Quote by Saint Justin Popovitch

"The Church is ecumenical, catholic, God-human, ageless, and it is therefore a blasphemy — an unpardonable blasphemy against Christ and against the Holy Spirit — to turn the Church into a national institution, to narrow her down to petty, transient, time-bound aspirations and ways of doing things. Her purpose is beyond nationality, ecumenical, all-embracing: to unite all men in Christ, all without exception to nation or race or social strata".

 

posted on facebook:

 

https://www.facebook.com/pages/All-Merciful-Saviour-Orthodox-Christian-Monastery/104578182913886

Abbot Tryphon - Angels Unawares

Angels Unawares

While sitting in a sidewalk cafe with my friend, Archpriest Basil Rhodes, having a cup of coffee and a bite to eat, we noticed a homeless man stop behind me. The man was staring at our food, so Father Basil asked him if he was hungry. He answered with an enthusiastic "yes", and when Father asked what he'd like to eat, he said "eggs and sausage". Father Basil told him they didn't have such a breakfast here, but gave him five dollars to buy it somewhere else.

...The whole time this conversation was taking place with this homeless man, another man, around thirty years of age, was standing nearby, listening to every word. As the homeless man walked away, the younger man walked up and confronted us with the question, "how could you give money to a junky? You are not doing him any good by giving him money. Aren't you men of God?"

I responded by saying that it was not our place to judge anyone, to which he replied, in a confrontational manner, "he's just going to buy drugs with that money. You don't seem to be very intuitive". I told him I'd worked with the homeless before, and that the man was hungry and deserving of our charity. The man said "cheers" and dismissively walked away.

A woman seated at a nearby table called over with the words, "good response". She then came over to our table, knelt down beside me, and with tears in her eyes, identified herself as a social worker, and told us she'd been going through a particularly difficult time, and that the interaction she'd just witnessed had helped her immensely.

I then told this woman the story of the time I was walking with an elderly bishop of the Russian Church, and how I had spotted a filthy homeless man walking towards us. This man's hair was disheveled, filthy with years of dirt, and was wearing torn clothing. He had no soles on his shoes, so with each step we could see the bottom of his feet. Instinctively, I took the elbow of the bishop, and attempted to get him to cross in the middle of the street. The bishop asked why, and I said, "Look at the crazy man coming towards us". The bishop told me we were not crossing, but would continue.

When directly in front of the the man, the bishop stopped, reached out, taking the man's filthy right hand into his own, and placed a twenty dollar bill into the man's hand, covering the bill with the man's left hand. At that moment the man looked up into our eyes, saying nothing. But looking back were the bluest, clearest eyes I had ever seen. They were not the eyes of a homeless man, nor the eyes of a deranged man, eyes filled with wisdom and holiness.

As we walked away, I remarked about the man's eyes, to which the bishop responded by saying, "We just encountered an angel unaware, and we were being tested," recalling the words of Scripture, "Be not forgetful to entertain strangers: for thereby some have entertained angels unawares" (Hebrews 13:2).

After the social worker left, a man seated at a nearby table remarked, "that was a remarkable story, and you made my wife cry". This other couple had witnessed the whole of these encounters.

A moment later, the young man who'd judged us so harshly after the original encounter, returned. He came up, asked forgiveness for having judged us, and said he'd "just seen the homeless man buying yogurt and fruit" with the money we'd given him. I stood up, gave the young man a hug, and we all parted ways.

With love in Christ,
Abbot Tryphon

 

Posted on Facebook:

 

https://www.facebook.com/pages/All-Merciful-Saviour-Orthodox-Christian-Monastery/104578182913886

Abbot Tryphon - The Unpardonable Blasphemy of

THE SIN OF NATIONALISM
The Unpardonable Blasphemy of
turning the Church into a National Institution

With the fall of communism, some nations with a history of Orthodoxy would seek to establish the Orthodox Church as a State Church, something that history tells us can be a big mistake. When the Bolsheviks defeated Imperial Russia, the former government's close ties with the Church led to the wholesale murder of countless bishops, priests, monastics, and faithful, all seen as ...an inseparable part of the government. The institution of the Church was seen as so closely tied to the former government, the new government sought to completely destroy the Church.

When we behold the Church in the light of how the Church sees herself, we realize as Christians, our true nation is not the country of our birth, but the Church herself. We Orthodox Christians belong to Christ and His Church. Our true nation is therefore the Church.

Whether we are Americans, Russians, Greeks, or Norwegians, by birth, our second birth in baptism has made us members of the nation of Orthodoxy. I am an American by my first birth, but in baptism my nation is Orthodoxy, and I am of one nation with all Orthodox Christians throughout the world.

