when I will keep it. (Jeremiah 33:14)
• When our Lord COMES with all of his people, I pray he will make your hearts pure and innocent in the sight of God the Father. (1 Thessalonians 3:13)
• Then the Son of Man will be seen, COMING in a cloud with power and great glory. (Luke 21:27)
The message of Nativity is God’s reassurance to us of his faithfulness to his promises. The promise is that Jesus Christ will be present among us and the Holy Spirit will guide and counsel us. Advent also is a summons to watch and pray. Watch for signs of the kingdom of God, for signs of love and forgiveness, for signs of hope and joy, for peace. Be alert for opportunities to reach out to others. Pray for the coming of the kingdom and the fulfillment of God’s will. We are called to grow in holiness as we prepare for the coming of the Lord.
God will overcome and change the world by pouring out, in self-sacrifice and love, his unrestricted force and flood of divine life. This life can be brought into being by making real in human affairs the depth of divine life and love; by showing ‘glory’ – the intensity and radiance of unqualified joy, eternal self-giving. Only in the heart of the ordinary vulnerability of human life can this be shown in such a way, so that we are saved from the terrible temptation of confusing it with earthly power and success. This is an assurance from the LORD, as recorded by Jeremiah, that God truly is the LORD, our salvation.
We have begun the new church cycle; we start over again, and we have the opportunity to review and recommit ourselves to the disciplines of faith. We will again receive the invitation and call, “Come, for all things are ready!” Let us respond with faith, in preparation of Jesus Christ’s coming! Amen!
Monday, September 21, 2009
The Sign of the Cross
The Sign of the Cross is a simple religious act, which is so universal and so frequently practiced during the course of the day. We all make this holy sign, but hardly many of us give any thought to the mysteries it signifies. The sign of the Cross follows a believer everywhere. The sign of the Cross of Christ sanctifies all and everything, so when a believer makes this sign over himself it brings him closer to salvation.[1]
St. Cyril of Jerusalem says: “Let us not then be ashamed to confess the Crucified. Let the Cross be our seal made with boldness by our fingers on our brow and in everything; over the bread we eat, and the cups we drink; in our comings in, and goings out; before our sleep, when we lie down and when we awake; when we are on the way and when we are still. Great is that preservative; it is without price, for the poor's sake; without toil, for the sick, since its grace is from God. It is the Sign of the faithful, and the dread of evils; for He has triumphed over them in it, having made a mockery of them openly; for when they see the Cross, they are reminded of the Crucified; they are afraid of Him, Who has bruised the heads of the dragon. Despise not the Seal, because of the freeness of the Gift; but for this rather honor thy Benefactor”.[2]
St. John Chrysostom wrote: “never leave home without making the sign of the cross”.[3] Tertullian recounts, “In all our travels in all our coming in and going out, in putting on our shoes, at the bath, at the table we mark our foreheads with the sign of the cross”.[4] This sign or mark on the forehead of consecration to Christ has an antecedent in Ezekiel’s prophetic vision of judgment, in which the Lord commands that a “mark be set upon the foreheads” of the Israelites who cry out against the evil which surrounds them, so that by this mark God’s people were identified as belonging to Him and saved from annihilation [Ezekiel: 9:4-6]. Other biblical references to “sealing” God’s people with a sign on their heads are found in Revelation 7:4, 9:4.[5]
The origins of the sign are unknown; “our information is sparse because this ancient practice emerged naturally, as something that made sense to most Christians”.[6] The earliest descriptions, such as Tertullian’s, indicate that the cross was made with one finger—probably the thumb—on the forehead in the shape of a Hebrew T or a Greek X, letters that stood for names of God and Christ. Presumably, early Christians were taking their cues from passages in Genesis 4:15, Ezekiel 9:4, and Revelation 14:1 and 22:4 that describe a mark on the forehead as a sign of God's claim on a person. The similarities among the shapes of T, X, and the cross were noted by early writers, but it wasn’t until the fourth century that the cross became a symbol of pride, of worship, and of Christian identity. By then, Augustine declared, “What else is the sign of Christ but the cross of Christ?” and advised that “the sign be applied … to the foreheads of believers”.[7]
Crossing one’s self recalls this seal, and the invocation that is said while making this holy sign calls on our God -- the Father, His Son, and the Holy Ghost -- and is a sign of our of belief; it is both a “mini-creed” that asserts our belief in the Trinitarian God, and a prayer that invokes the Holy Trinity.[8] With the Sign, we send a visible sign to the world as St. Ephrem the Syrians says: “Mark all your actions with the sign of the life giving Cross. Do not go out from the door of your house till you have signed yourself with the Cross. Do not neglect that sign whether in eating or drinking or going to sleep, or in the home or going on a journey. There is no habit to be compared with it. Let it be a protecting wall round all your conduct, and teach it to your children that they may earnestly learn the custom”.[9] Because of what the Sign indicates -- the very Cross of our salvation -- Satan hates it, and our using it makes demons flee.
The Sign of the Cross is made by holding the thumb, index finger, middle finger of the right hand together (signifying the Trinity) while tucking the ring finger and little finger (signifying the two natures of Christ) toward the palm. The sign of the Cross is made by touching the hand sequentially to the forehead, lower chest or navel area, and both shoulders, accompanied by the Trinitarian formula: at the forehead: In the name of the Father; at the stomach or heart: and of the Son; across the shoulders: and of the Holy Spirit; and finally: Amen. Today, Western Christians and the Oriental Orthodox touch the left shoulder before the right. Orthodox Christians use the right-to-left movement.
There are several interpretations; according to Church Fathers the forehead symbolizes Heaven; the stomach, the earth; the shoulders, the place and sign of power. Also, the hand to the forehead may be seen as a prayer to the Father for wisdom; the hand to the stomach as a prayer to the Son who became incarnate; and the hand to the shoulders as a prayer to the Holy Spirit. The fingers put together first touch the forehead — to sanctify the mind, then — the belly near the solar plexus — for sanctification of feelings, then to the right and finally to the left shoulder — to sanctify one’s bodily strength.[10]
The right cross, practiced by Eastern Orthodox believers, symbolizes how “Christ descended from the heavens to the earth, and from the Jews (right) He passed to the Gentiles (left)”, according to Pope Innocent III. In Oriental Orthodox and Roman Catholic practice, the left cross has become standard, showing, (in one of many interpretations) that the believer hopes to be not on Christ’s left—with the goats, as in Jesus’ parable—at the day of judgment, but on Christ’s right. The difference between the Latin and the Greek customs is that the right side is associated with holiness, and the heart (on the left) with the spirit, so that those who, in mentioning the Holy Spirit, used the Latin phrase “Spiritus Sancti” (noun before adjective) touched left before right, while those who said, in Greek, “τοῦ Ἁγίου Πνεύματος” – tou agiou pneumatos – (adjective before noun) did the opposite.[11]
Chrysostom admonishes: “You should not just trace the cross with your finger, but you should do it in faith”.[12] The sign of the cross is “a simple gesture and … a simple prayer”.[13]
[1] Very Rev. Canon Howe, “Sign of the Cross” in The Catechist, 1898.
[2] J.W. Drijvers, Cyril of Jerusalem: Bishop and City, (Brill, 2004).
[3] Rev. William Seymour, The Cross in Tradition, History, and Art, (Putnam Sons. Ltd., 1898). Also refer to Bert Ghezzi, The Sign of the Cross: Recovering the Power of the Ancient Prayer, (Loyola Press, 2006).
[4] Ibid.
[5] Andreas Andreopoulos, The Sign of the Cross: The Gesture, the Mystery, the History, (Paraclete Press, 2006).
[6] Ibid.
[7] Allan D. Fitzgerald, Augustine through the Ages: An Encyclopedia, (Eerdmens Publishing Press, 2009).
