ORTHODOXY IN THE 21st CENTURY: THE LIMITS OF ECUMENISM

ORTHODOXY IN THE 21st CENTURY: THE LIMITS OF ECUMENISM

Excerpt:

Dialogue is an important part of maintaining civil and appropriate relationships. Our Orthodox Christian faith gives us a capacity to enter into a conversation on the spiritual life with virtually anyone who is a seeker. We should all desire to see peaceful and respectful relationships among all groups of human beings. There are, however, necessary boundaries to the relationships we are trying to establish. Boundaries reflect a centre and are themselves part of our capacity to speak and care for each other while recognising who ourselves we really are. Or, to use an ancient adage, chastity is not a condition of withdrawal but a recognition of our limitations and thus a part of our capacity to respond to others in deeply human ways free of the fantasy that each of us is capable of everything. Ecumenism is an area in which proper boundaries have become blurred. Orthodox communities need to reassess the boundaries of participation without withdrawing from dialogue and confessing the Sacred Tradition and liturgical worship.

Painting: A Metaphor for Repentance

I had an unexpected thought recently that I thought I would share. I hope it may be profitable, though I fear it may be simplistic or even silly. Forgive me.

I have been working recently on refinishing the exterior trim of our front doorway. As I live in a house that is over ninety years old, one can imagine that this might be quite the undertaking - or, at least, not just a weekend job for someone like me.

As I was burning and scraping and sanding away layer upon layer of old paint, the thought occurred to me that this process is not unlike that of repentance and theosis. So how did I get from painting to theosis? I'll try to explain.

In all honesty, this struck me at a point when I was very frustrated with the work I was doing. There were so many layers of old paint, and with the different edges in the relief of the wood trim and mouding, it was so hard to get all of it off. And, in fact, in the process, I would gouge out chunks of perfectly good wood, or otherwise mar the wood that had been fine for nearly a century until I came along to "fix" things. So, here I was with a section of trim with patches of paint left or with gouges in the wood, and I thought to myself, "This is a lot like repentance."

You see, it occurred to me that a project like this was full of analogies of the spiritual life. For instance, the sheer decision that this old, peeling paint finally needed to be dealt with, and then starting the process of stripping away the old paint, was like realizing one's sinfulness, confessing and beginning the way of repentance.

It was not until I really got into the project, though, that I started to see other similarities. For example, as I mentioned above, in the process of trying to remove all the old paint, I would inadvertently damage the otherwise pristine wood. How frustrating! But aren't we like this in our own spiritual lives? Do we sometimes use the wrong tool to try and scrape away our sinful habits? Do we sometimes get over-eager and, even if we do manage to remove what we were after, go too far and create a divot where there was not one before? In other words, we have gone in with the intention of removing the sin, but in doing so, we, being inexperienced or otherwise incapable, can sometimes do more harm than good. This is obviously counterproductive. When we make these gouges, we then have to spend the time to fill them (not to mention to wait for the putty to dry, then sand it to make it indistinguishable once painted). Even this can be a source of frustration. If we use the wrong type of sandpaper, we may leave gouge marks in the dried putty, which, when painted, reveal the imperfection of our work.

I took this thought further. I said to myself: "Look at all these little crevices and corners where old paint is stubbornly holding its ground. The patience required to do a perfect job here is beyond me." This thought made me think of the great Saints of our Faith, and some of our recent and contemporary Elders, who, with patience but great fervor, were able to get into these crevices and reveal the perfect image. And so it showed me what an imperfect, lazy person I am. I thought "Here I am, willing to leave these imperfections in my work, only to save myself the effort. If I really wanted to, I could make this perfect." And then I thought, "How much my own soul is like this old wood: sins caked on like old paint in some places, and even rotted out in others. And here I come to save myself and end up causing more damage than before."

There is a saying that he who has only himself as a teacher has a fool for a teacher. I would say also: he who has himself as a painter has a fool for a painter. In other words, in order to save money, and thinking I had the requisite skills to do this project on my own, I avoided calling in a professional. We all do this with our spiritual lives. We come across problems we think we can handle on our own, when in reality, we need "professional" help. A good spiritual father will be able to make child's play of the molehills we make into mountains - or the mountains we make into molehills, as the case may be. Of course, the spiritual father does not do the work for us, but we work with him (really, he shows us how to work with Christ) to get the job done.