This unity of Faith is based on a personal relationship with Christ, Who is the head of His Church. Our true nationality is not based on political ideology, be it democratic, socialist, or monarchical, but on our common baptism that has united us to Christ, and to each other as the Body of Christ, the Church.

Saint Justin Popovitch wrote, "The Church is ecumenical, catholic, God-human, ageless, and it is therefore a blasphemy — an unpardonable blasphemy against Christ and against the Holy Spirit — to turn the Church into a national institution, to narrow her down to petty, transient, time-bound aspirations and ways of doing things. Her purpose is beyond nationality, ecumenical, all-embracing: to unite all men in Christ, all without exception to nation or race or social strata".

With love in Christ,
Abbot Tryphon

 

posted on facebook:

 

https://www.facebook.com/pages/All-Merciful-Saviour-Orthodox-Christian-Monastery/104578182913886

 

The Sainthood of the Venerable Elder Paisios

The Sainthood of the Venerable Elder Paisios

By His Eminence Metropolitan Nicholas of Fthiotidos

That which is happening with the blessed Elder Paisios the Hagiorite has no precedent in the Orthodox Church.

And when he lived, as well as after his venerable repose, the unanimous conscience of the Church believes and already considers him to be a saint.

In Greece as well as other homodox lands everyone speaks of his teachings, his miracles, and his clairvoyant charisma, through which, as a heavenly telescope, he knew the innermost parts of souls and offered to pilgrims the medicine of salvation.

This man had wisdom from above, who, although uneducated, took his place among the chorus of ecumenical teachers.

His words were wise, his advice was sweeter than honey, his love with which he embraced every person was divine, his mind and heart emitted the illuminating grace of the Holy Spirit.

In his person we came to know holiness in all of its depth and width. His words were "words of eternal life". His graceful jokes were full of wisdom and delight.

Everything he said was a gospel. His affectionate and compassionate style calmed every troubled soul.

No other spiritual father delivered such a great work, like Elder Paisios.

No other physician healed as many sick people, like the physician of souls Monk Paisios.

No other shepherd led their logical sheep so worthily along the way of salvation, like this humble Hagiorite Monk.

His boldness before God transcends even that of the great saints.

His presence in our time was a gift from God for afflicted people.

The conscience of the Church believes him to be a great saint. His name has reached the ends of the universe.

The day of his canonization to sainthood is very near. It is very significant that His All-Holiness Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew himself, in a recent homily in Nigdi of Cappadocia, numbered Elder Paisios among the saints of Cappadocia.

The day of the official recognition by the Venerable Head of Orthodoxy of the sainthood of Elder Paisios will be a triumphant day of the Faith and of the life in Christ.

May he intercede before the Lord on behalf of us all.

 

 

Source: Translated by John Sanidopoulos

 

thanks to source and John Sanidopoulos:

 

http://www.johnsanidopoulos.com/2013/07/the-sainthood-of-venerable-elder-paisios.html

 

A Personal Encounter With Elder Paisios

A Personal Encounter With Elder Paisios

By Protopresbyter George Efthymios

In the summer of 1975, I was blessed with going for the first time to the Garden of the Mother of God, Mount Athos (Agion Oros). I visited various ancient monasteries; I paid my respects to many of the priceless treasures of the holy place, that is, holy relics of martyrs and saints of our faith as well as holy icons. I participated in the daily all-night long vigils which are concluded with the Divine Liturgy early in the morning. I sat at the simple monastery dining room table, where everything reminds you that you eat in order to survive and fight for your salvation and you do not live in order to eat, where the reading of the devout patristic texts aim at transporting the minds of the table companions to heaven. I associated with conscientious monks who, inspired by divine love and obeying the urging of Basil the Great, "take care of thyself", have denied the world, but not man for whom they pray unfailingly with love and "with many tears" (Act. 20:19) in their cells and the church during the sacred vigils.

During my visit, I did not succeed, despite my wish, to meet Elder Paisios who was then an ascetic at the Stavronikita cell of the Holy Cross. This came later, "when the time was mature" (Gal. 4:4). What I realized about this full-of-grace person during my first pilgrimage to Mount Athos were the characteristic words of another co-pilgrim, today an assistant professor at the Medical School of the University of Thessaloniki, who had met him and told me that "his love breaks you apart", something I verified myself later on.

I will deal with this genuine man of God briefly, as I had the opportunity to do in the past with my dear spiritual fathers, Elder Porphyrios and Elder Iakovos.

On Tuesday, July 12, 1994 , the late Elder Paisios, the Hagiorite, rested in the Lord, at the Holy Cemetery of St. John the Theologian, in Souroti of Thessaloniki.