[8] Andreas Andreopoulos, The Sign of the Cross: The Gesture, the Mystery, the History, (Paraclete Press, 2006).
[9] Kees, den Biesen, Simple and Bold: Ephrem’s Art of Symbolic Thought, (Gorgias Press, 2006).
[10] Bert Ghezzi, The Sign of the Cross: Recovering the Power of the Ancient Prayer, (Loyola Press, 2006).
[11] Andreas Andreopoulos, The Sign of the Cross: The Gesture, the Mystery, the History, (Paraclete Press, 2006).
[12] Rev. William Seymour, The Cross in Tradition, History, and Art, (Putnam Sons. Ltd., 1898).
[13] Bert Ghezzi, The Sign of the Cross: Recovering the Power of the Ancient Prayer, (Loyola Press, 2006).
St. Cyril of Jerusalem says: “Let us not then be ashamed to confess the Crucified. Let the Cross be our seal made with boldness by our fingers on our brow and in everything; over the bread we eat, and the cups we drink; in our comings in, and goings out; before our sleep, when we lie down and when we awake; when we are on the way and when we are still. Great is that preservative; it is without price, for the poor's sake; without toil, for the sick, since its grace is from God. It is the Sign of the faithful, and the dread of evils; for He has triumphed over them in it, having made a mockery of them openly; for when they see the Cross, they are reminded of the Crucified; they are afraid of Him, Who has bruised the heads of the dragon. Despise not the Seal, because of the freeness of the Gift; but for this rather honor thy Benefactor”.[2]
St. John Chrysostom wrote: “never leave home without making the sign of the cross”.[3] Tertullian recounts, “In all our travels in all our coming in and going out, in putting on our shoes, at the bath, at the table we mark our foreheads with the sign of the cross”.[4] This sign or mark on the forehead of consecration to Christ has an antecedent in Ezekiel’s prophetic vision of judgment, in which the Lord commands that a “mark be set upon the foreheads” of the Israelites who cry out against the evil which surrounds them, so that by this mark God’s people were identified as belonging to Him and saved from annihilation [Ezekiel: 9:4-6]. Other biblical references to “sealing” God’s people with a sign on their heads are found in Revelation 7:4, 9:4.[5]
The origins of the sign are unknown; “our information is sparse because this ancient practice emerged naturally, as something that made sense to most Christians”.[6] The earliest descriptions, such as Tertullian’s, indicate that the cross was made with one finger—probably the thumb—on the forehead in the shape of a Hebrew T or a Greek X, letters that stood for names of God and Christ. Presumably, early Christians were taking their cues from passages in Genesis 4:15, Ezekiel 9:4, and Revelation 14:1 and 22:4 that describe a mark on the forehead as a sign of God's claim on a person. The similarities among the shapes of T, X, and the cross were noted by early writers, but it wasn’t until the fourth century that the cross became a symbol of pride, of worship, and of Christian identity. By then, Augustine declared, “What else is the sign of Christ but the cross of Christ?” and advised that “the sign be applied … to the foreheads of believers”.[7]
Crossing one’s self recalls this seal, and the invocation that is said while making this holy sign calls on our God -- the Father, His Son, and the Holy Ghost -- and is a sign of our of belief; it is both a “mini-creed” that asserts our belief in the Trinitarian God, and a prayer that invokes the Holy Trinity.[8] With the Sign, we send a visible sign to the world as St. Ephrem the Syrians says: “Mark all your actions with the sign of the life giving Cross. Do not go out from the door of your house till you have signed yourself with the Cross. Do not neglect that sign whether in eating or drinking or going to sleep, or in the home or going on a journey. There is no habit to be compared with it. Let it be a protecting wall round all your conduct, and teach it to your children that they may earnestly learn the custom”.[9] Because of what the Sign indicates -- the very Cross of our salvation -- Satan hates it, and our using it makes demons flee.
The Sign of the Cross is made by holding the thumb, index finger, middle finger of the right hand together (signifying the Trinity) while tucking the ring finger and little finger (signifying the two natures of Christ) toward the palm. The sign of the Cross is made by touching the hand sequentially to the forehead, lower chest or navel area, and both shoulders, accompanied by the Trinitarian formula: at the forehead: In the name of the Father; at the stomach or heart: and of the Son; across the shoulders: and of the Holy Spirit; and finally: Amen. Today, Western Christians and the Oriental Orthodox touch the left shoulder before the right. Orthodox Christians use the right-to-left movement.
There are several interpretations; according to Church Fathers the forehead symbolizes Heaven; the stomach, the earth; the shoulders, the place and sign of power. Also, the hand to the forehead may be seen as a prayer to the Father for wisdom; the hand to the stomach as a prayer to the Son who became incarnate; and the hand to the shoulders as a prayer to the Holy Spirit. The fingers put together first touch the forehead — to sanctify the mind, then — the belly near the solar plexus — for sanctification of feelings, then to the right and finally to the left shoulder — to sanctify one’s bodily strength.[10]
The right cross, practiced by Eastern Orthodox believers, symbolizes how “Christ descended from the heavens to the earth, and from the Jews (right) He passed to the Gentiles (left)”, according to Pope Innocent III. In Oriental Orthodox and Roman Catholic practice, the left cross has become standard, showing, (in one of many interpretations) that the believer hopes to be not on Christ’s left—with the goats, as in Jesus’ parable—at the day of judgment, but on Christ’s right. The difference between the Latin and the Greek customs is that the right side is associated with holiness, and the heart (on the left) with the spirit, so that those who, in mentioning the Holy Spirit, used the Latin phrase “Spiritus Sancti” (noun before adjective) touched left before right, while those who said, in Greek, “τοῦ Ἁγίου Πνεύματος” – tou agiou pneumatos – (adjective before noun) did the opposite.[11]
Chrysostom admonishes: “You should not just trace the cross with your finger, but you should do it in faith”.[12] The sign of the cross is “a simple gesture and … a simple prayer”.[13]
[1] Very Rev. Canon Howe, “Sign of the Cross” in The Catechist, 1898.
[2] J.W. Drijvers, Cyril of Jerusalem: Bishop and City, (Brill, 2004).
[3] Rev. William Seymour, The Cross in Tradition, History, and Art, (Putnam Sons. Ltd., 1898). Also refer to Bert Ghezzi, The Sign of the Cross: Recovering the Power of the Ancient Prayer, (Loyola Press, 2006).
[4] Ibid.
[5] Andreas Andreopoulos, The Sign of the Cross: The Gesture, the Mystery, the History, (Paraclete Press, 2006).
[6] Ibid.
[7] Allan D. Fitzgerald, Augustine through the Ages: An Encyclopedia, (Eerdmens Publishing Press, 2009).
[8] Andreas Andreopoulos, The Sign of the Cross: The Gesture, the Mystery, the History, (Paraclete Press, 2006).
[9] Kees, den Biesen, Simple and Bold: Ephrem’s Art of Symbolic Thought, (Gorgias Press, 2006).
[10] Bert Ghezzi, The Sign of the Cross: Recovering the Power of the Ancient Prayer, (Loyola Press, 2006).
[11] Andreas Andreopoulos, The Sign of the Cross: The Gesture, the Mystery, the History, (Paraclete Press, 2006).
[12] Rev. William Seymour, The Cross in Tradition, History, and Art, (Putnam Sons. Ltd., 1898).
[13] Bert Ghezzi, The Sign of the Cross: Recovering the Power of the Ancient Prayer, (Loyola Press, 2006).