I had a final thought that, even once I was done with the scraping, and then the patching and the sanding, this wood was not the beautiful, prototypical piece of wood it was when it was originally installed. If I did a good enough job of scraping and patching, once the new coat of paint was on, then maybe it would look convincingly unscathed. But I would know what was under that paint. Is it not like this with our sins? Even upon repentance, don't we still know what scars we have inflicted on our souls? Like the divine David says: "For I know my iniquity, and my sin is ever before me." We believe, of course, that with true repentance, when we confess our sins and live a God-fearing life, that our sins are forgiven us (as St. John Chysostom put it, Christ doesn't simply erase our sins - He shreds the document!), no matter what we have done. But it is impossible to think that we truly confess everything. Thus, over the course of our lifetime, that prototypical image we are formed in - that new and radiant soul, illumined perfectly in Holy Baptism - is marred and tarnished, even if we have been diligent in trying to tend to it. But it is our hope and our faith that our God is a loving and merciful God, and that He is the knower of hearts, and we will be judged accordingly. He is the Physician of our souls and bodies. I might not be able to make that old wood as perfect as it was years ago, but Christ can (with God, all things are possible). As some of our hymns phrase it, Christ has risen the image that had fallen aforetime.

And so, that is how I went from painting to theosis. As St. Athanasios famously wrote: "God became man so that man could become God." Of course, we will not become divine by nature, but by grace. Likewise, that ninety-year-old wood trim that I refinished will never be, by nature, that full and perfect piece of wood that it was ninety years ago - but I can do a decent job of making it look perfect.

We must continually ask God to be gracious unto us sinners, that we might see and know and do His will, and we ask Him to visit and heal our infirmities for His name's sake. Our hope is that, when He sees us trying our best to get those little hidden patches of sin from the corners of our soul with persistence and faith, He will step in to help us finish the job, or, at least, will find our effort pleasing in the end.

Lord, have mercy.

Fr. George Florovsky on St. Gregory Palamas

Link to the full article is at the end.

[T]he whole teaching of S. Gregory presupposes the action of the Personal God. God moves toward man and embraces him by His own 'grace' and action, without leaving that φως απρόσιτον, in which He eternally abides. The ultimate purpose of S. Gregory's theological teaching was to defend the reality of Christian experience. Salvation is more than forgiveness. It is a genuine renewal of man. And this renewal is effected not by the discharge, or release of certain natural energies implied in man's own creaturely being, but by the 'energies' of God Himself, who thereby encounters and encompasses man, and admits him into communion 'with Himself. In fact; the teaching of S. Gregory affects the whole system theology; the whole body of Christian doctrine. It starts with the clear distinction between 'nature' and 'will' of God. This distinction was also characteristic of the Eastern tradition, at least since S. Athanasius. It may be asked at this point: Is this distinction compatible with the 'simplicity' of God? Should we not rather regard all these distinctions as merely logical conjectures, necessary for us, but ultimately without any ontological significance? As a matter of fact, S. Gregory Palamas was attacked by his opponents precisely from that point of view. God's Being is simple, and in Him even all attributes coincide. Already S. Augustine diverged at this point from the Eastern tradition. Under Augustinian presuppositions the teaching of S. Gregory is unacceptable and absurd. S. Gregory himself anticipated the width of implications of his basic distinction. If one does not accept it, he argued, then it would be impossible to discern clearly between the 'generation' of the Son and 'creation' of the world, both being the acts of substance, and this would lead to utter confusion in the Trinitarian doctrine. S. Gregory was quite formal at that point.

