Koinonia

Seeking the Kingdom: Comparing Two Translations of a Kontakion

Fr Gregory Jensen — Mon, 20 May 2013 21:10:55 +0000

Fr Benedict Crawford (Christ the Saviour Orthodox Church, McComb, MS) has an interesting post comparing “two translations of a kontakion for Sts. Constantine and Helen (May 21).” Rightly Father points out how in the original Greek, the hymn uses “strikingly military language” that seems to be lost in at least some translations of the text. You can compare the two translations and read the whole of his post here). To his observations–which are excellent–let me add to his observation about the absence of martial language in some translations.

There is a significant difference between the translations regarding the battle that is joined with the Cross. In the first case, the battle is an actual military contest; under the sign of the Cross Constantine is victorious in war. This is lost in the second translation since the battle is internalized and universalized; under the sign of the Cross we are victorious in our ascetical struggle. This second translation–interpretation really–radically shifts the reference at the expense of the historical meaning of the feast.

There is, to my mind, a disturbing tendency among contemporary Orthodox Christians to embrace uncritically secular pacifism and to downplay, if not actively reject, the vocation of the Christian warrior. Yes, pacifism is a legitimate Christian vocation but it is no more–or less–legitimate than the call to serve Christ in military service. Both vocations have produced saints, both can be blessed as “peacemakers” even as both have produced their share of selfish thugs and cowards. “All in all, a disappointment that the OCA text departs so far from the sense of the original kontakion.”

In Christ,

+Fr Gregory

h/t Byzantine, Texas

Rating: 0.0/10 (0 votes cast)

What is Marriage?

Fr Gregory Jensen — Mon, 20 May 2013 18:38:52 +0000

Source: Online Library of Law and Liberty.

Podcast: Play in new window | Download (Duration: 39:48 — 36.5MB)

The Supreme Court will soon pronounce upon the constitutionality of California’s Proposition 8,

which amended that state’s constitution to prohibit same-sex marriage, and the federal Defense of Marriage Act that was enacted into law in 1996 under then President Bill Clinton. This conversation with Ryan Anderson, co-author with Sherif Girgis and Robert George of the recently publishedWhat is Marriage?, engages the philosophical argument that there is a natural form to marriage which has been instantiated by the western legal tradition in various ways. This lively conversation debates the most basic questions on this subject in a serious and respectful manner. Don’t miss it.

Rating: 0.0/10 (0 votes cast)

Property Rights in Orthodox Social Teaching

Fr Gregory Jensen — Mon, 20 May 2013 18:15:05 +0000

The Catholic apologist Phil Lawler asks “So why does the Pope sound like a socialist?” But immediately after asking, he rephrases the question: ‘Or rather, how have socialists managed to make themselves sound like Christians?” How indeed? “The political Left has been willing to take what it likes from the Bible, while the Right has been unwilling to do so.” He goes on to say, that socialists

…make their arguments in moral terms, because if the argument is stated purely in practical terms, the socialists will lose. By the same logic, capitalists prefer to state their arguments in practical economic terms. Unfortunately, in doing so, they cede the moral high ground to their opponents. With rare exceptions—one thinks immediately of Michael Novak and of the Acton Institute–defenders of capitalism have not taken the trouble to state their case primarily in moral terms. And that’s unfortunate, because a powerful argument can be made that capitalism, tempered by a Christian moral framework, is the best available solution to the problem of poverty.

There is in fact a Christian moral case to make for the capitalism—or rather the free market. Such a defense however can’t come at the cost of ignoring “the excesses of capitalism, and of capitalism raised to an all-encompassing ideology.” Lawler quotes a recent comments by Pope Francis in which the Pontiff said that Christians must be forthright in our condemnation of “ideologies which uphold the absolute autonomy of markets and financial speculation, and thus deny the right of control to States, which are themselves charged with providing for the common good.” As Lawler observes, “Hard-core libertarians will be uncomfortable with that language, certainly. But then hard-core libertarians are often uncomfortable with the Ten Commandments.”

This summer I’ll be a Lone Mountain Fellow with the Property and Environmental Research Center (PERC) in Bozeman, MT where I will research (among other things) the moral and practical foundations of the free market. It is part of the teaching of the Orthodox Church that property, or more broadly wealth, is “God’s gift given to be used for [our] own and [our] neighbor’s benefit” (The Basis of the Social Concept, section VII.2). To be sure the right to property is not “absolute” nerveless, property is “a socially recognized form of people’s relationship to the fruits of their labour and to natural resources.” Under normal circumstances this includes

“the right to own and use property”
“the right to control and collect income” from one’s property and
“the right to dispose of, lease, modify or liquidate property” (section VII.1).

Finally, the Church teaches that “the alienation and re-distribution of property” in any way that violates “the rights of its legitimate owners” (section VII.3).

While it makes some on the right anxious to hear that the right to property is not absolute, the reason for this is rooted in Christian anthropology. We can use our material, real or cultural wealth to “produce … sinful phenomena.” But we can also use it in ways that are “proper and morally justified” (section VII.3). Though they are good, property and wealth are not the greatest good even in this, earthly life.