Monday, September 14, 2009
Feast of the Exaltation of the Salvific and Life Giving Cross
Velum shathrukalle ninaal njangal halleluiah…
Dveshikale medhichedum nin naamathil
Varikallil ninnum kathengale nee halleluiah…
Shathrukalle lejipichu (Kukliyon of the Cross)
“The sayings of the prophets foretold the holy Wood, whereby Adam was set free from the ancient curse of death. And today, at the Exaltation of the Cross, all creation raises its voice, asking of God plenteous mercy. O Master, who alone art boundless in compassion, be our atonement and save our souls!" (Feast of the Veneration of the Cross)
Each year on the fourteenth of September, the faithful come together in her churches for a unique celebration bound up in mystery and paradox. In this season the Cross, that most horrible of tools, is hallowed in the center of the church. The bishop/priest, taking the cross, processes to the center of the church where, as through it he presents his blessing, the people intone a solemn ‘Lord, have mercy’. Christians “exalt” the Cross of Christ as the instrument of our salvation. Adoration of the Cross is, thus, adoration of Jesus Christ, God and Man, who suffered and died on this instrument of torture for our redemption from sin and death. The cross represents the One Sacrifice by which Jesus Christ, obedient even unto death, accomplished our salvation. The cross is a symbolic summary of the Passion, Crucifixion and Resurrection of Christ – all in one image.
On this great day, the precious Cross of Christ is not only venerated, it is exalted. It is elevated to the place of greatest honor, adored again and again as the ‘footstool’ by which Christ reigns over the universe. On this day, perhaps more than most other days, the full paradox of the Cross is loudly proclaimed: this instrument of most horrible death is become the ensign of victory and eternal life. The cruel weapon of torture and torment has been taken in the hand of God and transformed into the sword by which every enemy is defeated. The sword is raised, and the Devil is fallen. Without the Cross there is no Resurrection.
The Cross is power. The Cross is glory. The Cross is regal. The Cross is sweetness. The Cross is majestic. All these are wondrously foretold in the pages of a testament we call Old and all too often think of as ‘outdated’ or ‘outmoded’. But when the Church sings her hymns, and when she magnifies the precious and life-giving Cross, she turns her eyes to these images. It is with a heart immersed in this truly cosmic and eternal universality of the Cross that she exults: ‘The Cross is the guardian of the whole earth! The Cross is the beauty of the Church! The Cross is the strength of kings! The Cross is the support of the faithful! The Cross is the glory of the angels and the wounder of demons! We venerate Thy Cross, O Master, and we glorify Thy holy Resurrection!’.
The Cross – because of what it represents – is the most potent and universal symbol of the Christian faith. It has inspired both liturgical and private devotions: for example, the Sign of the Cross, which is an invocation of the Holy Trinity; the Sign of the Cross at the reading of the Gospel; and the Veneration of the Cross by the faithful on Good Friday. Placing a cross in churches and homes, in cars, or wearing this image on our persons, is a constant reminder – and witness – of Christ’s ultimate triumph, His victory over sin and death through His suffering and dying on the Cross. We remember Our Lord’s words, “He who does not take up his cross and follow me is not worthy of me. He who finds his life will lose it, and he who loses his life for my sake shall find it.” (Mt 10:38,39). Meditating on these words we unite ourselves – our souls and bodies — with His obedience and His sacrifice; and we rejoice in this inestimable gift through which we have the hope of salvation and the glory. "Dying, you destroyed our death; rising you restored our life. Save us by your cross, Christ our Redeemer".
Dveshikale medhichedum nin naamathil
Varikallil ninnum kathengale nee halleluiah…
Shathrukalle lejipichu (Kukliyon of the Cross)
“The sayings of the prophets foretold the holy Wood, whereby Adam was set free from the ancient curse of death. And today, at the Exaltation of the Cross, all creation raises its voice, asking of God plenteous mercy. O Master, who alone art boundless in compassion, be our atonement and save our souls!" (Feast of the Veneration of the Cross)
Each year on the fourteenth of September, the faithful come together in her churches for a unique celebration bound up in mystery and paradox. In this season the Cross, that most horrible of tools, is hallowed in the center of the church. The bishop/priest, taking the cross, processes to the center of the church where, as through it he presents his blessing, the people intone a solemn ‘Lord, have mercy’. Christians “exalt” the Cross of Christ as the instrument of our salvation. Adoration of the Cross is, thus, adoration of Jesus Christ, God and Man, who suffered and died on this instrument of torture for our redemption from sin and death. The cross represents the One Sacrifice by which Jesus Christ, obedient even unto death, accomplished our salvation. The cross is a symbolic summary of the Passion, Crucifixion and Resurrection of Christ – all in one image.
On this great day, the precious Cross of Christ is not only venerated, it is exalted. It is elevated to the place of greatest honor, adored again and again as the ‘footstool’ by which Christ reigns over the universe. On this day, perhaps more than most other days, the full paradox of the Cross is loudly proclaimed: this instrument of most horrible death is become the ensign of victory and eternal life. The cruel weapon of torture and torment has been taken in the hand of God and transformed into the sword by which every enemy is defeated. The sword is raised, and the Devil is fallen. Without the Cross there is no Resurrection.
The Cross is power. The Cross is glory. The Cross is regal. The Cross is sweetness. The Cross is majestic. All these are wondrously foretold in the pages of a testament we call Old and all too often think of as ‘outdated’ or ‘outmoded’. But when the Church sings her hymns, and when she magnifies the precious and life-giving Cross, she turns her eyes to these images. It is with a heart immersed in this truly cosmic and eternal universality of the Cross that she exults: ‘The Cross is the guardian of the whole earth! The Cross is the beauty of the Church! The Cross is the strength of kings! The Cross is the support of the faithful! The Cross is the glory of the angels and the wounder of demons! We venerate Thy Cross, O Master, and we glorify Thy holy Resurrection!’.
The Cross – because of what it represents – is the most potent and universal symbol of the Christian faith. It has inspired both liturgical and private devotions: for example, the Sign of the Cross, which is an invocation of the Holy Trinity; the Sign of the Cross at the reading of the Gospel; and the Veneration of the Cross by the faithful on Good Friday. Placing a cross in churches and homes, in cars, or wearing this image on our persons, is a constant reminder – and witness – of Christ’s ultimate triumph, His victory over sin and death through His suffering and dying on the Cross. We remember Our Lord’s words, “He who does not take up his cross and follow me is not worthy of me. He who finds his life will lose it, and he who loses his life for my sake shall find it.” (Mt 10:38,39). Meditating on these words we unite ourselves – our souls and bodies — with His obedience and His sacrifice; and we rejoice in this inestimable gift through which we have the hope of salvation and the glory. "Dying, you destroyed our death; rising you restored our life. Save us by your cross, Christ our Redeemer".
Wednesday, September 9, 2009
Nativity of the Theotokos
For the past few days – there has been a lot of discussion about the ‘8 days fast commemorating the nativity of the Theotokos’. Questions have been raised if this ‘feast’ is to be celebrated at all? Then, there are those that argue for and against the ‘8 days lent’ that has picked up so much popularity is the Orthodox Churches in India.
i) – the Nativity of the Theotokos is not a feast the Orthodox Church got from the Catholic church. This feast is celebrated by Byzantine Orthodox, some Oriental Orthodox and Roman Catholic Churches. This is a feast of the Church - it might not have come down to the Indian Orthodox Church through the West Syrian influence. That is no way means it is not Orthodox.
ii) – abstaining from certain kinds of food is fasting. Even if believers partake of the Holy Qurbana during these 8 days and break their fast, but they abstain from certain kinds of food - it is considered fasting. Fasting is the expression of expectation, of the state of waiting and preparation.
With that said here is a brief overview on the ‘Feast of the Nativity of the Theotokos’.
