Author Archives: Kristofer Carlson

Salvation and the Veneration [honoring] of Saints

Posted on by
Reply
The Synaxis of the Seventy Apostles

The Synaxis of the Seventy Apostles

Book cover for "The Orthodox Church" by John Anthony McGuckin

“It is a great mistake to think that the soul finds Christ nakedly and alone. The Lord always comes to us in the family, and through the medium of the love of other members of the communion. He came to his world through the Holy Virgin. He comes to us in faith, even to this day, through the ministry of those who have loved us and nurtured us, and formed our minds and characters in a thousand ways. He comes to us in the Scriptures, directly, yes, but also through the countless hundreds of thousands who have transcribed, collected the texts, and preached them to society over centuries. There is no direct and solipsistically solitary path to the Christ. If we find Christ we find the heart of love and communion. Those who wish to find the Lord alone, and possess him alone, have not found the true Lord. In some places in the world superstition may indeed have perverted the cult of the saints, so that it has degenerated into a disturbingly non-Christian phenomenon. Orthodoxy does not generally manifest that social condition. If it does appear, the clergy correct it energetically. The Orthodox veneration of the saints is widely understood by all levels of the faithful, educated or not. And the celebration of the saints is deeply integrated with the sense of the church as a communion of word and sacrament. This has been a pattern of Eastern Christian life since the earliest centuries, when the tombs of the martyrs grew into being the local parish churches.
“Orthodoxy, in its heard, does not understand a personalist attitude that issues in the form of a latent (or not so latent!) hostility to the saints, and finds it to be defective in its comprehension of the communion of salvation. It is difficult to express the significance of family to those whose experience of earthly families has been insignificant, or worse, damaging. But the action of the saints, still philanthropic and still assisting the lives of Christians on earth, is a fact of authentic Christian family life, and for the Orthodox is part of their very faith-confession that Christ has saved hot a host of solitary righteous people, but rather an elect communion of beings: humanity and angels, who are brought together in him and through him in a bond of love that constitutes the New Being of the Kingdom.” (McGuckin 2011)
Bibliography
McGuckin, John Anthony. The Orthodox Church: An Introduction to its History, Doctrine, and Spiritual Culture. West Sussex: Wiley-Blackwell, 2011.

 

 

a theory holding that the self can know nothing but its own modifications and that the self is the only existent thing

How to explain the Russian thinking on homosexuality?

Posted on by
Reply
Russian attitudes on homosexuality (1998 - 2012)

Russian attitudes on homosexuality (1998 – 2012)

“If protecting individual rights (including the right to ‘life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness’) is not the main task of a government, what is?  Older governments, including the government of what is now called Byzantium, would have replied, “justice”, including as one of its main components the promotion of virtue.  That is, rulers were concerned to discover what was just and virtuous behaviour and then to outlaw unjust and unvirtuous behaviour.  Obviously since rulers were fallen, they often made a mess of it, like all men make a mess of everything.  But attaining virtue remained the goal.  The question for them was not, ‘What are my rights as a citizen?’, but rather, ‘How should I live as a citizen?’  The focus was on the promotion of virtue and the elimination of vice.

“I am not saying, of course, that there is no overlap between the two approaches to law, or no commonality between the ancient way of looking at society and our modern one.  And I am as happy as anyone else living in the west to have the freedom to speak (or blog, like I am now) and not fear the policeman’s knock on my door.   But I am aware that our modern American way is not universal or of any great antiquity.”

Fr. Lawrence Farley

– See more at: http://www.soundingblog.com/index.php/culture/pop-culture/whats-with-russia.html#sthash.6EZGth6I.dpuf

 

Wise orators stand mute as fish.

Posted on by
Reply
Book cover for "The Orthodox Church" by John Anthony McGuckin

The Orthodox Church

NOTE: The following is an excerpt of Fr. John Anthony McGuckin’s book “The Orthodox Church”. I highly recommend it.