'If according to the delirious opponents and those who agree with them, the Divine energy in no way differs from the Divine essence, then the act of creating, which belongs to the will, will in no way differ from generation (γεννάν) and procession (εκπορεύειν), which belong to the essence. If to create is no different from generation and procession, then the creatures will in no way differ from the Begotten (γεννήματος) and the Projected (προβλήματος). If such is the case according to them, then both the Son of God and the Holy Spirit will be no different from creatures, and the creatures will all be both the begotten (γεννήματα) and the projected (προβλήματα) of God the Father, and creation will be deified and God will be arrayed with the creatures. For this reason the venerable Cyril, showing the difference between God's essence and energy, says that to generate belongs to the Divine nature, whereas to create belongs to His Divine energy. This he shows clearly saying, "nature and energy are not the same". If the Divine essence in no way differs from the Divine energy, then to beget (γεννάν) and to project (εκπορεύειν) will in no way differ from creating (ποιείν), God the Father creates by the Son and in the Holy Spirit. Thus He also begets and projects by the Son and in the Holy Spirit, according to the opinion of the opponents and those who agree with them.' (Capita 96 and 97.)


S. Gregory quotes S. Cyril of Alexandria. But S. Cyril at this point was simply repeating S. Athanasius. S. Athanasius, in his refutation of Arianism, formally stressed the ultimate difference between ουσία (or φύσις), on the one hand, and the βούλησις on the other. God exists, and then He also acts. There is a certain 'necessity' in the Divine Being, indeed not a necessity of compulsion, and no fatum, but a necessity of being itself. God simply is what He is. But God's will is eminently free. He in no sense is necessitated to do what He does. Thus γέννησις is always κατα φύσιν, but creation is a βουλήσεως έργον (Contra Arianos III. 64-6). These two dimensions, that of being and that of acting, are different, and must be clearly distinguished. Of course, this distinction in no way compromises the 'Divine simplicity'. Yet, it is a real distinction, and not just a logical device. S. Gregory was fully aware of the crucial importance of this distinction. At this point he was a true successor of the great Athanasius and of the Cappadocian hierarchs.

Read the entire article.

St. John of Damascus on the Trisagion Hymn

It is fitting that this post follows the earlier post I made regarding Monophysitism. However, it is not so much that which I thought of while reading St. John. Rather, what stood out to me - and that which was my initial reason for posting this - was his account of the origins of this hymn (see the final paragraph).

Recently, I visited a Coptic church (they were having an Egyptian festival), and was shown around their church by a kind and knowledgeable member of their community (who, it turns out, was my Physics professor in college years ago). He was showing me their service book, to point out the similarities in the Coptic alphabet and text with that of the Greek. He pointed to the Trisagion hymn as something I might recognize, and I was taken aback by the additions to the hymn, which, as is pointed out in the following excerpt, was a notable point of contention as regarded the Monophysite controversy. This further underscores the question I have as regards the statements by our Patriarch, that it is not theological, but ecclesiastical differences that separate our two confessions. Given what St. John writes on the matter, this is more than a simple liturgical embellishment. Rather, it is a manifestation of a different concept of who Christ is, and, thus is a theological difference.

We declare that the addition which the vain-minded Peter the Fuller made to the Trisagion (Thrice-Holy) Hymn is blasphemous; for it introduces a fourth person to the Trinity, giving a separate place to the Son of God, Who is the truly subsisting power of the Father, and a separate place to Him Who was crucified as though He were different from the "Mighty One," or as though the Holy Trinity was considered passible, and the Father and the Holy Spirit suffered on the Cross along with the Son. Have done with this blasphemous and nonsensical interpolation! For we hold the words "Holy God" to refer to the Father, without limiting the title of divinity to Him alone, but acknowledging also as God the Son and the Holy Spirit: and the words "Holy Mighty" we ascribe to the Son, without stripping the Father and the Holy Spirit of might: and the words "Holy Immortal" we attribute to the Holy Spirit, without depriving the Father and the Son of immortality. For, indeed, we apply all the divine names simply and unconditionally to each of the subsistences in imitation of the divine Apostle's words: "But to us there is but one God, the Father, of Whom are all things, and we in Him: and one Lord Jesus Christ by Whom are all things, and we by Him." And, nevertheless, we follow Gregory the Theologian when he says, "But to us there is but one God, the Father, of Whom are all things, and one Lord Jesus Christ, through Whom are all things, and one Holy Spirit, in Whom are all things:" for the words "of Whom" and "through Whom" and "in Whom" do not divide the natures (for neither the prepositions nor the order of the names could ever be changed), but they characterize the properties of one unconfused nature. And this becomes clear from the fact that they are once more gathered into one, if only one reads with care these words of the same Apostle, "Of Him and through Him and in Him are all things: to Him be the glory for ever and ever. Amen."