The Feast of the Nativity of the Theotokos is the first major feast of the new Church Year (Eastern Orthodox), which begins on September 1st. Why was this day selected since it is not in the Holy Scripture? History shows that St. Helena, the mother of Emperor Constantine, built a Church in Jerusalem, which was dedicated to the Nativity of our Lady. It was said to be consecrated on the date of her nativity: September 8th. The birth and early life of the Virgin Mary is not recorded in the Gospels or other books of the New Testament, however this information can be found in a work dating from the second century known as the Book of James or Protevangelion.[1]
According to the story found in this book, Mary’s parents, Joachim and Anna, were childless for many years. They remained faithful to God, but their prayers for a child were unanswered. One day, when Joachim came to the temple to make an offering, he was turned away by the High Priest who chastised him for his lack of children. To hide his shame, Joachim retreated to the hill country to live among the shepherds and their flocks. Joachim was frustrated that he was turned away by the High Priest in the temple but he submitted his emptiness to the Lord. At the same time his wife Anna also prayed at their house in Jerusalem. An angel appeared to both of them and announced that Anna would have a child whose name would be known throughout the world. Anna promised to offer her child as a gift to the Lord. Joachim returned home, and in due time Anna bore a daughter, Mary.[2] Joachim was of the lineage of David, and Anna of the lineage of Aaron. Thus, Mary was of royal birth by her father and of priestly birth by her mother. In this, Mary foreshadowed Christ who would be born of her as King and High Priest.
“Mary, Full of grace, Blessed among women, the Temple of the Holy Spirit, the Altar of the Living God, the Table of the Heavenly Bread, the Ark of God’s Holiness, the Tree of the Sweetest Fruit, the Glory of the race of man, the Praise of womanhood, the Fount of virginity and purity - this was the daughter given by God to Joachim and Anna. She was born in Nazareth, and at the age of three, was taken to the Temple in Jerusalem. In her young womanhood she returned again to Nazareth, and shortly thereafter heard the Annunciation of the Holy Archangel Gabriel concerning the birth of the Son of God, the Savior of the world, from her most-pure virgin body”.[3]
Romanos, who lived in the 5th century, was a native of Syria and later a deacon of Hagia Sophia in Constantinople. He is known to have composed and written many prayers and hymns now in use in the Eastern Church. He was probably the first one who brought this day to the attention of the Church leaders. He wrote a hymn in honor of her birth and spread the knowledge of it among the people. Both St. Andrew of Crete and St. John of Damascus also wrote much about this event. Andrew of Crete said: “This day is for us the beginning of all holy days. It is the door to kindness and truth. Today is arranged for the Creator of all, an inspired Church and creation prepares itself to become the divine dwelling place of its Creator”.[4] John of Damascus says, “The day of the Nativity of the Theotokos is the feast of joy for the whole world, because through the Theotokos the entire human race was renewed and the grief of the first mother Eve was changed into joy”.[5]
The fact that there is no Biblical verification of Mary’s birth is incidental to the meaning of the feast. There had to be one born of human flesh and blood who would be spiritually capable of being the Theotokos, and she herself had to be born into the world of persons who were spiritually capable of being her parents. The feast of the Nativity of the Theotokos, therefore is a glorification of the miracle of Mary’s birth, a celebration as well of the very first preparation of the salvation of the world. “From Apostolic times and to our days all who truly love Christ give veneration to Her Who gave birth to Him, raised Him and protected Him in the days of His youth. If God the Father chose Her, God the Holy Spirit descended upon Her, and God the Son dwelt in Her, submitted to Her in the days of His youth, was concerned for Her when hanging on the Cross then should not everyone who confesses the Holy Trinity venerate Her?”[6]
“The Redeemer of the human race -- as I said -- willed to arrange a new birth and re-creation of mankind: like as under the first creation, taking dust from the virginal and pure earth, wherein He formed the first Adam, so also now, having arranged His Incarnation upon the earth, -- and so to speak, in place of dust -- He chooses from out of all the creation this Pure and Immaculate Virgin and, having re-created mankind within His Chosen-One from amidst mankind, the Creator of Adam is made the New Adam, in order to save the old”.[7]
The Orthodox Church gives a special place to the honor and veneration of the Virgin Mary the Mother of God. The Third Ecumenical Council in Ephesus (431 A.D.) officially adopted the term Theotokos in her honor. There is a period of fasting (the first 14 days of August) and numerous feasts and hymns dedicated to her. Her image is traditionally painted above the Sanctuary and called “more spacious than the heavens” (Platytera). The Virgin Mary, being the mother of God, earnestly intercedes for us, for she gave her flesh to Christ in all humility and obedience, so that the Word of God could become man.[8]
The image of the Hodegetria holds a privileged place in the iconography of the Mother of God. “Hodegetria” means “She who shows the Way”.[9] Mary, the Mother of God always shows us the way to God. May the prayers of the Theotokos be a stronghold to us.
[1] Maria Vassilakis, Images of the Mother of God: Perceptions of the Theotokos in Byzantium, Burlington. VT: Ashgate Pub. 2005.
[2] Ibid.
[3] St Nikolai Velimirovich, Bishop of Zica, The Prologue from Ohrid: Lives of Saints. Also refer to Miri Rubin, Mother of God: A History of the Virgin Mary, (Yale University Press, 2009).
[4] Andrew of Crete, “Homily on the Nativity of the Most Holy Mother of God” in Luigi Gambero and Thomas Buffer, Mary and the Fathers of the Church: the Blessed Virgin Mary in Patristic Thought.
[5] Andrew Louth, St John Damascene: Tradition and Originality in Byzantine Theology, (NY: Oxford University Press, 2002).
[6] Fr. Seraphim Rose, The Orthodox Theology of John Maximovitch, (San Francisco, 1997).
[7] Andrew of Crete, “Homily on the Nativity of the Most Holy Mother of God” in Luigi Gambero and Thomas Buffer, Mary and the Fathers of the Church: the Blessed Virgin Mary in Patristic Thought.
[8] Miri Rubin, Mother of God: A History of the Virgin Mary, (Yale University Press, 2009).
[9] Linda Murray, The Oxford Companion to Christian Art and Architecture, (Oxford, 1996).
i) – the Nativity of the Theotokos is not a feast the Orthodox Church got from the Catholic church. This feast is celebrated by Byzantine Orthodox, some Oriental Orthodox and Roman Catholic Churches. This is a feast of the Church - it might not have come down to the Indian Orthodox Church through the West Syrian influence. That is no way means it is not Orthodox.
ii) – abstaining from certain kinds of food is fasting. Even if believers partake of the Holy Qurbana during these 8 days and break their fast, but they abstain from certain kinds of food - it is considered fasting. Fasting is the expression of expectation, of the state of waiting and preparation.
With that said here is a brief overview on the ‘Feast of the Nativity of the Theotokos’.
The Feast of the Nativity of the Theotokos is the first major feast of the new Church Year (Eastern Orthodox), which begins on September 1st. Why was this day selected since it is not in the Holy Scripture? History shows that St. Helena, the mother of Emperor Constantine, built a Church in Jerusalem, which was dedicated to the Nativity of our Lady. It was said to be consecrated on the date of her nativity: September 8th. The birth and early life of the Virgin Mary is not recorded in the Gospels or other books of the New Testament, however this information can be found in a work dating from the second century known as the Book of James or Protevangelion.[1]
According to the story found in this book, Mary’s parents, Joachim and Anna, were childless for many years. They remained faithful to God, but their prayers for a child were unanswered. One day, when Joachim came to the temple to make an offering, he was turned away by the High Priest who chastised him for his lack of children. To hide his shame, Joachim retreated to the hill country to live among the shepherds and their flocks. Joachim was frustrated that he was turned away by the High Priest in the temple but he submitted his emptiness to the Lord. At the same time his wife Anna also prayed at their house in Jerusalem. An angel appeared to both of them and announced that Anna would have a child whose name would be known throughout the world. Anna promised to offer her child as a gift to the Lord. Joachim returned home, and in due time Anna bore a daughter, Mary.[2] Joachim was of the lineage of David, and Anna of the lineage of Aaron. Thus, Mary was of royal birth by her father and of priestly birth by her mother. In this, Mary foreshadowed Christ who would be born of her as King and High Priest.