…This is only a brief argument using scriptural indications to speak about historical tradition soberly received and reverently passed on. It will hardly convince a generation of so-called historical scholars who have mutilated the scriptural record they set out to comment on, using the premise that ‘nothing unusual can happen in the world, that is not entirely explicable by reference to things that are usual’: and thus ‘explaining’ the Virgin birth for their readership as a ‘magical’ explaining away of an illegitimate birth. But the Akathist hymn gave a good response to this in ancient times:

Wise orators stand mute as fish before you Theotokos; for they are unable to explain how you could remain a virgin and yet give birth. But we who marvel at the mystery of faith can cry out to you: All hail, you who are the chosen vessel of God.

The Virgin Mary stands not only as a Christological bulwark, epitomizing the ultimate ‘scandal of our faith’ that if she is called the Theotokos, her Son must be confessed as divine (God of God, Light of Light, true God of true God, as the Creed has it). But in many ways she is a ‘Bronze Gate’ in a contemporary world abounding in reductionist and faithless exegesis. She who treasured all these stories and tales of wonder about her Son in her heart, as the evangelist tells us, is still one who refuses to allow the sacred kerygma of the Gospel to be watered down and made palatable to the tastes and conceptions of those who are far from being deeply rooted i the strange and paradoxical ways of a God who, with the world’s salvation in the balance, chose a simple and innocent heart which was ready to say to him: ‘Let it be done in me, as I am your servant. The choice of an unmarried first-century Jewish woman from a rural backwater was a contradiction of the ‘wisdom of this world’, and still is. It is perhaps why theological reflection on the Theotokos (so prevalent and powerful in the early church) has fallen into relative silence today.

McGuckin, John Anthony. The Orthodox Church: An Introduction to its History, Doctrine, and Spiritual Culture. West Sussex: Wiley-Blackwell, 2011.

 

Evidence from Silence

Posted on by
Reply
Dormition of the Theotokos

Dormition of the Theotokos

“In the fourth century, bishop Epiphanius noted, cautiously, that nobody knows if or whether Mary died, nor if she was buried, nor the location of her grave.” Philip Jenkins, “Why Mary?”

Several years ago, while I was still Lutheran, my pastor noted a number of interesting things about Mary. In particular, he mentioned that although there were church all over the holy land commemorating various persons and events, there were no churches where Mary died, nor was anyone claiming her gravesite, or claiming to have her bodily relics. This is so unusual that it must mean something. We cannot be dogmatic about it, but it does support the position of most of the world’s Christians that there was a miracle attached to her death, such that her body was lost. How and in what way we don’t know, except for the evidence preserved in the liturgy and in the apocryphal writings.

Father George Calciu: Interviews, Homilies, and Talks

Posted on by
Reply

Father George Calciu: Interviews, Homilies, and TalksFather George Calciu: Interviews, Homilies, and Talks by George Calciu

My rating: 5 of 5 stars

This book is not a single narrative, but a selections of biographical sketches about and interviews with Father George Calciu, as well as a selection of his homilies, talks, and newsletter articles written to his congregation. Because of this, there is a certain amount of repetition — repetition which is to be expected.

The organization of this book is interesting, beginning with biographical sketches and interviews which mention the seven Lenten Homilies to the Youth, the sermons Father George gave to the Romanian people in 1978. But for all the foreshadowing, one is still unprepared for the power of these sermons. It is no wonder that they were laboriously hand-copied, passed from person to person, and quickly made their way to the outside world. After his Homilies to the Youth the book focuses on the various lectures, talks, writings, and interviews given after Father George was released from prison and exiled to the United States, including interviews given after the fall of communism and on the occasion of his visit to his homeland.

Their are several notable things about this book.

First, Father George rarely names names or places blame. There are a few occasions where he mentions a specific church hierarch who failed him, specifically the Bishop and former monk who arranged for Father George’s arrest and imprisonment. And yet even here there is no sense that Father George is seeking revenge; what one senses is sorrow and forgiveness. Father George notes that when he initially began writing his account of life in the Pitești prison, his anger overwhelmed him. It wasn’t until he put his writing away, symbolically making a break with the past, that he recovered. By this we are meant to learn that the rehashing of wrongs hurts our hearts and is ultimately unfruitful. Revenge is a dish best not served at all.