For that the Trisagion refers not to the Son alone, but to the Holy Trinity, the divine and saintly Athanasios and Basil and Gregory, and all the band of the divinely-inspired Fathers bear witness: because, as a matter of fact, by the threefold holiness the Holy Seraphim suggest to us the three subsistences of the superessential Godhead. But by the Lordship they denote the one essence and dominion of the supremely-divine Trinity. Gregory the Theologian of a truth says, "Thus, then, the Holy of Holies, which is completely veiled by the Seraphim, and is glorified with three consecrations, meet together in one lordhship and one divinity." This was the most beautiful and sublime philosophy of still another of our predecessors.

Ecclesiastical historians, then, say that once when the people of Constantinople were offering prayers to God to avert a threatened calamity, during Proclus' tenure of the office of Archbishop, it happened that a boy was snatched up from among the people, and was taught by angelic teachers the Thrice-Holy Hymn, "Thou Holy God, Holy Mighty One, Holy Immortal One, have mercy upon us:" and when once more he was restored to earth, he told what he had learned, and all the people sang the Hymn, and so the threatened calamity was averted. And in the fourth holy and great Ecumenical Council, I mean the one at Chalcedon, we are told that it was in this form that the Hymn was sung; for the minutes of this holy assembly so record it. It is, therefore, a matter for laughter and ridicule that this Thrice-Holy Hymn, taught us by the angels, and confirmed by the averting of calamity, ratified and established by so great an assembly of the Holy Fathers, and sung first by the Seraphim as a declaration of the three subsistences of the Godhead, should be mangled and forsooth emended to suit the view of the stupid Fuller as though he were higher than the Seraphim. But oh! the arrogance! not to say folly! But we say it thus, though demons should rend us in pieces, "Do Thou, Holy God, Holy Mighty One, Holy Immortal One, have mercy upon us."

St. John of Damascus Exposistion of the Orthodox Faith Book 3, Chapter 10

Using God's Gifts

The following is a lesson for my 11th-12th Grade religious education class at our church.  It’s a copy-and-paste…it’s meant as a read-and-discuss type lesson, so if it isn’t composed as well as it should be, my apologies! I figured it would be a decent blog post:

We'll look at discerning what gifts God has given us, with a bit of inspiration from St. Paul, St. John Chrysostom, and Sts. Cosmas and Damian the Unmercenaries.

As Orthodox Christians, we should realize that the life we have is a precious gift to us from God.  What does it mean to have "life"? Certainly, it means to have a body and to exist as a biological creature. But we all know that our life is more than just a biological existence; we are not mere animals. As humans, we are created in God's image and likeness, and we have a special place in God's created order, as stewards of creation. This means that we are here to take care of creation, which belongs to God - not to us.

Thus we see, even from the beginning of our creation, we have been given by God a specific role. What does it mean to be a steward of creation? Quite simply, it means going about our daily lives, doing the things it takes to live - whether we are children or parents, students or teachers, consumers or producers - and thus to do the work assigned to us by God.

There are literally billions of human beings on our planet.  Where do we fit in to this crowd? What is our specific role as a steward?

It should be readily apparent to us that our existence on this planet and the stewardship of creation requires a multitude of roles. For example, if everyone was, say, a banker, we would all quickly starve.  There are so many facets to human life, and an equal number of needs to be met.

If I am hungry, I need food.  I am not particularly good at farming, so I purchase food from a farmer.  The farmer is good at farming, but he is not good at financial matters, so he hires an accountant.  The accountant is good at counting money, but she is not so great at making calculators, so she buys one. The person who makes the calculators does not know how to fix a broken axle on the delivery truck, so they hire a mechanic, to get the shipment of calculators where it needs to go.  And so we could go on endlessly to demonstrate the multitude of needs people have and roles we play in society.