“Mary, Full of grace, Blessed among women, the Temple of the Holy Spirit, the Altar of the Living God, the Table of the Heavenly Bread, the Ark of God’s Holiness, the Tree of the Sweetest Fruit, the Glory of the race of man, the Praise of womanhood, the Fount of virginity and purity - this was the daughter given by God to Joachim and Anna. She was born in Nazareth, and at the age of three, was taken to the Temple in Jerusalem. In her young womanhood she returned again to Nazareth, and shortly thereafter heard the Annunciation of the Holy Archangel Gabriel concerning the birth of the Son of God, the Savior of the world, from her most-pure virgin body”.[3]
Romanos, who lived in the 5th century, was a native of Syria and later a deacon of Hagia Sophia in Constantinople. He is known to have composed and written many prayers and hymns now in use in the Eastern Church. He was probably the first one who brought this day to the attention of the Church leaders. He wrote a hymn in honor of her birth and spread the knowledge of it among the people. Both St. Andrew of Crete and St. John of Damascus also wrote much about this event. Andrew of Crete said: “This day is for us the beginning of all holy days. It is the door to kindness and truth. Today is arranged for the Creator of all, an inspired Church and creation prepares itself to become the divine dwelling place of its Creator”.[4] John of Damascus says, “The day of the Nativity of the Theotokos is the feast of joy for the whole world, because through the Theotokos the entire human race was renewed and the grief of the first mother Eve was changed into joy”.[5]
The fact that there is no Biblical verification of Mary’s birth is incidental to the meaning of the feast. There had to be one born of human flesh and blood who would be spiritually capable of being the Theotokos, and she herself had to be born into the world of persons who were spiritually capable of being her parents. The feast of the Nativity of the Theotokos, therefore is a glorification of the miracle of Mary’s birth, a celebration as well of the very first preparation of the salvation of the world. “From Apostolic times and to our days all who truly love Christ give veneration to Her Who gave birth to Him, raised Him and protected Him in the days of His youth. If God the Father chose Her, God the Holy Spirit descended upon Her, and God the Son dwelt in Her, submitted to Her in the days of His youth, was concerned for Her when hanging on the Cross then should not everyone who confesses the Holy Trinity venerate Her?”[6]
“The Redeemer of the human race -- as I said -- willed to arrange a new birth and re-creation of mankind: like as under the first creation, taking dust from the virginal and pure earth, wherein He formed the first Adam, so also now, having arranged His Incarnation upon the earth, -- and so to speak, in place of dust -- He chooses from out of all the creation this Pure and Immaculate Virgin and, having re-created mankind within His Chosen-One from amidst mankind, the Creator of Adam is made the New Adam, in order to save the old”.[7]
The Orthodox Church gives a special place to the honor and veneration of the Virgin Mary the Mother of God. The Third Ecumenical Council in Ephesus (431 A.D.) officially adopted the term Theotokos in her honor. There is a period of fasting (the first 14 days of August) and numerous feasts and hymns dedicated to her. Her image is traditionally painted above the Sanctuary and called “more spacious than the heavens” (Platytera). The Virgin Mary, being the mother of God, earnestly intercedes for us, for she gave her flesh to Christ in all humility and obedience, so that the Word of God could become man.[8]
The image of the Hodegetria holds a privileged place in the iconography of the Mother of God. “Hodegetria” means “She who shows the Way”.[9] Mary, the Mother of God always shows us the way to God. May the prayers of the Theotokos be a stronghold to us.
[1] Maria Vassilakis, Images of the Mother of God: Perceptions of the Theotokos in Byzantium, Burlington. VT: Ashgate Pub. 2005.
[2] Ibid.
[3] St Nikolai Velimirovich, Bishop of Zica, The Prologue from Ohrid: Lives of Saints. Also refer to Miri Rubin, Mother of God: A History of the Virgin Mary, (Yale University Press, 2009).
[4] Andrew of Crete, “Homily on the Nativity of the Most Holy Mother of God” in Luigi Gambero and Thomas Buffer, Mary and the Fathers of the Church: the Blessed Virgin Mary in Patristic Thought.
[5] Andrew Louth, St John Damascene: Tradition and Originality in Byzantine Theology, (NY: Oxford University Press, 2002).
[6] Fr. Seraphim Rose, The Orthodox Theology of John Maximovitch, (San Francisco, 1997).
[7] Andrew of Crete, “Homily on the Nativity of the Most Holy Mother of God” in Luigi Gambero and Thomas Buffer, Mary and the Fathers of the Church: the Blessed Virgin Mary in Patristic Thought.
[8] Miri Rubin, Mother of God: A History of the Virgin Mary, (Yale University Press, 2009).
[9] Linda Murray, The Oxford Companion to Christian Art and Architecture, (Oxford, 1996).
Thursday, August 13, 2009
CREED - Why does the Indian Orthodox Church recite "he rose according to His Will" and not "rose according to the Scriptures"?
The Nicene Creed, is a statement of faith accepted by the Orthodox (both Eastern and Oriental), Roman Catholic, Anglican, and major Protestant churches. It gets its name from the First Council of Nicaea (325), at which it was adopted and from the First Council of Constantinople (381), at which a revised version was accepted. Thus it may be referred to specifically as the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed to distinguish it from both the 325 version and later versions that include the filioque clause. There is also an Armenian version of the Creed.
In modern times there are many variations to the Nicene Creed – but what we recite today in the Indian Orthodox Church has not deviated from the Faith of the Fathers. Given below are the Greek (original and transliteration), Syriac (transliteration) and Latin form of the Creed along with the translation. We see that in the Syriac – the word “w’meet” – “and died” is added in between “and suffered and was buried”. This in no way deviates from the Faith but it is just a variation. In the same way if you pay attention to the last part of the Syriac transliteration – the words “akh dasbo” – “according to His will” is what is recited in the Syriac Orthodox Church today. This is not a practice that crept into the Syriac Orthodox Church in the recent past, but something that has been handed down over centuries.
Always bear in mind that when the Creed was formed in Greek, there were people who followed the Faith and who did not know Greek and so several translations needed to be made into other languages such as Armenian, Coptic, Ethiopic, Latin, Syriac – all these translations kept the core of the Faith and might have added a few words of which “w’meet” is one. Some Fathers might have thought that it is just not enough to say “he rose according to the Scriptures”, but to emphasize that “it was in accordance with His Will”. For Christ, the will of the Father signified, exclusively, one specific thing, and it was that one thing that he had come to the earth to perform. “For I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will, but the will of him who sent me”. (John 6:38). The “akh dasbo” emphasizes the will of Christ in accordance with the will of the Father.
Secondly, in the early days – when texts were copied on scrolls and a scribe translates a text from another language to Syriac – there is a possibility of word corruption. Originally it could have been “akh ketbo qadisho” or just “akh ketbo” (am not sure if there is a specific word for Scriptures that might be very similar to “dasbo” (will) in Syriac. So when a scribe copies from one manuscript to another, he might misread the text and write a word he thinks that might make sense to the context. This happens often in ancient manuscript copying. Please bear in mind that this reason is just a thought, but not a confirmed thesis as to why we use “akh dasbo”. However, the change “according to His Will” in the Creed from the original in no way deviates from the Faith of our Fathers. It only goes on to show that there are many variations of the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed.