Lawler’s observation about American conservatives and the Vatican are I think equally applicable to Orthodox Christian. Yes, “ liberal activists and social engineers as enemies of the faith…., [B]ut the argument works both ways. Conservatives should recognize the Catholic Church as a defender of the moral order that makes productive capitalism possible. There’s a natural alliance to be made, if only both sides recognize it.”

In Christ,

+Fr Gregory

h/t: Elise Hilton, “What capitalists can learn from Pope Francis”

What capitalists should learn from the Pope’s critique

Rating: 0.0/10 (0 votes cast)

Building Bridges Between Orthodox and Catholic Christians

Fr Gregory Jensen — Thu, 02 May 2013 21:26:32 +0000

An interview with Archimandrite Robert Taft, SJ, prominent Byzantine liturgical theologian and lifelong healer of Christian relations between East and West

Christopher B. Warner

A welcome interview from the always direct and charitable Fr Robert Taft (Building Bridges Between Orthodox and Catholic Christians)!

Yes there is a stubborn streak of anti-Catholicism among Orthodox Christians that needs to be called out and repudiated by all Orthodox Christians of good will. I certainly have encountered this bias in parishes I’ve served and it is a bias that, sadly, is not limited to any demographic within the Church.

One criticism if I may of the interview.

Christopher refers to “the Orthodox Churches and the Catholic Church.” As I understand Catholic ecclesiology, the One Catholic Church is a communion of Churches that embraces both the Latin rite and the various Churches who follow the Eastern rite. Likewise, the Orthodox Church though a communion of autocephalous local Churches is nevertheless One Church.

Referring to the Catholic Church and the Orthodox Churches I think obscures the fact that, whatever our other differences, both Churches are simultaneously One Church and a communion of Churches. Too frequently Orthodox Christians trumpet the local Churches at the expense of the One Church even as Catholic Christians emphasize the One Church at the expense of the existence of autonomous, self-governing particular churches in full communion with the Pope that make up the various Eastern Catholic Churches.

So heres the interview.

In Christ,

+Fr Gregory

The April 22nd kidnapping of Syrian archbishops Mar Gregorios Ibrahim of the Syriac Orthodox Church and Paul Yazigi of the Greek Orthodox Church of Antioch, and the killing of their driver, has reminded us once again of the vulnerability of ancient Christian peoples living in the Middle East. More than 1,000 Christians have been killed to date in the Syrian conflict and more than 80 churches have been destroyed. The majority of Christians in Syria are Greek or Syriac Orthodox or Melkite Greek Catholic. This recent violence in Syria can remind us to pray for suffering Christians in the Middle East and afford us the opportunity to practice solidarity with our Greek Catholic and Orthodox Christian brothers and sisters.

Catholic World Report had the recent privilege of asking Archimandrite Robert Taft, SJ for his perspective on current Orthodox-Catholic relations. Father Taft has been the leading scholar in Byzantine liturgical studies for decades. Taft has devoted his life to preserving the liturgical treasury of the East and building bridges between Orthodox and Catholic Christians. As a young Jesuit, Taft first became interested in the liturgical traditions of the Christian East while teaching at the Baghdad Jesuit College in Iraq (1956-1959).

In 1963, Taft was ordained a Catholic priest of the Byzantine Slavonic (Russian) Rite. He is Professor-emeritus of Oriental Liturgy at the Pontifical Oriental Institute, Rome, where he received his doctorate in 1970 and remained to teach for 38 years. The Oriental Institute is the most prestigious institute in the world for Eastern Christian studies.

A prolific writer, his bibliography comprises more than 800 articles and 26 books, including A History of the Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom (vols. II-VI), Orientalia Christiana Analecta, Rome, 1978-2013. Several of his writings have been translated into other languages.

Taft is the personal friend of many prominent Orthodox scholars, living and deceased, like Father Alexander Schmemann and Father John Meyendorff. He has many friends in and ties to the Russian Orthodox community, where he is admired and respected. For example, he directed the doctoral studies for both of St. Vladimir Seminary’s liturgical professors: Paul Meyendorff and Father Alexander Rentel.

CWR: Father Robert, thank you very much for your willingness to share with us some of your recent thoughts on Eastern Christian ecumenism.

Many people who are sensitive to Orthodox-Catholic dialogue noticed that when Pope Francis appeared on the balcony a month ago, he was not only very humble, but spoke of the Church of Rome as the Church “which presides in love” and referred to himself as the bishop of Rome concerned for the Christians of Rome. These past few weeks he has definitely set the tone for his pontificate.

This quotation from the second-century letter of St. Ignatius of Antioch to the Roman Church, “which presides in love,” could not have been coincidence considering Pope Francis’ noteworthy sensitivities to Eastern Christian ecclesiology. Plus, the historically unprecedented response to Francis’ election in the form of Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew’s attendance at the papal installation Mass seems to mark Pope Francis as another welcomed bridge-builder between East and West. As an aside, I think it is beautiful that pontifex means “bridge-builder” in Latin. Perhaps Pope Francis will bring a new understanding of that title through his ecumenical dialogue and his local focus on the duties of the bishop of Rome? Could you comment on how you think Pope Francis’ humble “style” will be viewed by Orthodox Christians?