Second, Father George notes several times that it was through suffering that he became aware of God’s presence, that God was with him in his suffering. God did not save him from his suffering, nor did God save him by means of his suffering. However, patient endurance of suffering — while not redemptive — has a purifying effect.

Third, there are passages in this book that are quite remarkable in their practicality. For example, when Father George discusses prayer, he outlines which prayers are normative, and then provides a number of techniques by which one can maintain focus on the prayers. Unlike some more theoretical discourses on prayer, this is personal, pragmatic, and pastoral.

Finally, Father George notes that although our fellow Christians can fail us, our priests can fail us, and even the Church hierarchs can fail is, the Church is still the place where we find salvation. This is continually relevant, as the failure of Bishops, Metropolitans, and Patriarchs looms large in social media. And yet the Church of Christ still stands, and is still the one place where we can partake of the Eucharist, the medicine of immortality. Thanks be to God.

View all my reviews

The Loneliness of Contemporary Man

Posted on by
Reply
Picture of a man's hands gripping prison bars

Isolation

My beloved faithful, our contemporary society and most authorities …are increasingly isolating us, in order that we may become lonelier, less bound to each other, and less communicative, in order that they may lead us to their intended destination. They are trying to isolate us, because communities are much harder to lead than isolated individuals.

The Communists have done this through violence. The West doesn’t use violence but another method: proclaiming that you are “unique,” that you have “many rights,” that you are an “independent man,” that you need to be alone, not confined by your parents, not obedient to them or to anyone as a child, because you are a “free man.”

This misunderstood freedom is a revolt against God, it is nihilism.

Thus we have reached the state that we see today, with all the crimes that haunt the world … where fourteen-year-old children shoot their teachers, their friends, and their parents.

We have broken the human ties with those we live near. That spiritual relationship between my brother and me, between my parents and me, between parents and children, between friends has vanished. And in this disintegration of personality, which leads towards a demonized world, we are growing increasingly isolated.

Let us remain united in faith and love with one another, through Jesus Christ our Lord. Let us stay united in the community of the Church, because the Church of Christ is the only beneficial social group.[1]  Other groups lead to self-destruction. They attempt to destroy humankind, to make man an instrument of business,[2] a mere cog in the complicated mechanism of human society.

Bibliography

Calciu, George. Father George Calciu: Interviews, Homilies, and Talks. Edited by Saint Herman of Alaska Brotherhood. Platina: Saint Herman of Alaska Brotherhood, 2010.

[1] [Fr. George is not speaking here of family and friends. Elsewhere Fr. George speaks of the father as the priest of the family church. He also says: “You are in Christ’s Church whenever you uplift someone bent down in sorrow, when you help someone elderly walk more easily, or when you give alms to the poor and visit the sick.” (Calciu 2010, 162) The Church of Christ exists wherever we bear the body and blood of Christ to the world; the Church of Christ exists wherever we serve our family, our friends, and our neighbor, renewing the bonds of love and thereby resacrilizing the world.]

[2] [We are treated as an “instrument of business” when we are lumped together in arbitrary groups based on common characteristics rather than as communities of persons — when our primary relationship is viewed as being the isolated customer of a soulless corporation, treated in the aggregate as consumers.]

A Word on the “Spirit of the Times”

Posted on by
Reply
Coexist

Coexist

There is a “spirit” unveiling itself in Europe and the world in general, a New Age kind of spirit that frequently changes its appearance and speech,[1] striking the Christian world from all sides. Its images is generally gentle, its discourse attractive, but its intent perfidious. This spirit can speak in beautiful words about family, but its intent is to annihilate it. It can also sermonize on the Church, full of “love” for all, a sort of religious syncretism, but its urge is primarily to dispel Orthodoxy. It can speak about nations and their homelands as something that it tries to support, but its intent is to destroy both the Church and the nations. This spirit is called Ecumenism.

