The Orthodox Word Archives

I just recently discovered the website of The Orthodox Word where you can read articles of past issues. If you do not subscribe to “The Orthodox Word” then you should. They always publish articles that have substance and that carry an Orthodox ethos. I am glad that they have put some older articles online. The following article by Hieromonk Damascene is just one example.

1. Why Preach the Gospel?

The theme of today’s conference, “Preaching the Gospel of Christ

in the Modern World,” is relevant to everyone here, not only to

those who are called to preach sermons from the ambo. Each of us is

called to preach the Gospel, first of all by bearing witness to it through

our lives, and secondly by making it available to others. This morning

I will talk about why we should preach the Gospel, about the prerequisites

for preaching the Gospel, and finally about how to bear witness to

it in our lives.

The Gospel, of course, is the sum of the message of the Christian

Faith, and especially the good news that Christ has saved mankind

from the eternal consequences of sin, that He has overcome the central

problem of the world—death, both bodily and spiritual—by means of

His Incarnation, Death, and Resurrection.

In approaching the subject of preaching the Gospel, the first

question that arises is: Why should we be preaching the Gospel of

Christ in our modern world?

Why, indeed, when the Protestants seem to be doing it much

better? They have evangelistic programs, crusades that fill stadiums,

mega-churches, television channels, Christian bookstores, a Christian

music industry, and all the money they could want. We Orthodox in

America are small by comparison. Why can’t we just concentrate on

our beautiful services and our social functions, and let the evangelicals

preach to the unchurched?

The answer to this question is that the Protestants, and the Roman

Catholics as well, do not preach the whole, complete, and unadulterated

Gospel of Christ. Only the Orthodox Church can do that,

because the Orthodox Church is the true Church that Christ founded,

and that has continued up to today in a continuous, unbroken line of

Holy Apostolic Tradition. This is the Church against which, as Christ

promised, the gates of hell shall not prevail (cf.Matt. 16:18). Right before

His Crucifixion, Christ told His disciples that the Holy Spirit

would come and lead them into all Truth. That promise was indeed

fulfilled after Christ’s Resurrection. But it did not cease to be fulfilled

after His Apostles reposed. Christ has continued to fulfill that promise

through two millennia of upheaval and tribulation; He continues doing

so even now, and He will continue until His Second Coming. During

our Church’s history, heretical emperors, priests, bishops, and even

patriarchs threatened to destroy the purity of the Orthodox Faith, but

through the guidance of the Holy Spirit the Church was preserved in

Truth, and the heresies were overcome.

The non-Orthodox Christian churches have preserved some of the

Truth of the original Christian Faith. But whatever they have that is

true—whether it be theHoly Scriptures, the dogma of theHoly Trinity,

or the dogma of Christ’s Incarnation—they have received from the original,

Apostolic Church, the Orthodox Church, whether they acknowledge

this or not. But, again, they possess only some of the Truth, and

the rest they have distorted because they are separated from the true

Church that Christ founded. Only the Orthodox Church is the repository

of the pristine Gospel and the undistorted image of Christ. Read More

What is Orthodoxy?

In order to answer this question, another must first  of all be asked. It is the same question which Our Lord Jesus Christ Himself asked His disciples. It is the most important question that has ever been asked.

“What think ye of Christ? Whose son is He?” (Mt. 22:42) ‘Who do men say that I am?” (Mt. 16:13) This is the question which must be answered in order to know what Orthodox is.

St. Peter answered the question rightly when he replied, “Thou art the Christ, the Son of the Living God,” Mt. 16:16, for then Jesus declared that this truth had been revealed to Peter, not by men, but by the heavenly Father.

Christ’s whole Life and the body of His teachings answered this question for all people and for all times. Who Christ is, and what His mission is, was the truth that he conveyed to His Apostles. The Apostles in turn preserved this teaching intact. Without adding or subtracting, without emphasizing one part of it over another, they passed it on to the next generation in the Church. Even unto the present time, the Church has preserved this truth down through the centuries.

The reason the Church has labored from the beginning to combat errors and to give the doctrine of Christ to every generation in all its purity is because Orthodoxy is, more than anything else, the right doctrine about Christ.All of this effort has been made because Christ’s teachings about himself are necessary for the salvation of man and the world.