Taft: Pope Francesco is making a wonderful impression on most of the world by just being himself, the self of a real Christian in love, not with himself or his image, but with what real Christians love…God and all His creatures He died to save, especially the poor and needy and downtrodden. This has come across clearly to all of us, including Orthodox I know, who as real Christians can spot a fellow-Christian a mile away.

In addition, even more interesting from the ecumenical perspective is Francesco’s emphasis on his primary title, “Bishop of Rome.” Because a prelate’s title to his primacy comes from his local primatial see, not from some personal or super-imposed ecclesiological distinction. I can’t imagine that any of our attentive Orthodox observers have missed that!

CWR: Most Catholics probably envision future unity between the Orthodox Churches and the Catholic Church as a re-installment of one world Church organization with the pope of Rome at the top of the governing pyramid. A look at history shows that such a model never existed, so what could Orthodox-Catholic communion actually look like if it were achieved? A renewal of Eucharistic communion? The possibility of an eighth ecumenical council? A resolution for the dating of Pascha/Easter?

Taft: What it would look like is not a “reunion” with them “returning to Rome,” to which they never belonged anyway; nor us being incorporated by them, since we are all ancient apostolic “Sister Churches” with a valid episcopate and priesthood and the full panoply of sacraments needed to minister salvation to our respective faithful, as is proclaimed in the renewed Catholic ecclesiology since Vatican II and enshrined in numerous papal documents from Paul VI on, as well as in the wonderful Catechism of the Catholic Church. So we just need to restore our broken communion and the rest of the problems you mention can be addressed one by one and resolved by common accord.

CWR: According to the most recent joint statement of the North American Orthodox-Catholic Theological Consultation (2010), future communion would include several key elements:

· Mutual recognition: The numerous Orthodox Churches and the Catholic Church would have to “explicitly recognize each other as authentic embodiments of the one Church of Christ, founded on the apostles”;

· A common confession of faith: The “Filioque” ought to be dropped in order to reflect the common Confession of Faith “canonized at the Council of Constantinople in 381”;

· Accepted diversity: Orthodox-Catholic Christians would “live in full ecclesial communion with each other without requiring any of the parts to forego its own traditions and practices”;

· Liturgical sharing: “Members of all the Churches in communion would be able to receive the sacraments in the other Churches”;

· Synodality/conciliarity: “Bishops of all the Churches would be invited to participate fully in any ecumenical councils that might be summoned.

Synodality would operate at various levels of ecclesial institutions: local, regional, and worldwide”;

· Mission: “As sister Churches, they would also engage in common efforts to promote the realization of a Christian moral vision in the world”;

· Subsidiarity: “Those elected to major episcopal or primatial offices would present themselves to other Church leaders at their level”;

· Renewal and reform. They would “commit themselves to continuing [Christian] renewal and growth—together.”

The statement goes on to say, “Conscience holds us back from celebrating our unity as complete in sacramental terms, until it is complete in faith, Church structure, and common action.” Can you clarify what you mean by “restoring our broken communion” so that the other existing problems “can be addressed one by one and resolved by common accord”? It seems like we already have “mutual recognition,” “accepted diversity,” and “mission”; what is the next step and how many steps will it take before we get to “liturgical sharing” which is what I think of when you say “broken communion?”

Taft: Yes, much that is put forward in this excellent historic document is already a reality or on the way to being so. For instance there is no “Filioque” in the Creed Russian Catholics chant in our Slavonic liturgy, and some years ago Rome issued a clarification of its Trinitarian belief about which the late French Orthodox theologian Olivier Clément said if that is the Catholic teaching on the issue then the problem has been resolved. As for “ecumenical councils,” the Catholic Church might specify more clearly its list of those, which as far as I know we have never defined. Are the purely Roman Catholic post-schism councils to be considered ecumenical councils of the undivided Church? If so, says who?

CWR: How could the papal claims of Rome be modified in a way that would be both acceptable to the Orthodox Churches and faithful to the tradition of the Catholic Church? Do you think the jurisdiction issue really is a hang-up for the Orthodox since they also practice cross-jurisdiction throughout Western Europe, the Americas, Australia, and East Asia?

Taft: The new Catholic “Sister Churches” ecclesiology describes not only how the Catholic Church views the Orthodox Churches. It also represents a startling revolution in how the Catholic Church views itself: we are no longer the only kid on the block, the whole Church of Christ, but one Sister Church among others. Previously, the Catholic Church saw itself as the original one and only true Church of Christ from which all other Christians had separated for one reason or another in the course of history, and Catholics held, simplistically, that the solution to divided Christendom consisted in all other Christians returning to Rome’s maternal bosom.

Vatican II, with an assist from those Council Fathers with a less naïve Disney-World view of their own Church’s past, managed to put aside this historically ludicrous, self-centered, self-congratulatory perception of reality. In doing so they had a strong assist from the Council Fathers of the Melkite Greek Catholic Church whose concrete experience of the realities of the Christian East made them spokesmen and defenders of that reality.