While these types of things are illustrative of the ins and outs of daily life, stewardship means more than simply surviving from one task to the next. Ultimately our task is to glorify God, and we can - and must strive - to glorify Him in everything that we do.  If we do not, we are not living in a manner that is true to our Faith as Christians.

When we talk about our existence in the world, as Christians, the proper way to understand ourselves is as members of the Church - the Body of Christ.  We must operate together and in harmony - always with Christ as our Head, and following His direction.  If I play soccer, and in the middle of the game, my mind tells my foot to kick the ball, but instead I reach out and strike it with my hand, not only is my body not following the direction of my mind, but I've incurred a penalty that affects my team and the whole game.  It is like this with the Church.  We must try to be good "feet" and "hands" of Christ, and do what we are supposed to do.  St. Paul talks about this in today's Epistle reading - let's see what he has to say:

St. Paul
First Letter to the Corinthians (12:27-31; 13:1-8)

Brethren, you are the body of Christ and individually members of it. And God has appointed in the church first apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then workers of miracles, then healers, helpers, administrators, speakers in various kinds of tongues. Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Do all work miracles? Do all possess gifts of healing? Do all speak with tongues? Do all interpret? But earnestly desire the higher gifts. And I will show you a still more excellent way. If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal. And if I have prophetic powers, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing. If I give away all I have, and if I deliver my body to be burned, but have not love, I gain nothing. Love is patient and kind; love is not jealous or boastful; it is not arrogant or rude. Love does not insist on its own way; it is not irritable or resentful; it does not rejoice at wrong but rejoices in the right. Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things. Love never ends.

So we see that St. Paul talks about our unity as members of the Body of Christ, and how God has appointed us with certain gifts.  These gifts are recognized to their fullest ability in the Church, but they apply outside of the Church as well.  (It is important to say here that we should never, ever, think that Church is separate from the rest of our lives.  Our Faith must permeate everything that we do!) In our daily activity, we must utilize the gifts given to us by God in ways appropriate to our task.  But does St. Paul merely talk about what roles we are to play? No, he shows us a "still more excellent way": Love.  His point? Anything we find ourselves doing - from being an apostle to a being a healer, or from being a janitor to being the President of the United States - must be done with Love for God and love for our fellow man.

Preaching and writing a few centuries later, St. John Chrysostom - who loved St. Paul dearly - says this about finding out what it is that God wants us to do or be (be attentive to how this ties in with what we just read from St. Paul):

St. John Chrysostom

God has created all people spiritually equal. Every person has the same propensity for good and evil. Every person has the same choice, as to whether to obey God or to defy Him. Yet in other ways, we are very unequal. Some people are highly intelligent, while others have feeble intellects. Some people are physically strong and healthy, while others are weak and prone to illness. Some people are handsome and attractive while others are plain. Those who are gifted in some way should not despise those less gifted. On the contrary, God has distributed gifts and blessings in such a way that every person has a particular place and purpose within a society--and thus everyone is equally necessary for a society to function well. So, do not resent the fact that someone is more intelligent or stronger than you are. Instead, give thanks for their intelligence and strength, from which you benefit. And then ask yourself, "What is my gift, and thence what is my place in society?" When you have answered this question, and you act according to your answer, all contempt and all resentment will melt away.

Do you see here what St. Paul meant earlier?  No matter what we find ourselves doing in life, we must perform our duties with Love - the love of God and the love of our neighbor, as we are commanded by Christ.  Everyone's role - whether in the Church or in society - has a value, and it is not our place to judge that value.  That is for God alone to decide.  Our focus must be on determining our own role and then acting on it.

So the question we might ask ourselves at this point might be: "What is my gift, and what is my place in society?" We certainly will not answer that question today! It is our own responsibility to be attentive to the things we seem to be gifted in - mathematics, writing, speaking, science, athletics, art, etc. - and then focus our prayers and energies on developing these gifts.  This is not always easy, and it may take years to develop - and sometimes with false starts.  But with our parents, our teachers, our peers, and our spiritual father, we will come to understand what gifts God has given us, and how we might apply them as good stewards of His creation, to His glory.