It is the concern of the Apostles and of the Fathers of the Councils that Christ’s teaching about Himself be kept untarnished. Thus, the Scriptures were written, the Creed was composed, and the definitions were given in order that this might be so. The Church when referring to the Scriptures, or to the councils and this creeds and definitions, declares “This is the Orthodox Faith”…..

As history and experience have shown, anything less than the whole truth about Christ ends up in utter confusion and the multiplication of the denominations. …..Most of them have been founded on some novel idea about the Lord Himself…..

Following the teaching of the Apostles and of the Fathers, there are many other things that need to be said and studied. All of the things that are so characteristic of our Church, the rites, the icons, the veneration of the Mother of God and of the Saints, have as their most important function the support of this very doctrine of Christ. Hence, those who would deny any one of these teachings and practices, in effect, deny one part or another of the doctrine of Christ.” -The Doctrine of Christ by Archbishop Dmitri

How do we expel darkness from our life?

With divine grace all things are possible. With divine grace the martyrs of Christ did not feel the pains  of their martyrdom. Employ this gentle method. Don’t struggle to expel darkness and evil. You achieve nothing by flailing at darkness. Are you in darkness and do you want to escape? Then what do you do? You assault darkness with all your might, but it doesn’t go away. Do you wish light? Open a little hole and a ray of sunlight will enter and light will come. Instead of expelling darkness and instead of fighting the enemy to prevent him from entering into you, open your arms to Christ’s embrace. This is the most perfect way. That is, don’t wage war on evil directly, but love Christ and His light, and evil will retreat.”- From Wounded By Love: The Life and the Wisdom of Elder Porphyrios

If you wish to save your soul…

“If you wish to save your soul and win eternal life, arise from your lethargy, make the sign of the cross and say: In the name of the Father, and the Son and of the Holy Ghost. Amen.

Faith comes not through pondering but through action. Not words and speculation but experience teaches us what God is. To let in fresh air we have to open a window; to get tanned we must go out into the sunshine. Achieving faith is no different; we never reach a goal by just sitting in comfort and waiting, say the holy Fathers. Let the prodigal Son be our example. He arose and came (Luke 15:20)”.Way of the Ascetics by Tito Colliander

Avoid External Obsessions

Keep a careful watch over yourself, and do not allow yourself to be swept away by external obsessions. The tumultuous movements of the soul, in particular, can be rendered quiet by stillness (hesychia). If, however, you keep encouraging and stimulating them, they will start to terrorize you, and can disorder your whole life. Once they are in control, it is as hard to heal them as it is to soothe a sore that we cannot stop scratching.

- Abba Philemon

Two Orthodox Blogs

I recently discovered another very good Orthodox blog by Aaron Taylor titled “Logismoi” that I highly recommend. I also want to mention a blog by Fr. Milovan Katanic titled “Again and Again” that is worth your time as well.

May the memory of His Holiness, Patriarch Aleksy II of Moscow and All Russia be eternal!

YOSSET, NY [OCA Communications] — The chancery of the Orthodox Church in America has received the following media release from the office of the Administrator of Patriarchal parishes in the U.S.A. concerning the repose of His Holiness, Patriarch Aleksy II of Moscow and All Russia.

“The office of the Administrator of Patriarchal parishes in the U.S.A sorrowfully informs you that this morning, Dec. 5, 2008, His Holiness Patriarch Alexy II of Moscow and All Russia, the Primate of the Russian Orthodox Church, fell asleep in the Lord in his residence in suburban Moscow.

“At 7 pm a solemn memorial service will be conducted by US Patriarchal Vicar, His Grace Bishop Mercurius of Zaraisk, at St. Nicholas Russian Orthodox Patriarchal Cathedral, located at 15 East 97 Street, NY, NY.”

The OCA chancery has also learned that a special session of the Holy Synod of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church will be convened in Moscow on Saturday, December 6, 2008, to appoint a Locum tenens of the Patriarchal Throne and to determine the time and place of the burial of His Holiness, Patriarch Aleksy. -From OCA.org

The Failure of Evangelical and Emergent Movements in Engaging American Culture

Here are some very good insights from Fr. Tobias at Second Terrace.