In this context I would recommend the excellent new book by Robert Louis Wilken, The First Thousand Years: A Global History of Christianity (New Haven & London: Yale U. Press 2012). Professor Wilken, a convert to Catholicism who is a recognized expert on Early Christianity and its history and literature, shows that Early Christianity developed not out of some Roman cradle but as a federation of local Churches, Western and Eastern, each one under the authority of a chief hierarch who would come to be called Archbishop, Pope, Patriarch, or Catholicos, each with its own independent governing synod and polity, all of them initially in communion with one another until the vicissitudes of history led to lasting divisions.

CWR: Many Orthodox theologians claim that even if the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople or the Patriarch of Moscow were to unite with Rome tomorrow, the lay faithful and the monastics would probably not accept it and therefore there would be no actual union. Given the history of Lyons and Florence do you think this is true, or has the Orthodox mood changed recently?

Taft: Part of the problem is that some Orthodox do not instruct their people adequately and update them, so ecumenical progress on the upper level often does not filter down to the ordinary faithful. In addition of course, there is the problem of the bigotry of many of the monastics and others towards anyone who is not Orthodox. On how they square this with what Christianity is supposed to be according to Jesus’ explicit teaching in the New Testament, we still await their explanation. One Catholic remedy for this—its usefulness proven by the rage it provokes in the exposed bigots—is the factual diffusion of their views, objectively and without editorial comment, in publications like Irénikon in French, or in English Father Ronald Roberson’s highly informative monthly SEIA Newsletter on the Eastern Churches and Ecumenism, distributed gratis to subscribers via email and eventually preserved for permanent reference in the Eastern Churches Journal. These publications just give the news without comment, including quotations from the bigots permanently recorded for posterity, thereby exposing them to the public embarrassment they merit. This is especially important for some representatives of Orthodoxy who speak out of both sides of their mouth, saying one thing at international ecumenical venues, and quite another for the consumption of Orthodox audiences or in publications they do not expect the non-Orthodox to read.

CWR: You mentioned the fact that documenting statements from Orthodox representatives has the potential to nail down the real arguments and eradicate equivocation. How has modern technology, especially the Internet, helped (or hindered) ecumenical dialogue?

Taft: Anything that helps spread the news and the flood of ever-new documentation on inter-church relations can only be viewed positively. And it is a mistake to think that this is not true in countries of the less-developed so-called “third world,” where those interested in the rest of the world are often more computer-literate than those of us in the West. Some of my Orthodox friends in far away countries are computer whizzes compared to me!

CWR: It seems as though Western Catholic theologians have been interested in Eastern theology for the past 1,500 years and have generally sought to integrate it into their own theology. On the other hand, many modern Eastern Orthodox theologians are very leery about anything Western and have furthermore severed themselves from their roots in Hellenic philosophy. Is this statement accurate? Is this a recent phenomenon? And are there any schools of Eastern Orthodox theology that do not see the integration of Western theology and philosophical inquiry as a threat to Eastern theology?

Taft: First of all, the roots of ALL of us include a Neo-Platonic heritage that no one has abandoned in East or West since it is part of Christianity’s DNA, so drop that notion. As for Orthodox theologians, we must distinguish the second-stringers from the best ones. Lest my list be endless, let me mention just a few in each Orthodox Church who are fully conversant with present western Catholic theology. Among the Greeks: Metropolitans Kallistos Ware and Ioannes Zizioulas, Archpriest Stefanos Alexopoulos, Prof. Pantelas Kalaitzidis of Volos, and the professors of Holy Cross Hellenic Greek College in Brighton, Massachusetts. Among the Russian Orthodox: Metropolitan Ilarion Alfayev, Sr. Dr. Vassa Larin, Protoierej Mixail Zheltov, and numerous others. Then in the USA we have the Professors of St. Vladimir’s Orthodox Seminary of the OCA, and on and on. So there are in fact plenty of top Orthodox theologians au courant in modern non-Orthodox theological thought.

Rating: 0.0/10 (0 votes cast)

The Paschal Message of His Beatitude, Metropolitan Tikhon

Fr Gregory Jensen — Tue, 30 Apr 2013 21:02:37 +0000

Source: OCA

To the Venerable Pastors, God-loving Monastics and Devout Faithful of the Orthodox Church in America

“We celebrate the death of death and the overthrow of hell, the beginning of another life which is eternal; and in exultation, we sing the praises of its source. He alone is blessed and most glorious, the God of our Fathers.”

(Paschal Canon, Ode 7)

Dearly Beloved in the Lord:

The central mystery of the Christian Faith is the glorious Resurrection of our Lord, God and Savior Jesus Christ, through which mankind is offered the gift of another life, which is eternal. This miracle of divine and everlasting life was wrought for us in a most remarkable way, for our Lord accomplished it by voluntarily suffering His Passion, being nailed to the Cross and descending into the tomb and into hell.

To the world, suffering is understood as something to be avoided at all costs. The Cross is perceived as foolishness, while the reality of death is ignored as often as possible. But Christ takes the very things the world fears and uses them, not only to reveal His glory and His power, but to share that power and glory with us. He voluntarily endures suffering to free us from our suffering. He ascends the Cross to bring joy to a world that is so often shrouded in war, destruction and hatred. And He willingly endures death so that He might trample it down and reveal that, in the risen Lord, it has no power over us.