We'll finish here with a short account of the lives of Sts. Cosmas and Damian the Unmercenaries.  That they were unmercenary means they did their work for free.  As we read through this account of their lives, let us keep in mind the fact that they developed their God-given skill through a technical education, but also perfected it with attention to their spiritual lives, as well.  If we do our work without any aim to improving our spiritual health and our relationship with God, we ultimately will have worked in vain.

Sts. Cosmas and Damian the Unmercenaries
Commemorated on November 1

The Holy Wonderworkers and Unmercenary Physicians Cosmas and Damian and their mother St Theodota were natives of Asia Minor (some sources say Mesopotamia). Their pagan father died while they were still quite small children. Their mother raised them in Christian piety. Through her own example, and by reading holy books to them, St Theodota preserved her children in purity of life according to the command of the Lord, and Cosmas and Damian grew up into righteous and virtuous men. 

Trained and skilled as physicians, they received from the Holy Spirit the gift of healing people's illnesses of body and soul by the power of prayer. They even treated animals. With fervent love for both God and neighbor, they never took payment for their services. They strictly observed the command of our Lord Jesus Christ, "Freely have you received, freely give." (Mt. 10:8). The fame of Sts Cosmas and Damian spread throughout all the surrounding region, and people called them unmercenary physicians. 

Once, the saints were summoned to a grievously ill woman named Palladia, whom all the doctors had refused to treat because of her seemingly hopeless condition. Through faith and through the fervent prayer of the holy brothers, the Lord healed the deadly disease and Palladia got up from her bed perfectly healthy and giving praise to God. In gratitude for being healed and wishing to give them a small gift, Palladia went quietly to Damian. She presented him with three eggs and said, "Take this small gift in the Name of the Holy Life-Creating Trinity, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit." Hearing the Name of the Holy Trinity, the unmercenary one did not dare to refuse. 

When St Cosmas learned what had happened, became very sad, for he thought that his brother had broken their strict vow. On his deathbed he gave instructions that his brother should not be buried beside him. St Damian also died shortly afterward, and everyone wondered where St Damian's grave should be. But through the will of God a miracle occurred. A camel, which the saints had treated for its wildness, spoke with a human voice saying that they should have no doubts about whether to place Damian beside Cosmas, because Damian did not accept the eggs from the woman as payment, but out of respect for the Name of God. The venerable relics of the holy brothers were buried together at Thereman (Mesopotamia).

May the prayers of Sts. Cosmas and Damian be with you as you begin to discover God's gifts, and may you successfully apply them according to His will!

His All-Holiness Bartholomew on Orthodox & Oriental Church Relations

This is an excerpt from the Patriarch's remarks, made at the Vesperal United Nations Prayer Service on Monday, October 26, 2009 at Holy Trinity Greek Orthodox Archdiocesan Cathedral in New York:

The theological dialogue between our two Christian families - that is, the Orthodox Church and the sister ancient Oriental Churches - has formally ended the misunderstandings of the past. It is not theology that divides us. Rather, we are united in our commitment to address the pastoral, liturgical, and ecclesiastical issues on which we may ever build our unity in Christ more and more. The dialogue must continue, and we must continue to seek opportunities for mutual exchange. As our knowledge grows, our love will grow as well.

Therefore, in the hope that love brings to all, we express once again our blessing and Patriarchal benediction to all who have gathered here this evening. May the Triune God abundantly shower upon you all His saving grace and infinite mercy. Amen.

On the surface, of course, this sounds positive and promising. For another look at this issue, from the more "traditional" standpoint of Orthodoxy (the one that has maintained that the Oriental Churches are and have been in heresy for the past 1500 years, and that this is not something that can just be written off as a misunderstanding about theological terms or political factors), see here: http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/ecumenism/ea_mono.aspx .

This seems like a rather important statement to be making, as it essentially overturns (in spirit) the fourth Ecumenical Council of Chalcedon in 451, which clearly marked boundaries concerning the Orthodox Church's beliefs about who Christ is. The non-Chalcedonians were the ones whose idea of Christology fell outside of those boundaries, hence the cutting off from the body of the Orthodox Church.