καὶ παθόντα καὶ ταφέντα καὶ ἀναστάντα τῇ τρίτῃ ἡμέρα κατὰ τὰς Γραφάς (Greek – Original Language)
kai pathonta kai tafenta kai anastanta ti triti imera kata tas graphas (transliteration)
and suffered, and was buried, and rose on the third day, according to the Scriptures
Hash w’meeth w’etheqbar w’qom latlotho yawmeen akh dasbo (Syriac transliteration)
suffered and died and was buried and rose on the third day according to His will
Passus, et sepúltus est, Et resurréxit tértia die, secúndum Scriptúras (Latin)
suffered and was buried, and rose on the third day, according to the Scriptures
In modern times there are many variations to the Nicene Creed – but what we recite today in the Indian Orthodox Church has not deviated from the Faith of the Fathers. Given below are the Greek (original and transliteration), Syriac (transliteration) and Latin form of the Creed along with the translation. We see that in the Syriac – the word “w’meet” – “and died” is added in between “and suffered and was buried”. This in no way deviates from the Faith but it is just a variation. In the same way if you pay attention to the last part of the Syriac transliteration – the words “akh dasbo” – “according to His will” is what is recited in the Syriac Orthodox Church today. This is not a practice that crept into the Syriac Orthodox Church in the recent past, but something that has been handed down over centuries.
Always bear in mind that when the Creed was formed in Greek, there were people who followed the Faith and who did not know Greek and so several translations needed to be made into other languages such as Armenian, Coptic, Ethiopic, Latin, Syriac – all these translations kept the core of the Faith and might have added a few words of which “w’meet” is one. Some Fathers might have thought that it is just not enough to say “he rose according to the Scriptures”, but to emphasize that “it was in accordance with His Will”. For Christ, the will of the Father signified, exclusively, one specific thing, and it was that one thing that he had come to the earth to perform. “For I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will, but the will of him who sent me”. (John 6:38). The “akh dasbo” emphasizes the will of Christ in accordance with the will of the Father.
Secondly, in the early days – when texts were copied on scrolls and a scribe translates a text from another language to Syriac – there is a possibility of word corruption. Originally it could have been “akh ketbo qadisho” or just “akh ketbo” (am not sure if there is a specific word for Scriptures that might be very similar to “dasbo” (will) in Syriac. So when a scribe copies from one manuscript to another, he might misread the text and write a word he thinks that might make sense to the context. This happens often in ancient manuscript copying. Please bear in mind that this reason is just a thought, but not a confirmed thesis as to why we use “akh dasbo”. However, the change “according to His Will” in the Creed from the original in no way deviates from the Faith of our Fathers. It only goes on to show that there are many variations of the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed.
καὶ παθόντα καὶ ταφέντα καὶ ἀναστάντα τῇ τρίτῃ ἡμέρα κατὰ τὰς Γραφάς (Greek – Original Language)
kai pathonta kai tafenta kai anastanta ti triti imera kata tas graphas (transliteration)
and suffered, and was buried, and rose on the third day, according to the Scriptures
Hash w’meeth w’etheqbar w’qom latlotho yawmeen akh dasbo (Syriac transliteration)
suffered and died and was buried and rose on the third day according to His will
Passus, et sepúltus est, Et resurréxit tértia die, secúndum Scriptúras (Latin)
suffered and was buried, and rose on the third day, according to the Scriptures
Friday, August 7, 2009
Who Rules Our Lives Today – God Or Money?
“No man can serve two masters; for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to one, and despise the other. You cannot serve God and mammon”. – Matthew 6:24
You cannot serve God And wealth (Mammon). Commanding us, not to be anxious for our food, drink, clothing or future, Christ asks us to trust God. The Gospel tells us that our lives are more than material things and that God cares for us.The word mammon comes from a word in Aramaic which simply means wealth or profit. Mammon was not the name of a deity in antiquity. Actually what we know about mammon is what Jesus told us about it. Jesus uses the name to denote a master of the heart of man, when that heart is consumed by self-interest and pride.
This is what makes his teaching so difficult for us today. We are part of society in which greed is covertly considered a good thing. No body says so too loudly but everyone knows it’s true. To a large extent capitalism is based upon the principle of self interest. As an economy model I do not know any other that surpasses capitalism. There is a danger when capitalism becomes the basis for the spiritual life, when self-interest is not only a necessary principle for free market but the foundation upon which our hearts are built. We derive our sense of identity and mission and value; the law of our personal, communal and spiritual life is founded on money. Economical success becomes equivalent in our minds to the blessing of the kingdom of God. Our sense of security derives from our wealth and not from our God. Then the leaven of greed leavens the whole lump; then the love of money rules over the use of money; then our trust is in money instead of God.
And that may be a very subtle virus. Wealth is very tricky. It seldom presents its ugly face directly unless taken by surprise. It has a very persuasive voice that easily appeals to our deepest yearnings. It promises pleasure, comfort, security, worldly glory, happiness and even goodness and blessing. It lures us to trust in it for our future, to justify our hardness of heart to others with all sorts of rationalizations. It promises all this if only we give it our unconditional allegiance by pursuing our own self-interest first in all we do, while we stop caring for our neighbors as ourselves and God above all things.
Money is the lord of self-interest, profit and wealth. And we say what is wrong with that? Every normal human being must have a degree of healthy self-interest and learn to fend for himself, pursue profit and wealth as much as he/she can. Yes, that is true. But there is a problem. Self-interest, profit and wealth are not the purpose God created us for. We were not made to serve things or ourselves. We were created to serve God, and self-interest, profit and wealth must be crucified with Christ – that is, brought to the service of God and not vice versa.
When how much we get defines how much our life is worth; when making money, because of its potential to satisfy our temporal needs, becomes the predominant purpose and preoccupation of our lives, we have fallen victims of slavery to money. The sad thing is that this may happen to us while we are not aware. As the Lord said: ‘Take heed, and keep yourselves from all covetousness’: We must take heed because there are many aspects of our lives that may be and have been under the influence of money for a long time.
Money forces us to worry trying to answer all questions regarding food, clothing, future, until we secure enough money when we won’t have to worry about anything, anymore. Worrying is exactly the opposite of that which the Lord tells us. The Lord clearly says ‘be not anxious about these things’. And that we cannot serve two Masters. So let us be honest with ourselves: Are we not anxious about these things? We often think that the only way for us to stop being anxious about such things is by working hard to secure a big stock of all of them, and then we can say to our soul, like the foolish rich man of the parable, Soul, thou hast much goods laid up for many years; take thine ease, eat, drink, be merry – Luke 12:19. But that night, God told him: ‘You foolish one, this night is your soul required of you; and the things which you has prepared, for whom shall they be?’ Luke 12:20.
Money is important and we need to have enough of it in our lives. However, there is another way to live responsible lives upon this world. We should pursue lives of stewardship instead of slavery. It is called the way of the cross, the way of faith, the way of love, trust and thanksgiving. It means learning that our lives are not defined by what we have, but by what we do with what we have in the service of Christ. It means learning to be content with whatever the Lord has in store for us good or bad. Learning to be good stewards of all God puts in our hands little or much. Working hard while trusting God in his plan for our future, both in the abundance as with the scarcity, caring for our neighbor as ourselves, putting our gifts in Gods service, not only to help ourselves but caring also for others.
The truth is that a man’s life consists not in the abundance of the things which he possesses – Luke 12:15. Life is more than clothing, eating, drinking and money. Wealth is not the greatest good. It is just a tool and as all tools it should be in our hands and not in our hearts. Wealth is not the greatest rest, it is not the greatest happiness. It is not the ultimate blessing or the unconditional sign that God is with us.
There is a richness, of which wealth knows nothing. It is the richness of the abundance of faith, and charity and compassion and love and peace. It is the blessedness of a heart filled to overflowing with the grace and goodness of the Lord. Such a heart can be deprived of all the benefits of this world and is still content, because of the greatest riches of the spirit, which cannot be taken away, which remain for ever. And this is where a catastrophe like the Tsunami, Katrina and Earthquake may come to help us. It gives us and opportunity to examine our priorities, to see where the treasure of our heart really is. Which Master are we pursuing? In which God do we trust? Is it God or wealth/mammon?