Throughout our beautiful Paschal services, we sing of the great paradox of eternal life, revealed and accomplished through death: of mortality, clothed in the robe of immortality; of the Sun of Righteousness shining forth from the tomb; of death being trampled down by death. Christ, Who is Life itself, dies for us, so that we who are dead might live. We no longer fear those things that the world fears, for they no longer have power over us. As Saint John Chrysostom reminds us in his magnificent Paschal homily, “Let no one fear death, for the Savior’s death has set us free. He who was prisoner of it has annihilated it. By descending into hell, He made hell captive.”

Let us, therefore, rejoice in the Risen Lord and be strengthened to face our own struggles with courage and hope, knowing that the Lord is ever with us. As we celebrate the bright and joyous day of His Resurrection, let us exclaim with the Apostle Paul, “O death, where is thy sting? O hell, where is thy victory?” (1 Corinthians 15:55). And let us all partake of the Banquet of Immortality, the Feast of Faith, with joy and thanksgiving.

With love in the Risen Lord,

+TIKHON
Archbishop of Washington
Metropolitan of All America and Canada

Rating: 0.0/10 (0 votes cast)

An appeal to President Obama…

Fr Gregory Jensen — Mon, 29 Apr 2013 20:11:22 +0000

… and his government for the release of two Orthodox Christian Archbishops, namely Archbishop Paul Yazigi and Archbishop Youhanna Ibrahim who were abducted by armed rebels on April 23, 2013 in the suburbs of Aleppo, Syria. The driver of the Archbishops was murdered and the Archbishops were forced by the rebels to go to an unknown location either in Syria or in Turkey.

We appeal to you beloved in Christ and peace loving people to sign this petition urgently asking the American administration to use all its influence for the release of these two Archbishops and to bring a peaceful settlement to this bloodletting Syrian conflict through a negotiated settlement.

https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/appeal-president-obama-and-his-government-release-two-abducted-orthodox-christian-archbishops-syria/xNskxL1q

When I signed the petition a few minutes ago, it had only 1,600 of the 100,000 signatures needed to get the White House to act. So please sign the petition, post it on Facebook and Twitter and ask your friends to sign.

Attached as well is a letter from Patriarch JOHN X of Antioch regarding the situation in Syria and the Palm Sunday Procession. His Beatitude requested all the parishes of the Patriarchate of Antioch to do the following: “Let our processions be this year with candles tied with black ribbons, chanting the hymn: ‘To Thee O Champion Leader….’ Instead of the Hymn ‘Rejoice O Bethany…’ asking the Virgin Mary to keep our Church as a fortified city.” Please read the full attached letter.

You can find this same letter in many languages, including Arabic, on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/Antiochpatriarchate.org.

In Christ,

+Fr Gregory

Rating: 0.0/10 (0 votes cast)

Letter to Secretary of State John Kerry

Fr Gregory Jensen — Mon, 29 Apr 2013 18:38:19 +0000

Source (ACOB)

Saturday, April 27, 2013

Download the Letter in PDF format

The Honorable John Kerry
United States Secretary of State

Dear Secretary Kerry,

We, the Members of the Assembly of Canonical Orthodox Bishops of North and Central America, kindly bring to your attention the urgent and very serious plight of the Greek Orthodox and Syriac Orthodox Archbishops of Aleppo, Paul Yazigi and Yohanna Ibrahim, who were abducted this past week by “a terrorist group” in the village of Kfar Dael as they were carrying out humanitarian work.

Since the outbreak of the civil war in Syria, religious minorities have not only come under increasing attacks by Islamic fundamentalist rebels, but also have been caught in the crossfire of the opposing factions. As you well know, on April 22, 2013, the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom released a report entitled Protecting and Promoting Religious Freedom in Syria. Religious minorities, including the Christian population, have been targeted for extinction in an attempt to create an Islamic State in Syria and to impose Sharia Law as the law of the land. To that end, Christian clerics have been kidnapped and murdered, even as they tried to bring aid and comfort to their people in this war torn country, while others are still missing, taken captive by rebel forces.

We fervently beseech you to immediately call for and actively work towards the immediate release of Archbishops Paul Yazigi and Yohanna Ibrahim, especially as Orthodox Christians around the globe are preparing to celebrate the Resurrection of OurLord and Savior Jesus Christ on May 5th. We would further hope that the United States government, which has always been a champion of civil rights and religious freedom and defends the dignity and safety of every individual, would exert pressure on all parties in Syria to stop the killing of innocent people and restore freedom of religion and respect for all religious minorities.

We are indebted to you and others within the administration for your tireless efforts. As Orthodox Christians, the most appropriate way to express this appreciation is to continue to pray for all our civil authorities. May the Lord bless and keep you: The Lord make His face to shine upon you, and be gracious to you: The Lord lift up His countenance upon you, and give you peace. (OT Book of Numbers 6:24-26).