“I referred to the most telling example of naive fundamentalist politics in the post above: the Christian Right complains about abortion, the destruction of embryos, hyper-socialism, termination of the aged and disabled, and the chic redefinition of aberrant sexual proclivity as conferring “minority” status – these are all issues about which I wholeheartedly agree with my right-wing heterodox friends.

But they are not-so-strangely silent, in their insouciance, about encroaching totalitarianism, consumerism, war-as-aggrandizement, environmental rapine, and hyper-capitalism: these concerns are just as Biblical, and should be just as salient — even in such a restricted view that sola scriptura allows.

Even now you would be hard pressed to find a fundamentalist Christian who will ever say a critical word about capitalism, given their multi-generational catechism that defines the Beast as a red communist for sure. If you turn the radio dial (or the url-bar) enough, late at night, you can still hear the static of cheap polyester declaiming Gog and Magog at the Kremlin.

I suppose we must think of it as a gain that many “emergent” and neo-evangelical folk are becoming more consistently prophetic in their outlook. Nevertheless, it is difficult for them to experiment with these novel approaches and to remain rational, with all the attendant roller-coaster excitement of thinking new liberal thoughts that would make their elders blanch. I believe Frank Schaeffer documents this prurient experimentation pretty well.

But the difficulty inflicts itself right at the point of Natural Law, as you would expect. When the “neo” sort of evangelical churchpeople (can’t say “churchmen” anymore) break free from the confining fundamentalistic strait-jacket of their upbringing, they enthusiastically embrace environmentalism, civil rights, a semi-pacifism and a concern for the poor and the marginalized. Look, for example, at this recent “manifesto” from Os Guinness et al (of course it’s called a “manifesto”: there seems to be no other modern word for “confession”). Or, for another example, this “reflection” (as way, way opposed to that nasty word, “dogma”) from the emerging people.

But many of them find themselves so caught up in the enthusiasm of the Democrat boutique that they load their carts with other, less defensible, wares. Into the basket goes the embrace of the metrosexual re-edit of human nature, or — I suggest — “Release Anthropology 2.0.” You will find the likes of Tony Campolo and Brian MacLaren smack dab in this heady mix.

Also in the modern shopping basket is a tacit acquiescence to the new economy of fornication that seems to reign supreme nowadays. We shouldn’t be so surprised. The surfeit of foreplay splayed out on virtual reality monitors (some of the appliances are wetware like human cerebellum) almost commands sexual activity — and it matters little what sort of partner should be found as the object of this activity.

This new moral economy produces sexual activity at the earliest ages ever, surely hastening the constant advance of menarche. It also produces, or urges, serial “hookups” that precede marriage, all expressed in various forms, ranging from furtive gropings, oral agreements, to the full monty capulet-montague coupling.

In a 2007 government study on adolescent attitudes and behavior, evangelical teen-agers were found to be more sexually active than Mormons, mainline Protestants, and Jews. In the linked New Yorker article, there is the usual hackneyed complaint about evangelicals failing to ape the Anthropology 2.0 dogma that all should learn the art condom-ation. Nevertheless, there is that wretched truth that the evangelical love-affair with the TV Nation has wreaked gross hyper-sexualization in its younger members. (And, I should add before I get charged with smugness: the Orthodox population is no better.)

And this activity is enthusiastically (but silently) endorsed by church kids whose virginity is unlocked by latch-keys, and whose sexual emancipation is ratified by dual-income households pledged to the American Dream.

In other words, why can’t someone like Palin insist on the environment and the provision of a family wage, along with her well-known (and rightly lauded) opposition to abortion? On the other hand, why can’t Campolo insist on the male-ness of the priesthood and the male-and-femaleness of marriage, along with his well-known (and rightly lauded) critique of this present capitalistic war?

Why oh why is our stewardship of creation contingent upon inane arguments about global warming? Is it not enough that we are asked to fast and feast, to renounce avarice in favor of simplicity in beauty, to remember the names of animals and to tend the Garden? When was this responsibility abrogated? Since when has the Creation become a monster, a mother, a mine, an asset, a construct of google-earth? Since when have we forgotten brother sun and sister moon? And danced?”-On Complexity

Also read What this election has done by Fr. Tobias.