This genuine man of God, whose secular name was Arsenios Eznepides, was born to pious parents, Prodromos and Evlavia, at Farasa, Cappadocia on the 25th of July, 1924.

Due to the extraordinary and harsh conditions, he was baptized a few days later at Farasa, on the 7th of August, by St. Arsenios Chatziefentis and was given the name "Arsenios".

Barely a month after his birth, he was exiled along with his parents, relatives and other citizens of Farasa away from his paternal home and became a refugee.

The boat with the refugees arrived in metropolitan Greece on September 14. The Elder's family lived for a little while first in Piraeus, then in Castro of Corfu, and in a small village near Igoumenitsa prior to settling down in Konitsa in 1926.

He finished the Konitsa Elementary School and, then, he worked as a carpenter until 1945 when he was enlisted in the army. His military service, during those unlucky years of the civil war, lasted for approximately four years, until 1949, when Arsenios Eznepides, the radio operator, received his discharge certificate marked with "excellent" conduct.

In 1950, he went to Mt. Athos aiming at realizing the dream of his life; that is to receive the angelic schema.

In 1954, he was tonsured at the Monastery of Esphigmenou where he was serving as a novice as a rasophoros monk with the name of Averkios.

In 1956, he was tonsured to the "Small Schema" in Philotheou Monastery taking the name "Paisios".

In 1958, after being asked by the people of Konitsa who were spiritually in danger by a "raid" of Protestants who had managed to proselytize eighty poor families, he went to the Monastery of the Nativity of the Theotokos, at Stomio, next to the Aos River. He stayed there for four years and greatly helped the inhabitants of the area who visited the Monastery.

In 1962, we find him as an ascetic at the Cell of Saints Galaktionas and Episteme, in the desert of Mt. Sinai.

In 1964, he returned to Mt. Athos and took up residence at the Archangels' cell, at the Skete of Ivira.

In 1966, he was operated on and had part of his lungs removed due to a serious illness.

In 1967, he settled down at Katounakia, at the Cell of Ypatios of Lavra, for more intense discipline.

In 1968, Papa-Tychon clothed him in the "Great and Angelic Schema", at the Holy Cross Cell of Stavronikita Monastery. He remained in the Cell after the repose of Papa-Tychon on the 10th of September 1968 , and stayed there until 1979.

In 1979, he moved on to his final home, the Panagouda Cell of the Monastery of Koutloumousiou, near Karyes. He stayed there until 1993 receiving many thousands of people who visited him in order to share their pain with him and ask his advice and prayer.

I was blessed by God to manage to visit him and talk with him during that blessed and fruit-bearing period of fifteen years that he lived in the Panagouda Cell.

I remember my eagerness when I went down the path that led from Karyes, the administrative centre of the Athos State, to the Elder's cell. The sweet expectation of my meeting with this true man of God flooded my heart and gave wings to my feet.

The waiting in front of the yard's gate at the Cell was short or long depending on the case. The Elder took good care to "make this waiting sweeter" having always in the Cell loukoumia or other sweets and water to offer to the pilgrims. The inscription written by him "to eat is a blessing" is characteristic. Apart from all the above, there were also makeshift seats so that the waiting pilgrims could rest and various articles of clothing to be worn by them so that they would not get cold as they were sweaty. Such affection, such love, such providence for everybody!

At some point, the Cell's door, of the old and poor building, would open and the Elder, who had been inside involved in asceticism and prayer of the heart for the salvation of his soul and the souls of his brothers, would appear. His face was always exhilarated and his attitude cordial. He would receive us and ask us to sit in the "outdoors dorter" on seats made of pieces from tree trunks. He would shake our hands and at the same time offer us loukoumia and water according to the tradition of Mt. Athos.

There, under the trees, with the songs of the birds "as the vocal drone", the Elder would start talking to us with "the words of eternal life" (John 6:68) either answering our questions or making comments on his own on the basis of information from "above" about the needs of each one of us. Here is the miraculous thing! The pilgrims were of various ages, professions, characters, spiritual and intellectual levels. Some of them were conscious of who was sitting in front of them and exactly what they were looking for. Some were there because they had heard something about him. Others were there with an ill-tempered and negative mood. He, guided by the Holy Spirit, offered "as every man had need" (Acts 2:45 ).