And this whole “beautiful” discourse, which takes on many faces, has only one purpose: the destruction of nations, the abolition of the Orthodox Church in particular, and the establishment of a group of leaders, anointed by I do not know whom …to win over all nations to their spirit, to initiate them into certain social, political, and religious orders, so that those leaders may always direct [world events]. Let us not be deceived! I live among these “spreaders” of prolific and protean discourses that cover the world. And I know their hearts. They have no good intention for our Church! Under the guise of Christian love, of Christian peace, they hide their perfidious intent. And I came here to say: Do not be allured by it!…

Subjectivism

Subjectivism

For their intent is to destroy all the elements of the Faith, the moral elements, the elements of kinship, on which we have relied, since (so they say) there is no absolute truth. The truth, according to them, is that which I possess {i.e., subjective truth]. And therefore, when my neighbor is wrong I cannot tell him, “You are deceived!” Nor can he tell me that I have erred, because we are absolute entities [unto ourselves]. We have our opinions which are absolute, but before others, they hold no value! This game of hiding the truth is an insidious invention of Satan.

Fr. George Calciu. Interviews, Homilies, and Talks. Platina. Saint Herman of Alaska Brotherhood. 2010. 314-315.

Translated by Elena Chiru from Diaconesty Monastery, ed., Fr. George Calciu: Living Words (in Romanian) (Bacau: Bonifaciu Press, 2009), pp. 86-87

[1] [According to the fathers, one of the signs of a demonic spirit is its changeableness, its inability or unwillingness to maintain a consistent appearance.]

Fr. George Calciu on the Uncreated Light

Posted on by
Reply
Father George Calciu

Fr. George Calciu

I can tell you about the burning bush. The burning bush was seen by Moses, and he understood that God was there. He tried to approach, and the voice of God said, Put off thy shoes from off thy feed, for the place whereon thou standest is holy ground (Ex 3:5). The bush was enveloped in Light, but the Light did not consume it. It was the same Light that God gives to man, which in touching us does not consume us. Only sin is consumed in us, as this Light gives us perfection or makes us better.

Icon of The Mother of God of the Burning Bush

The Mother of God of the Burning Bush

You know that this burning bush represents the Mother of God, who received in herself the absolute Light of Jesus Christ, the fire. We say in our prayers before receiving the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ: “Rejoicing and trembling at once, I who am straw partake of fire, and, strange wonder! I am ineffably bedewed, like the bush of old, which burnt without being consumed.”[1] It is true: we take in our mouth the fire — God, Jesus Christ — but we are not burnt because the fire consumes nothing except for sin [Isa 6:1-7].

In Exodus we read: The glory of the Lord abode upon Mount Sinai, and the cloud covered it six days: and the seventh day He called unto Moses out of the midst of the cloud. And the sight of the glory of the Lord was like devouring fire on the top of the mount in the eyes of the children

of Israel (Ex 24:16-17). This means that the mountain was covered by that Uncreated Light which cannot be comprehended by us.

God said to Moses: Thou canst not see My face: for there shall no man see Me, and live…. Thou shalt see My back parts, but My face shall not be seen (ex 33:20, 23). No one can see God and be alive because we can never see or understand the Essence of God. He is above everything: above every mind, above every possibility of being misunderstood. Even the angels cannot see the face of God, that is, His Essence. They see only his “back parts,” that is, His Uncreated Energies.

Prophet Moses Receiving the Ten Commandments

Prophet Moses Receiving the Ten Commandments

What did Moses see? He saw precisely the Uncreated Light of Energies. After that, he lived: this means he did not see the face of God, but saw only His Uncreated Energies. The Holy Fathers say that we, like the angels, can only see the “back parts” of God. We can see only from the back and never see His face.

Afterwards, when Moses was invited by God to the top of Mount Sinai and wrote down the Ten Commandments, the glory of God again filled the mountain. Moses didn’t see the face of God, he saw only the Uncreated Light.

Sometimes this Light makes the body and soul come near to perfection, and thus the body begins to shine. The Light is incorporated by the body and becomes visible to the physical eyes. That is why Moses, when he came down from the mountain, covered his face with a veil: the shining of his face was unbearable for the Jews to look at (cf. Ex 34:33-35). The Uncreated Energy was present in his body, not only in his spirit.

Fr. George Calciu. Interviews, Homilies, and Talks. Platina. Saint Herman of Alaska Brotherhood. 2010. 264-265.

[1] Prayer of St. Symeon the New Theologian.

Mt Athos: Myths, Contradictions, and Incongruities.