Archbishop Demetrios, Chairman of the Assembly of Bishops
Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America

Metropolitan Philip, 1st Vice Chairman of the Assembly of Bishops
Antiochian Orthodox Christian Archdiocese of New York and all North America

Archbishop Justinian, 2nd Vice Chairman of the Assembly of Bishops
Russian Orthodox Church in the USA

Bishop Basil, Secretary of the Assembly of Bishops
Antiochian Orthodox Christian Diocese of Wichita and Mid-America

Metropolitan Antony, Treasurer of the Assembly of Bishops
Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the USA Eastern Eparchy

Metropolitan Iakovos
Greek Orthodox Metropolis of Chicago

Metropolitan Methodios
Greek Orthodox Metropolis of Boston

Metropolitan Isaiah
Greek Orthodox Metropolis of Denver

Metropolitan Alexios
Greek Orthodox Metropolis of Atlanta

Metropolitan Nicholas
Greek Orthodox Metropolis of Detroit

Metropolitan Savas
Greek Orthodox Metropolis of Pittsburgh

Metropolitan Gerasimos
Greek Orthodox Metropolis of San Francisco

Metropolitan Evangelos
Greek Orthodox Metropolis of New Jersey

Bishop Andonios
Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America

Bishop Demetrios
Greek Orthodox Metropolis of Chicago

Bishop Sevastianos
Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America

Metropolitan Athenagoras
Holy Metropolis of Mexico

Metropolitan Nikitas
Patriarch Athenagoras Orthodox Institute in Berkley, CA

Bishop Gregory
American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese of the USA

Bishop Daniel
Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the USA Western Eparchy

Bishop Ilia
Albanian Orthodox Diocese

Archbishop Joseph
Antiochian Orthodox Christian Diocese of Los Angeles and the West

Bishop Antoun
Antiochian Orthodox Christian Diocese of Miami and the Southeast

Bishop Thomas
Antiochian Orthodox Christian Diocese of Charleston, Oakland and the Mid-Atlantic

Bishop Alexander
Antiochian Orthodox Christian Diocese of Ottawa, Eastern Canada & Upstate New York

Bishop John
Antiochian Orthodox Christian Diocese of Worcester and New England

Bishop Anthony
Antiochian Orthodox Christian Diocese of Toledo and the Midwest

Bishop Nicholas
Antiochian Orthodox Christian Archdiocese, Bishop of Brooklyn and Assistant to the Metropolitan

Metropolitan Hilarion
Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia, Eastern America and New York Diocese

Archbishop Alypy
Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia, Chicago and Mid-America Diocese

Archbishop Kyrill
Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia, San Francisco and Western America Diocese

Bishop Peter
Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia, Administrator of Chicago and Mid-America
Diocese

Bishop Theodosy
Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia, Vicar – San Francisco and Western America Diocese

Bishop George
Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia, Vicar – Eastern America Diocese

Bishop Jerome
Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia

Bishop John
Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia, Bishop-in-Charge of Old Ritualist Parishes

Bishop Longin
Serbian Orthodox Church, Chicago and Mid-America Diocese

Bishop Mitrophan
Serbian Orthodox Church, Eastern American Diocese

Bishop Maxim
Serbian Orthodox Church, Western American Diocese

Archbishop Nicolae
Romanian Orthodox Archdiocese in the Americas

Bishop Ioan Casian
Romanian Orthodox Archdiocese in the Americas

Metropolitan Joseph
Bulgarian Eastern Orthodox Church of the USA, Canada, and Australia

Bishop Daniil
Bulgarian Eastern Orthodox Church of the USA, Canada, and Australia

Metropolitan Dimitri
Georgian Orthodox Church, Dioceses of Batumi & Lazeti and America

Metropolitan Tikhon
Orthodox Church in America, Archdiocese of Washington, D.C.

Archbishop Nathaniel
Orthodox Church in America, Romanian Orthodox Episcopate

Archbishop Nikon
Orthodox Church in America, Diocese of New England and Albanian Archdiocese

Archbishop Benjamin
Orthodox Church in America, Diocese of San Francisco and the West

Bishop Melchisedek
Orthodox Church in America, Diocese of Pittsburgh and Western Pennsylvania

Bishop Michael
Orthodox Church in America, Diocese of New York and New Jersey

Bishop Alexander
Orthodox Church in America, Bulgarian Diocese

Bishop Irineu
Orthodox Church in America, Romanian Orthodox Episcopate

Bishop Mark
Orthodox Church in America

Metropolitan Sotirios
Greek Orthodox Metropolis of Toronto

Bishop Christoforos
Greek Orthodox Metropolis of Toronto

Metropolitan Yurij
Ukrainian Orthodox Church in Canada

Bishop Ilarion
Ukrainian Orthodox Church in Canada

Bishop Andriy
Ukrainian Orthodox Church in Canada

Archbishop Gabriel
Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia

Bishop Iov
Russian Orthodox Church

Bishop Georgije
Serbian Orthodox Church

Bishop Irénée
Orthodox Church in America, Archdiocese of Ottawa and Canada

Bishop Pankratij
Holy Metropolis of Mexico

Metropolitan Antonio
Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of Mexico, Venezuela, Central America & the Caribbean

Bishop Ignatius
Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of Mexico, Venezuela, Central America & the Caribbean

Archbishop Alejo
Exarchate of Mexico Orthodox Church in America

Rating: 0.0/10 (0 votes cast)

The Virtue of Chastity

Fr Gregory Jensen — Tue, 23 Apr 2013 00:31:07 +0000

Fifth Sunday of Great Lent, the Commemoration of St Mary of Egypt

Epistle: Hebrew 9:11-14
Gospel: Mark 10:32-45

April 21, 2013: St Ignatius Orthodox Church, Madison WI

Today we thank God for His mercy and love our out in the life of our sister

St Mary of Egypt (Orthodox icon) (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

St Mary of Egypt, a woman as extreme in her asceticism after her repentance as she was in her sin before her repentance.