I will never forget, in relation to the above, the Elder's behaviour towards a Spanish student of Fine Arts, follower of the Pope, who happened to be amongst us in the "outdoors dorter" at some visit. At some point, the Elder turned to him with affection and interest making use of some Italian words and phrases he remembered from the Italian occupation so that he could communicate with him. Then, he gave him many pieces of advice in the Greek language and revealed to him many truths that, as he explained to us, the Holy Spirit would help him feel regardless of the fact that the different language would not allow him to understand. More specifically, when another visitor made the comment that "the foreign student does not understand what you are saying to him in Greek", he answered that "he will understand what he is meant to understand".

His advice to all his visitors was to have a spiritual father. This is why after giving answers and advice to questions or problems put forward by the people, he would finally send them to their spiritual fathers to lay the burden of their sins, which were the cause of all problems, under their stoles.

Many Christians, therefore, leading autonomous lives, selfishly, as orphans, "as sheep having no shepherd" (Matthew 9:36 ) took his advice, found a spiritual father and started living according to the Church. Their lives and the lives of the ones around them changed. Here I would like to mention something that the Elder always recommended for his wedded visitors. "Have the same spiritual father with your wife. Because as the carpenter uses the same plane to work on two pieces of wood and make them fit, the same way the spiritual father will use the same "plane" to work on the character of both spouses so as to make them fit. Whereas if you have different spiritual fathers, you will face difficulties."

I would like to mention something else extremely important that the Elder said on another occasion. I was with a group of people in the "outdoors dorter", when another group came, amongst whom there was an assistant professor of the Medical School of the University of Athens who held the Elder in great veneration. The professor asked Fr. Paisios at some point with pain, interest and love: "There are, Elder, many colleagues of mine, doctors, who have good intentions, good feelings, 'bowels of mercies' (Colossians 3:12 ) but do not believe. What can we do for them?" "Listen," said the Elder", "pray for them because under these circumstances they deserve God's mercy." He had said the same about some teachers and professors on another occasion.

The Elder, as a genuine man of God, had consolidated and immovable ideas "in the things he hast learned and hast been assured of" (2 Timothy 3:14 ). He knew and taught "by word and deed" (Romans 15:18 ) that in the issues of faith there is no swaying, negotiation or compromise. He clearly knew that there is no greater unhappiness and bigger danger for the Christian than to deny his faith and accept deceit. As we know, many deceived people, people that did not feel rest, urged by his reputation, went to meet him and discuss their existential problems. It is true that many of those people went there full of delusions and left repented, seeking then guidance in their spiritual fathers. If, therefore, someone gets involved with some of the heresies and false religions that have flooded our country mainly in recent years as well as if someone advances in the initiations, rites and other demonic activities imposed in order to become a member, this means a conscious or unconscious negation of the faith to the Trinitarian God, Christ, the Church and Baptism. I once asked the Elder: "What should we do with these people when they repent and want to return to the Church?" "You will say," he said, "the Service for the One that returns to the Orthodox Church. The people that return will denounce the bad faith with libel, they will confess the faith of the Church by reciting the Symbol of Faith and then you will anoint them with the holy chrism."

All of us are very much concerned about our dear departed, their state and what we can do about them. We used to ask the Elder about this and wanted really convincing answers. He would emphatically advise us to pray a lot for them. "Prayers," he said, "memorial services, liturgies, alms are very much to the benefit of the departed ones." "You should pray more," he added, "for the departed ones than the living. Because there is nothing they can do on their own any more, but we can help them attracting God's mercy through praying and the other means we have mentioned so that their state can be improved or even change, because they are still under judgment." And he concluded by saying in his characteristic way: "Is it a small thing to take our departed one from a sunless basement to a sunny apartment through our prayers?" At some point, I remember, he mentioned something overwhelming as regards the departed ones and our stance for them. There was a suicide once, a person who put an end to his life by falling from a bridge into a river. This man, as the Elder said, repented while he was falling, asked for forgiveness, his repentance was accepted and his soul was received by a Lord's angel. We must learn not to despair; and pray for our brethren asking for God's mercy and according to the words of St. Isidore of Piluseum: "Do not forerun God's judgment" (P. G. 78, 377) and be judges of others

It is unanimously accepted by the ecclesiastical tradition that pride is the biggest enemy of man's salvation. This is also underlined by the Bible where, inter alias, it is said that the "Lord scorneth the scorners…" (Proverbs 3:34) and "everyone that exalteth himself shall be abased" (Luke 18:14). The Elder told the following story which shows that pride is not the unfortunate privilege of the officials, rich and intellectuals only but is found amongst the most insignificant, poor and illiterate people. There was a shepherd who was discussing one day with the Elder when he was an ascetic in the Stomio Monastery near Konitsa. During the discussion, the dog of the flock approached trying to eat the shepherd's food which was in a plate nearby. The shepherd realized the dog's intention and managed quickly and swiftly to cover the plate avoiding thus the damage. Then, he turned to the Elder and boasted: "Did you see, monk, how clever I am and how I managed to save the food?" By mentioning this incident, the Elder pointed out the danger of pride which threatens all of us and the need to be alert and show repentance and humility in order to avoid the temptation stemming from the right.