St. Cyril of Alexandria taught, among other things, the Virgin Mary is Theotokos (Mother of God) and not simply Christotokos (Mother of the Christ). When we speak about the nature of Christ, we absolutely must consider this a theological discussion. If the Orthodox Church and non-Chalcedonians have, for over 1500 years, been out of communion because of different concepts of who Christ is, how can His All-Holiness say that "it is not theology that divides us?"

I admit ignorance in the subject matter. Perhaps someone can better educate me. I mainly wanted to make this quote and an alternate viewpoint available in one place.

New Link Addition

I'm adding a new link to the "Chanting Links" section.

Fr. Ephraim (the "junior") at St. Anthony's Monastery in Arizona now has a Scribd account, where he is publishing the work the monastery is doing as a part of The Divine Music Project. While you can access much of this information already on their website, the Scribd format makes it easier to browse different works.

Dogmatic Theotokion - First Tone

The universal glory born of men, who hath given birth unto the Master, the heavenly gate: let us praise Mary the Virgin, the song of the bodiless hosts, and the adornment of the faithful. For she was shown to be a Heaven and a temple of the Godhead; destroying the middle wall of enmity, she ushered in peace and opened the Kingdom. Possessing, therefore, this anchor of faith, we have as champion the Lord who was born of her. Take courage, therefore, take courage, O ye people of God; for He shall fight thine enemies, since he is the Almighty One.

HTM Translation

Fr. John Romanides on the Therapeutic Nature of Orthodoxy

Some people are convinced that sacred tradition is guarded by episcopal synods. But contemporary synods in the Orthodox Church are not like the local or ecumenical councils of bishops in the age of the early Christians, because the early councils were composed of bishops who had mastered the Church’s therapeutic method. Their aim in coming together as a council was not merely to safeguard the Church’s doctrine and liturgical order, as is the case today. No, their aim was to preserve and protect the Church’s therapeutic method. So a proper bishop is a master of the therapeutic method of the Church. During those early years, the work of a bishops’ synod was absolutely vital, more so than today. Their task was to preserve and protect the Church’s therapeutic method and curative treatment.

But when the bishops’ synod would safeguard this method, they would struggle along two fronts. The inner front involved taking care to safeguard sound ascetic culture and practices within the Church. The outer front consisted in safeguarding doctrinal teachings for the cure of the soul. Another aspect of the inner front was protecting dogmas from heresies, which always have their source in people who have not mastered the proper therapeutic method. Whenever an innovation appears within the Church, it always means, from the very moment it appears, that the person introducing the innovation not only fails to view doctrine properly, but he also fails to be in a healthy spiritual state.

Some of the greatest Fathers of the Church were systematizers who situated their understanding of doctrine in the context of the therapeutic method. The include St. John of Damascus, St. Maximos the Confessor, St. Symeon the New Theologian, and St. Dionysius the Areopagite, among others. We should also mention the disciples of St. Gregory Palamas. Moreover, we also find all these basic principles present and organized in the works of St. Ignatios the God-bearer, because this is an unbroken tradition dating back to the first century. The same basic principles are also present throughout St. Paul's epistles, as well as throughout the entire Old and New Testaments. If we have the proper criteria, we can discover the presence of these basic principles and locate them in texts that contain them.

St. Makarios of Egypt carefully explains these issues by setting forth a coherent body of principles. He claims that Christians who do not have noetic prayer are not intrinsically different from believers in other religions. The only factor that makes such Christians different from believers of other religions is that these Christians intellectually believe in Christ and merely accept Christian doctrine, while the believers in other religions do not accept Christian doctrine. But such Christians do not gain anything from this kind of intellectual faith, because it does not heal them or purify their hearts from the passions. In terms of healing the human personality, they remain without benefit and with behavior that does not differ from that of non-Christians. This can be seen in their way of life.