In her Vita we discover that unlike others who lived the life she did before her repentance, Mary was not motivated by economic necessity. No what Mary did, she did not for monetary gain but because she took pleasure in wickedness. For Mary the degradation of others—even at cost to her own dignity—was the goal.

Understanding this helps us make sense of the Gospel appointed for the feast. Given Mary’s life we might have expected to hear the Gospel of the woman taken in sin (John 7:53-8:11), or maybe of the woman who washes Jesus feet with her tears (Luke 7:36-50), or possibly even of parable of the 10 virgins (Matthew 25:1-13). But instead of one of these, we hear about how the Apostles James and John try to exploit their intimacy with Jesus to gain an advantage in the life to come over the other Apostles.

As He often does, Jesus doesn’t directly respond to their question but instead ask James and John a series of His own questions. Can the brothers be baptized with His baptism? Can their drink from the chalice from which He will drink? When they say they can He tells them so be—they will suffer as He suffers, as He dies so they will die as well. But as for sitting at His right and left in the Kingdom of God, this has been reserved others not for them.

Hearing what James and John asked Jesus the other Apostles are so indignant that St Mark refers to them not as the “other Apostles” or the disciples but as “the Ten.” By their presumption James and John create a division, a schism even if I can dare to speak this way, among the Apostles. In their willingness to exploit for their own advantage their intimacy with Jesus, James and John sin against the unity of the Twelve.

This willingness to exploit the weakness of others for selfish gain is why we hear this Gospel as we commemorate St Mary of Egypt. Her sin was a sin against chastity, against that virtue that refuses to exploit for one’s own advantage the weakness of others. This is fundamentally different from competition in sports or business. Healthy competition doesn’t exploit others; rather their strength is an invitation for me to excel, to develop more fully the talents and gifts God has given me.

But Mary is not competitive but unchaste. Hearing of a pilgrimage to Jerusalem to venerate the True Cross, Mary goes along. But she goes not out of piety but to degrade the other pilgrims. Mary’s willingness to exploit others is so deeply rooted, so much a part of her character that she is willing even to twist the things of God and turn the noble sentiments of others against them.

While Mary is extreme in her sin, her sin it isn’t unique of her. We’ve already seen how the Apostles James and John were willing to trade on their intimacy with Jesus to gain an advantage over the other Apostles and how the Ten were equally willing to hold the brothers’ failure against them. We see similar behavior in families when withholding love and approval is used as a means of control. Or, in the workplace, an employer tries to force compliance from an employee through economic threats; or one worker seeks his own economic or social gain by undermining a colleague.

We even see this in the Church. How often do we find ourselves, if even fleetingly, judging our brother or sister based on outward expressions of piety? All of these (and more) are sins against chastity because all of these are modes exploitation, of twisting the moral or social or emotional or economic or physical or spiritual weakness of my neighbor for my own, selfish ends.

To cultivate the virtue of chastity I must first commit myself to NOT exploit my neighbor’s weakness. Even if I can’t bring myself to respond with understanding or compassion, chastity requires that I at least first do no harm.

Chastity is a virtue easily dismissed and so many in our culture do just that. This is all the more the case when we focus on its negative dimension; of not exploiting others in their weakness. But think for a moment what it would mean in the family, in the workplace, in the Public Square and yes, in the Church, if we had the confidence that others would NOT seek to harm us when we failed? Chastity as a social norm not only frees us from shame; it frees us from the fear, the anxiety and the insecurity that so frequently characterizes our relationships with one and other.

The freedom to express our weaknesses and our burdens to each other is the first step in learning to help each other carry the Cross of our Lord and God and Savior Jesus Christ. How can I hope in a few days time to venerate the “Wood of the Cross on which hung our salvation” if seeing you on your cross I respond with scorn and seek to shame you and exploit you for my own advantages. How can I venerate the Life-giving Cross if, like Mary, I take a perverse pleasure in degradation for degradation’s sake?

But chastity is more than not doing something; it is more than mere abstinence, of doing no harm.

Just as refusing to exploit my neighbor can foster in me respect for him for the strength required from him to carry his cross such respect is the precondition for love. Seen in this way, chastity is not simply a negative virtue; it is also positive and fruitful. My willingness to “first do no harm,” my willingness to respect my neighbor’s weakness, is an invitation to give myself over in love and so makes possible all the gifts that only love can bring us (1 Corinthians 13:1-13).