All the evil related to the human side of wars, catastrophe, problems within churches and parishes can be traced to the demon of self-interest, and egotism. The principles that govern God’s people according to his righteousness are directly opposite to the demon of wealth. Wealth cares for things over people. God cares for people over things. Wealth cares for comfort over kindness, while God for mercy over affluence. Wealth cares only for self. God cares for self and neighbor. Mammon cares for money. God cares for stewardship. Mammon loves temporal glory. God cares for eternal glory. Mammon cares for appearances but God cares for truth.
Our church has run into trouble because it has ignored the teaching of Christ. Whenever the righteousness of the kingdom has been compromised by worldly interest and temporal glory the Church of God has suffered loss. We have abandoned his true worship. Our church is in the forefront when it comes to charity but we are still at war with our neighbours. The elder generation might tell us that we do not understand the sentiments attached to all the faction fights that go in the Church. True peace and love can never be restored when the Gospel is compromised…however high the stakes.
‘Seek ye first his kingdom, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you.’ No one can serve two masters. We must chose between the justice of the kingdom or the service of mammon. We cannot serve self interest first and the kingdom of God at the same time. All of us are charitable by nature and we do a wonderful job but let me take this opportunity to make a humble request to my young brothers and sister who have jobs. Please GIVE openly and freely. Never has anybody in history become a pauper because of his/her charity. God loves a cheerful giver. This is a time to examine ourselves and reassess our priorities, to order them according to the values of the kingdom. Let us renew our vows and commit our whole lives to the honor and service of God and his kingdom.
You cannot serve God And wealth (Mammon). Commanding us, not to be anxious for our food, drink, clothing or future, Christ asks us to trust God. The Gospel tells us that our lives are more than material things and that God cares for us.The word mammon comes from a word in Aramaic which simply means wealth or profit. Mammon was not the name of a deity in antiquity. Actually what we know about mammon is what Jesus told us about it. Jesus uses the name to denote a master of the heart of man, when that heart is consumed by self-interest and pride.
This is what makes his teaching so difficult for us today. We are part of society in which greed is covertly considered a good thing. No body says so too loudly but everyone knows it’s true. To a large extent capitalism is based upon the principle of self interest. As an economy model I do not know any other that surpasses capitalism. There is a danger when capitalism becomes the basis for the spiritual life, when self-interest is not only a necessary principle for free market but the foundation upon which our hearts are built. We derive our sense of identity and mission and value; the law of our personal, communal and spiritual life is founded on money. Economical success becomes equivalent in our minds to the blessing of the kingdom of God. Our sense of security derives from our wealth and not from our God. Then the leaven of greed leavens the whole lump; then the love of money rules over the use of money; then our trust is in money instead of God.
And that may be a very subtle virus. Wealth is very tricky. It seldom presents its ugly face directly unless taken by surprise. It has a very persuasive voice that easily appeals to our deepest yearnings. It promises pleasure, comfort, security, worldly glory, happiness and even goodness and blessing. It lures us to trust in it for our future, to justify our hardness of heart to others with all sorts of rationalizations. It promises all this if only we give it our unconditional allegiance by pursuing our own self-interest first in all we do, while we stop caring for our neighbors as ourselves and God above all things.
Money is the lord of self-interest, profit and wealth. And we say what is wrong with that? Every normal human being must have a degree of healthy self-interest and learn to fend for himself, pursue profit and wealth as much as he/she can. Yes, that is true. But there is a problem. Self-interest, profit and wealth are not the purpose God created us for. We were not made to serve things or ourselves. We were created to serve God, and self-interest, profit and wealth must be crucified with Christ – that is, brought to the service of God and not vice versa.
When how much we get defines how much our life is worth; when making money, because of its potential to satisfy our temporal needs, becomes the predominant purpose and preoccupation of our lives, we have fallen victims of slavery to money. The sad thing is that this may happen to us while we are not aware. As the Lord said: ‘Take heed, and keep yourselves from all covetousness’: We must take heed because there are many aspects of our lives that may be and have been under the influence of money for a long time.
Money forces us to worry trying to answer all questions regarding food, clothing, future, until we secure enough money when we won’t have to worry about anything, anymore. Worrying is exactly the opposite of that which the Lord tells us. The Lord clearly says ‘be not anxious about these things’. And that we cannot serve two Masters. So let us be honest with ourselves: Are we not anxious about these things? We often think that the only way for us to stop being anxious about such things is by working hard to secure a big stock of all of them, and then we can say to our soul, like the foolish rich man of the parable, Soul, thou hast much goods laid up for many years; take thine ease, eat, drink, be merry – Luke 12:19. But that night, God told him: ‘You foolish one, this night is your soul required of you; and the things which you has prepared, for whom shall they be?’ Luke 12:20.
Money is important and we need to have enough of it in our lives. However, there is another way to live responsible lives upon this world. We should pursue lives of stewardship instead of slavery. It is called the way of the cross, the way of faith, the way of love, trust and thanksgiving. It means learning that our lives are not defined by what we have, but by what we do with what we have in the service of Christ. It means learning to be content with whatever the Lord has in store for us good or bad. Learning to be good stewards of all God puts in our hands little or much. Working hard while trusting God in his plan for our future, both in the abundance as with the scarcity, caring for our neighbor as ourselves, putting our gifts in Gods service, not only to help ourselves but caring also for others.
The truth is that a man’s life consists not in the abundance of the things which he possesses – Luke 12:15. Life is more than clothing, eating, drinking and money. Wealth is not the greatest good. It is just a tool and as all tools it should be in our hands and not in our hearts. Wealth is not the greatest rest, it is not the greatest happiness. It is not the ultimate blessing or the unconditional sign that God is with us.
There is a richness, of which wealth knows nothing. It is the richness of the abundance of faith, and charity and compassion and love and peace. It is the blessedness of a heart filled to overflowing with the grace and goodness of the Lord. Such a heart can be deprived of all the benefits of this world and is still content, because of the greatest riches of the spirit, which cannot be taken away, which remain for ever. And this is where a catastrophe like the Tsunami, Katrina and Earthquake may come to help us. It gives us and opportunity to examine our priorities, to see where the treasure of our heart really is. Which Master are we pursuing? In which God do we trust? Is it God or wealth/mammon?
All the evil related to the human side of wars, catastrophe, problems within churches and parishes can be traced to the demon of self-interest, and egotism. The principles that govern God’s people according to his righteousness are directly opposite to the demon of wealth. Wealth cares for things over people. God cares for people over things. Wealth cares for comfort over kindness, while God for mercy over affluence. Wealth cares only for self. God cares for self and neighbor. Mammon cares for money. God cares for stewardship. Mammon loves temporal glory. God cares for eternal glory. Mammon cares for appearances but God cares for truth.
Our church has run into trouble because it has ignored the teaching of Christ. Whenever the righteousness of the kingdom has been compromised by worldly interest and temporal glory the Church of God has suffered loss. We have abandoned his true worship. Our church is in the forefront when it comes to charity but we are still at war with our neighbours. The elder generation might tell us that we do not understand the sentiments attached to all the faction fights that go in the Church. True peace and love can never be restored when the Gospel is compromised…however high the stakes.
‘Seek ye first his kingdom, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you.’ No one can serve two masters. We must chose between the justice of the kingdom or the service of mammon. We cannot serve self interest first and the kingdom of God at the same time. All of us are charitable by nature and we do a wonderful job but let me take this opportunity to make a humble request to my young brothers and sister who have jobs. Please GIVE openly and freely. Never has anybody in history become a pauper because of his/her charity. God loves a cheerful giver. This is a time to examine ourselves and reassess our priorities, to order them according to the values of the kingdom. Let us renew our vows and commit our whole lives to the honor and service of God and his kingdom.