Consider an Orthodox Christian whose soul is sick, but who not only fails to struggle to be healed, but does not even imagine that the Church has an effective therapeutic strategy for curing his sickness. What is the difference between such a nominal Orthodox Christian and a Muslim, for example? Does doctrine make him different? But what good is doctrine when it is not used as a pathway towards healing? What good is doctrine when it is merely kept hung up in the closet so that it can be worshiped? In other words, what is the point of worshiping the letter of the law and ignoring the spirit, hidden within the letter?

- Fr. John Romanides Patristic Theology (Lecture 58, On Councils)

Photios Kontoglou on Music in the Orthodox Church

The following is by Photios Kontoglou (1895-1965), included as an Epilogue to The Divine Music Project at St. Anthony's Monastery of Arizona:

Music is of two kinds (as are the other arts also)—secular and ecclesiastical. Each of these has been developed by different feelings and different states of the soul. Secular music expresses worldly (i.e., carnal) feelings and desires. Although these feelings may be very refined (romantic, sentimental, idealistic, etc.), they do not cease being carnal. Nevertheless, many people believe that these feelings are spiritual. However, spiritual feelings are expressed only by ecclesiastical music. Only ecclesiastical music can truly express the secret movements of the heart, which are entirely different from those inspired and developed by secular music. That is, it expresses contrition, humility, suffering and godly grief, which, as Paul says, "worketh repentance to salvation." Ecclesiastical music can also evoke feelings of praise, thanksgiving, and holy enthusiasm. Secular music, on the other hand—even the purest—expresses carnal emotions, even when it is inspired by suffering and affliction. This type of suffering, Paul calls "worldly grief," which "worketh death."

Thus two kinds of music were formed, the secular, which arouses emotion—any kind of emotion—and ecclesiastical music, which evokes contrition. St. John Chrysostom strongly condemns the attempts that were made by some of his contemporaries to introduce into the Church secular music, the music of the theatre and the mimes.

Only the arts which were developed by devout motives since the early years of Christianity have given expression to the spiritual essence of the religion. These alone can be called liturgical, that is, spiritual, in the sense that religion gives to the term spiritual. The "spiritual odes" of which Paul speaks were works of such art. All the liturgical arts express the same thing: architecture, hymnody, iconography, embroidery, and even writing, the manner of walking, and in general the movements and gestures of the priests, the chiming of the bells, and so forth.

That these arts are truly of unique spirituality has been realized by many non-Orthodox, especially clergymen, whose sense-organs have been exposed, from youth on, to formative influences different from those in which Orthodox Christians have been brought up. Nevertheless, they confess that our icons and psalmody evoke in them contrition—of course, when executed by inspired and pious artists.

Thus, the value of the liturgical arts is not merely conventional, but real, extending beyond the limited conceptions that are due to nurture, habit, and taste, since even persons who are not of the Orthodox faith recognize that the arts of the Orthodox Church reflect the spirit of the Gospels and for this reason lift the soul above the earthly realm. And how could it be otherwise, inasmuch as these arts have been developed by sanctified hearts, which felt deeply the liturgical element in speech and music? Liturgical music is the natural musical garb of liturgical speech. Both sprang up together; they are one and the same thing. Essence and expression here have an absolute correspondence, even more exact than that of an object and its reflection in a mirror, for the objects of which we speak here belong to the spiritual realm. The profound and apocalyptic spirit of Christian religion and its mysteries could not be expressed faithfully and worthily except by these arts, which are called liturgical and spiritual, and which were developed by that same profound spirit. Only this music, and none other, uniquely expresses the spirit of our religion, because only this music has an absolute and most exact correspondence with it. This is testified to, I repeat, by certain men whose spiritual upbringing, religious training, phyletic and other heritage have no relation to that of the Orthodox. "The Spirit bloweth where it listeth," and is transmitted to souls by means of sounds which the same Spirit formed, by illuminating the souls of the holy writers of hymns.

The Fathers of the Church ordained that Christians use the voice alone in execution of hymns, chanting as did our Lord Himself and His disciples. St. John Chrysostom says: "Our Savior chanted hymns just as we do." The Apostolic Constitutions forbid the use of musical instruments in the church. From the time of the Apostles, psalmody was monophonic, or homophonic, as it is to this day in our churches [in Greece].

Click here to continue reading...