Teaching Prayer

“Among the subjects important for a Christian to learn, prayer is among the most difficult to teach. There are several reasons for this difficulty, I suppose, but perhaps the most serious is the problem of how to “model” prayer. Prayer is the one subject about which a Christian teacher cannot plainly and unequivocally say to the pupils, “Watch, and do like me.”

Even when the disciples asked Jesus, “Teach us to pray,” He responded by giving them a simple formula to recite (Luke 11:2-4). He did not tell them, “Well, later on this evening, when I go out into the desert to spend the night in prayer, why don’t you tag along and see how it’s done.”

Because prayer is so deeply personal, the most prayerful people in the Bible seem downright reluctant to discuss it. The Apostle Paul, for instance, who exhorts us four times to pray always (Romans 12:12; Ephesians 6:18; Colossians 4:2; 1 Thessalonians 5:17), gives us precious little idea how to go about it.

Moreover, Paul rarely speaks directly of his own prayer. He permits the veil to be lifted slightly on occasion, but normally only when he has some other point to make (for example, 2 Corinthians 12:1-10). Perhaps we best discern something of Paul’s life of prayer from the many times that he cites the Book of Psalms.

Paul’s reluctance to speak of his intimate prayer is consistent with the teaching of Jesus, who maintained such prayer should be concealed behind a closed door (Matthew 6:6). Thus, if we find Paul, or James, or John a bit circumspect of this topic, surely it is because they too were familiar with the temptation to make a display of their prayer. Jesus had solemnly warned of this danger (6:5).

Consequently, when Holy Scripture holds up “models” for our imitation in prayer, these are fictional characters, such as the persistent widow and the publican in the temple (Luke 18:1-14).

I render these reflections only in order to indicate how sensitive and ambiguous a thing it is to “model” prayer for others. Not for a minute do I question the need for personal models in the life of prayer. Like all other aspects of the life in Christ, it is imperative to learn from example. Normally, we must have models.

In the case of prayer, nonetheless, those serve best as our models who do not think of themselves as models. We are obliged to ferret them out, as it were, and force them—unwittingly—to disclose their secrets.

Such a one was Samuel’s mother, Hannah, whom many generations of Christians have taken as their model in the ways of prayer. According to Caesarius of Arles, for example, “our prayer must be such as we read of holy Hannah, the mother of Samuel,” and Gregory the Dialoguist inquired, “If that woman so wept who desired a son, how much should the soul weep who desires God?”

Both Chrysostom and Bede compared Hannah’s prayer at Shiloh to that of the publican in the temple. Rupert of Deutz, writing of Hannah’s perseverance in prayer, likened her to Mary of Bethany sitting at the feet of Christ. Haymo of Halberstadt spoke of her freedom from distraction in prayer. Going further, Paschasius Radbertus compared the prayer of Hannah to that of Jesus in the garden of agony.

Hannah’s patient endurance of the ridicule of Pennina caused several writers—including Chrysostom, Rhabanus Maurus, and Peter of Celles—to liken her to Job.

Hannah’s prayer, said Origen, was inspired by the Holy Spirit. Indeed, Gregory the Dialoguist and others compared her to the Apostles on the morning of Pentecost—in both cases their ecstasy in the Holy Spirit was mistaken for drunkenness!

Hannah prayed silently, wrote Clement of Alexandria, but God could read the thoughts of her heart. Didymus the Blind spoke of her “continuous meditation.”

Numerous writers drew attention to the similarities of Hannah’s canticle to that of the Mother of the Lord.

In the five sermons that he devoted to her, St. John Chrysostom repeatedly held up Hannah as the model of true philosophy—indeed, “the mother of philosophy”—and spoke of the patience and perseverance of her prayer. This woman, he proclaimed, is “our teacher in the ways of God.”- Fr. Patrick Reardon

Guarding the Heart

“Our holy fathers have renounced all other spiritual work and concentrated wholly on this one doing, that is, on guarding the heart, convinced that, through this practice, they would easily attain every other virtue, whereas without it not a single virtue can be firmly established.”
- St Symeon the New Theologian