Tuesday, August 4, 2009
The Orthodox Church and Original Sin
The Epistle of Romans is St. Paul 's magnum opus. While it's not the systematic theology text that some make it out to be, it is his most theological and most systematic epistle. It’s in this Epistle that Paul writes most specifically about the inherited nature of sin, and it is from this passage that St. Augustine gets his material for “inherited guilt”. Romans 5:12 – 19 reads: “Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people, because all sinned -- For just as through the disobedience of the one man the many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of the one man the many will be made righteous”.
Technically speaking, in their writings the Eastern Fathers and Orthodox theologians do not use the Latin term introduced by Augustine in his treatise “De Peccato originali”, but instead translate this concept by means of two cognate terms in Greek, namely, progoniki amartia and to propatorikon amartima, which is properly translated “ancestral sin”. These terms allow for a more careful nuancing of the various implications contained in the one Latin term.[1]
With regard to original sin, the difference between Orthodox Christianity and the West is: In the Orthodox Faith, the term “original sin” refers to the “first” or “ancestral” sin of Adam and Eve. As a result of this sin, humanity bears the “consequences” of sin, which is death. Here the word “original” may be seen as synonymous with “first” or “ancestral”. Hence, the “original sin” refers to the “first sin” or “ancestral sin”.[2] In the West, humanity likewise bears the “consequences” of the “original sin” of Adam and Eve. However, the West also understands that humanity is likewise “guilty” of the sin of Adam and Eve. The term “Original Sin” here refers to the condition into which humanity is born, a condition in which guilt as well as consequence is involved. In the Orthodox Christian understanding, while humanity does bear the consequences of the original, or first, sin, humanity does not bear the personal guilt associated with this sin. Adam and Eve are guilty of their willful action; we bear the consequences, which is death.[3]
John Karmiris writes that “the sin of the first man, together with all of its consequences and penalties, is transferred by means of natural heredity to the entire human race. Since every human being is a descendant of the first man, ‘no one of us is free from the spot of sin, even if he should manage to live a completely sinless day’”.[4]
The Orthodox Church cannot agree with Augustine, when he says that humans are under a “harsh necessity” of committing sin in his City of God. The image of God is distorted by sin but never destroyed and because we still retain the image of God we still retain free will, although sin restricts its scope. Orthodoxy repudiates any interpretation of the fall which allows no room for freedom. However, we agree with the West that sin had set up a barrier which humanity by its own efforts could never break down. Sin blocked the path to union with God. Since we could not come to God, He came to us. With all that said I do recommend works of Augustine for Orthodox believers.
It can be said that while we have not inherited the guilt of Adam’s personal sin, because his sin is also of a generic nature, and because the entire human race is possessed of an essential, ontological unity, we participate in it by virtue of our participation in the human race. St. Cyril of Alexandria says: “The imparting of “First Sin/Ancestral Sin/ Original Sin” by means of natural heredity should be understood in terms of the unity of the entire human nature, and of the homoousiotitos of all men, who, connected by nature, constitute one mystic whole. Inasmuch as human nature is indeed unique and unbreakable, the imparting of sin from the first-born to the entire human race descended from him is rendered explicable: ‘Explicitly, as from the root, the sickness proceeded to the rest of the tree, Adam being the root who had suffered corruption’”.[5]
[1] Original Sin in Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church ( Oxford , 2005).
[2] Fr. Anthony Hughes, “View of Sin in the Early Church: Ancestral Versus Original Sin”.
[3] Protopresbyter Michael Pomazansky, Orthodox Dogmatic Theology: A Concise Exposition, trans. Hieromonk Seraphim Rose (Platina, Calif.: St. Herman of Alaska Brotherhood, 1994).
[4] John Karmiris, A Synopsis of the Dogmatic Theology of the Orthodox Catholic Church, trans. from the Greek by the Reverend George Dimopoulos (Scranton, PA.: Christian Orthodox Edition, 1973), pp. 35-36.
[5] Justo L. Gonzalez, A History of Christian Thought: Volume 2 - From Augustine to the eve of the Reformation.
Technically speaking, in their writings the Eastern Fathers and Orthodox theologians do not use the Latin term introduced by Augustine in his treatise “De Peccato originali”, but instead translate this concept by means of two cognate terms in Greek, namely, progoniki amartia and to propatorikon amartima, which is properly translated “ancestral sin”. These terms allow for a more careful nuancing of the various implications contained in the one Latin term.[1]
With regard to original sin, the difference between Orthodox Christianity and the West is: In the Orthodox Faith, the term “original sin” refers to the “first” or “ancestral” sin of Adam and Eve. As a result of this sin, humanity bears the “consequences” of sin, which is death. Here the word “original” may be seen as synonymous with “first” or “ancestral”. Hence, the “original sin” refers to the “first sin” or “ancestral sin”.[2] In the West, humanity likewise bears the “consequences” of the “original sin” of Adam and Eve. However, the West also understands that humanity is likewise “guilty” of the sin of Adam and Eve. The term “Original Sin” here refers to the condition into which humanity is born, a condition in which guilt as well as consequence is involved. In the Orthodox Christian understanding, while humanity does bear the consequences of the original, or first, sin, humanity does not bear the personal guilt associated with this sin. Adam and Eve are guilty of their willful action; we bear the consequences, which is death.[3]
John Karmiris writes that “the sin of the first man, together with all of its consequences and penalties, is transferred by means of natural heredity to the entire human race. Since every human being is a descendant of the first man, ‘no one of us is free from the spot of sin, even if he should manage to live a completely sinless day’”.[4]
The Orthodox Church cannot agree with Augustine, when he says that humans are under a “harsh necessity” of committing sin in his City of God. The image of God is distorted by sin but never destroyed and because we still retain the image of God we still retain free will, although sin restricts its scope. Orthodoxy repudiates any interpretation of the fall which allows no room for freedom. However, we agree with the West that sin had set up a barrier which humanity by its own efforts could never break down. Sin blocked the path to union with God. Since we could not come to God, He came to us. With all that said I do recommend works of Augustine for Orthodox believers.
It can be said that while we have not inherited the guilt of Adam’s personal sin, because his sin is also of a generic nature, and because the entire human race is possessed of an essential, ontological unity, we participate in it by virtue of our participation in the human race. St. Cyril of Alexandria says: “The imparting of “First Sin/Ancestral Sin/ Original Sin” by means of natural heredity should be understood in terms of the unity of the entire human nature, and of the homoousiotitos of all men, who, connected by nature, constitute one mystic whole. Inasmuch as human nature is indeed unique and unbreakable, the imparting of sin from the first-born to the entire human race descended from him is rendered explicable: ‘Explicitly, as from the root, the sickness proceeded to the rest of the tree, Adam being the root who had suffered corruption’”.[5]
[1] Original Sin in Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church ( Oxford , 2005).
[2] Fr. Anthony Hughes, “View of Sin in the Early Church: Ancestral Versus Original Sin”.
[3] Protopresbyter Michael Pomazansky, Orthodox Dogmatic Theology: A Concise Exposition, trans. Hieromonk Seraphim Rose (Platina, Calif.: St. Herman of Alaska Brotherhood, 1994).
[4] John Karmiris, A Synopsis of the Dogmatic Theology of the Orthodox Catholic Church, trans. from the Greek by the Reverend George Dimopoulos (Scranton, PA.: Christian Orthodox Edition, 1973), pp. 35-36.
[5] Justo L. Gonzalez, A History of Christian Thought: Volume 2 - From Augustine to the eve of the Reformation.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