But we ought not to get ahead of ourselves.

For now, it is enough to simply commit ourselves to being chaste in small measure—it is enough that we refuse to exploit human weakness—our neighbors. Or even our own. How frequently do I excuse my own failings by saying, “I’m weak, I couldn’t help myself”? If we can do this, if we can hold our hand back from this common evil then as He did with St Mary of Egypt, with James and John and the Ten, God can take our chaste offering and make us saints worthy of that Name above every other name and live lives to His glory and for our own salvation.

In Christ,

+Fr Gregory

Rating: 0.0/10 (0 votes cast)

More on Humility

Fr Gregory Jensen — Thu, 18 Apr 2013 17:35:09 +0000

Jesus Christ is the standard of what it means to be fully and wholly human. And it is to Christ that we should look to understand what it means to be humble. Unfortunately, we tend to look at our own ideals about Jesus rather than at Him.

But look what St John Chrysostom says about the Jesus in his Paschal Homily:

He has destroyed death by undergoing death.
He has despoiled hell by descending into hell.
He vexed it even as it tasted of His flesh.
Isaiah foretold this when he cried:
Hell was filled with bitterness when it met Thee face to face below;
filled with bitterness, for it was brought to nothing;
filled with bitterness, for it was mocked;
filled with bitterness, for it was overthrown;
filled with bitterness, for it was put in chains.
Hell received a body, and encountered God.

It received earth, and confronted heaven.
O death, where is your sting?
O hell, where is your victory?

Look at the lines towards the end of the quote “Hell received a body and encountered God.//It received earth and confronted heaven.” Far from being weak or a door mat, Jesus is subtle, clever even. And He uses His ingenuity not simply to liberate us from the power of sin and death. No, He “destroyed death” and “despoiled hell.” Hell is made bitter, “brought to nothing; … mocked; … overthrown; … put in chains.” The humility of Jesus is anything but passive; divine humility is strong because it reflects God’s love for us.

Humility makes me strong because it frees me from myself and makes me eager to give myself away on love for the sake of your sake. And this it does not by stripping me of self-worth but by showing me my value in the eyes of God.

In Christ,

+Fr Gregory

Rating: 0.0/10 (0 votes cast)

Degradation and Humility Are Not the Same

Fr Gregory Jensen — Thu, 18 Apr 2013 15:14:19 +0000

From Dom Mark Daniel Kirby, Conventual Prior of Silverstream Priory in Stamullen, County Meath, Ireland, has a good word about humility:

Sacrament of the Divine Humility
Mother Mectilde speaks often of the anéantissement, the ennothingment of the Son of God in the Most Holy Sacrament of the Altar. The Eucharist is the sacrament of the divine humility. It is the descent to the altar of the Word made flesh, the crucified Word, the glorious Word, risen and ascended into heaven. There, upon the altar, the substance of a little piece of bread becomes the very substance of the Body and Blood of Christ, leaving only the appearance of bread to serve as veil concealing the awful Mystery.

Raised Up by Grace
There is no fall from grace, no fall into disgrace, no descent into the vile gutters of sin that cannot be reversed by the humility of the Son of God adored, received sacramentally, and appropriated to oneself. It is by the humility of His Son — in His passion and in the sacramental state of lowliness assumed for our sakes in the Most Holy Eucharist — that every soul fallen low into sin can raised up by grace, and restored to communion with the Father in the Holy Ghost.

Read the rest here.

During the fifth week of the Great Fast, the Orthodox Church commemorates the life of St Mary of Egypt during the reading of the Great Canon of St Andrew at Compline. According to her vita, Mary engaged in immoral behavior for neither sensual pleasure or love of money. Her motivation was in wickedness for its own sake, her delight in degradation for the sake of degradation. In this see is the antithesis of what we see in Jesus Christ Who in the words of St Paul, humbles Himself to the point of death on the Cross in order that He might raise us up to new life (see Philippians 2).

There is nothing good about degradation, there is nothing good about humiliation and yet God can in His mercy draw goodness from these for us.

Where we often go wrong is imagining that because God can bring a situation to a good end that the situation itself is good. Nothing could be further from the truth however. To make this mistake is to set your foot on the path to perversion, a word that means to subvert or overturn. In the current case what is subverted is our moral sense, our sense of what a wholesome human means concretely. Yes, it is a good and noble thing to bear patiently with injustice. But the goodness is found in the patient endurance not the injustice.

Moral confusion here is especially damaging in our responsibility to care for others in the weakness. What is laudable (at least potentially) in my personal life is a grievous even deadly, moral failure when it fosters in me passivity and timidity when I see others being mistreated.

in Christ,

+Fr Gregory

Rating: 0.0/10 (0 votes cast)

Koinonia

Seeking the Kingdom: Comparing Two Translations of a Kontakion

What is Marriage?

Related articles

Property Rights in Orthodox Social Teaching

Related articles

Building Bridges Between Orthodox and Catholic Christians

The Paschal Message of His Beatitude, Metropolitan Tikhon

An appeal to President Obama…

Letter to Secretary of State John Kerry

The Virtue of Chastity

More on Humility

Degradation and Humility Are Not the Same