Posted on by
Reply

Skiti Agiou Andrea Σκήτη Αγίου Ανδρέα

Ever since I’ve become Orthodox, I’ve heard about Mt. Athos, it’s intriguing history, its spectacular setting, it’s magnificent architecture. But what I find most interesting are the myths, the contradictions, and the incongruities.

First, Mt. Athos is both a mountain and a peninsula. What Orthodoxy calls the Holy Mountain is in fact not the single mountain itself, but the entire peninsula.

Second, the Holy Mountain is often described as primitive and pristine. It is often said that the only way to get to Mt. Athos is by ferry, that the only way to get around is by walking, and that the sound of internal combustion engines is never heard on the Holy Mountain. This is not true. A search on Google Maps reveals quite a few roads on Mt. Athos. A great number of these roads connect the harbors to each other, and roads criss-cross the interior, leading up to and past the various sketes and monasteries. There are even pictures of cars driving these roads up to monasteries in the interior, with one showing what appears to be a vehicle fleet belonging to the ACS Courier service. It is clearly possible to drive to the Greek town of Ouranoupoli, from which roads radiate into the interior of the Holy Mountain. I don’t know if these roads are blocked or guarded in some way, but given the pictures of cars driving on Mt. Athos, the possibility exists. In addition, Mt. Athos has the Elikodromio heliport, and even concrete roads. With curbs, no less. <https://www.google.com/maps?q=mt+athos&sll=36.930821500000015,-76.2397205&sspn=0.42162902326964075,0.7033899703359611&t=h&dg=opt&z=18&iwloc=A> . And finally, Mt. Athos has a branch of the Agricultural Bank of Greece, complete with ATM. So, not as primitive and pristine as we’ve been led to believe.

Third, Mt. Athos was supposedly chosen by the Virgin Mary herself.  She was traveling with John the Evangelist to visit Lazarus in Cyprus, and the ship was blown off course. After setting foot on the shore, she blessed it and asked her Son for the area to be her garden. A voice was heard from heaven, saying: “Let this place be your inheritance and your garden, a paradise and a haven of salvation for those seeking to be saved.” From that moment on the site was consecrated to the Virgin Mary and off limits to women. The oddity that a site consecrated to the Virgin Mary would be off limits to those of her gender has been often noted. This presents a theological problem, in that it separates the Virgin Mary from other women in a manner that has more in common with Roman Catholicism than Eastern Orthodoxy.

Fourth, although the site was consecrated to the Virgin Mary in the first century, it was inhabited by both pagans and Christians during the reign of Emperor Constantine, and pagan temples and statues of Zeus existed in the fifth century. The area was deserted early in the ninth century, following raids by the Cretan Saracens. It was not until late in the ninth century that the Emperor Basil I declared via a Chrysobull (Golden Bull, or declaration) that Mt. Athos was declared to be a place of monks, and that no laymen, farmers, or cattle-breeders were allowed to live there. So the present condition of Mt. Athos did not exist for most of the first millennium. This suggests that the prohibition against women setting foot on Mt. Athos is representative of European Medieval thinking regarding the status of women, rather than a feature of Orthodox monasticism.

Fifth, the monks of Mt. Athos come under the ecclesiastical jurisdiction of the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople, Bishop Bartholomew. And yet the monks regard themselves as “the non-negotiable guardian of the Holy Tradition.” In other words, while formally under the authority of the Ecumenical Patriarch, the monks of Mt. Athos consider themselves an independent authority and arbiter of Holy Tradition. It has been said that some of the monasteries, in protest against the ecumenical tendencies of Patriarch Bartholomew, have censured him. There are even accounts of their having stripped him from the Diptychs, which is tantamount to their breaking communion with their Patriarch. If so, this makes them schismatics.

To be honest, I don’t know what to make of Mt. Athos. On the one hand, there have been a great number of saints on the Holy Mountain, even in the 20th century. On the other hand, there does seem to be a certain arrogance that adheres to the monks of Mt. Athos (collectively, not individually). I don’t know what to make of the monks of Mt. Athos, and their status within the canonical Orthodox church. They seem to be setting themselves apart, setting the stage for some sort of showdown. I pray they come to their senses.