During one of our visits, we asked the Elder about mercy. His answer was categorical. We have to practice this great Christian virtue suggested by Christ in the Sermon on the Mount when he blesses the ones that practice it and says: "Blessed are the merciful for they shall receive mercy" (Matthew 5:7). He mainly urged us to help widows, orphans and, in general, people that are in great need. He said that upon accepting our help, they make a wish for us and our departed from the bottom of their hearts and say "May God forgive them, may their bones become holy!" and God hears the prayers that spring deep from their souls. In answer to the question that sometimes the idea crosses our mind that the ones begging can be cons or use our mercy for harmful purposes, he used to say that in these cases we should apply Christ's order by giving a small amount of money, and He takes care so that the money goes where it is needed. Furthermore, he referred for long periods to the ways that this is done.

The bleak condition of the world that "lieth in wickedness" (1 John 5:19) and the difficulties that the conscientious Christian faces "because strait is the gate and narrow is the way which leadeth unto life" (Matthew 7:14 ) are very well known. The "enemies of man", the devil that "prowls about as a roaring lion seeking someone to devour" (1 Peter 5:8), the old man, the one enslaved in the will of the flesh and the world, under the thumb of the devil who promotes his will in an attractive way, fight fiercely against the Christian who, literally, "goes in the midst of snares" (Sirach 9:13). In answer to the agonizing question raised by Christian family men about what they should do in order to face these bleak circumstances, the Elder provided the exit from the stranglehold of the daily reality talking to two different men. He said to the one that we will be saved from these if we "cling to the Church" and on a different occasion, he said to the other, as a clarification to the above: "Go to the church, confess, receive the Eucharist and you will reach the average".

The urging of Basil the Great "take care of thyself" (P. G. 31, 217B) is well known; the same holds for the unanimous advice of the Holy Fathers for continuous self-control exercised by the Christian. Elder Paisios, following this tradition, used to advise us to look into our selves and see "how many carats of Christians we are".

I left for the end two pieces of advice given to me by the Elder when I visited him for the final confirmation of God as regards my entering the holy orders. It was the 1st November 1986, when the Church celebrates the memory of Venerable David the Elder. I walked down with eagerness from Karyes to the Elder's Cell, Panagouda, in the wet autumn afternoon. A bit further down from the Monastery of Koutlomousio, two dogs became my "companions". They were running along the path which I did not know well. When they led me to the gate of the Cell's yard and the Elder came out to welcome me, he said to them and his words were full of meaning: "Ok, you can go now." And the dogs, as good "subservients" left immediately upon concluding their mission. This time the Elder welcomed me inside the cell where the stove with the wood was lit. After the "traditional" treat we went to the small church of the cells. I mentioned the purpose of my visit and after his unreserved and at the same time overwhelming answer for me "of course it is God's will", we talked about other things. There, inter alias, he gave me the following pieces of advice which I am quoting hoping that they will help my brethren as they have helped me. His first piece of advice was: "Do not put your plans before God's plans". These words saved me. They freed me from stress and anxiety. They taught me to put Christ's will always first in my life over my own will, to ask Christ always to lead the way in my life and direct me in everything. I saw, through the daily experience of so many years, that Christ knows and can assume full charge in the best way when we love Him, trust Him and ask Him to do that freely, voluntarily and unquestionably. We all understand the importance of this, especially for the shepherd's ministration of rational sheep and for the faithful that Christ entrusted him with. His second piece of advice was: "Thank God for everything you are; everything you have and everything you achieve. By thanking God you will realize that these are not your achievements but His gifts and, thus, you will feel humble." Without many comments, someone can understand the importance of the Elder's precept who with a simple, but "square" way leads man to self-knowledge and balance, far away from the morbid complexes of handicap and arrogance as well as away from man's lethal enemy, pride. The Elder's words always remind me of what Apostle Paul writes: "What hast thou that thou didst not receive? Now if thou didst receive it, why dost thou glory, as if thou hadst not received it?" (1 Corinthians 4:7).

I know that thousands of pages have been written about Elder Paisios. And I am sure that many more will be written. My work did not aspire to add some pages to the so many others. Stating my personal experience, six years upon the repose of the blessed Elder, is a debt of honor and gratitude for the person who, with God's providence, helped me in critical choices of my life and continues to help me in my pastoral ministration with the prayers and precepts he left me. These lines are also a debt of love for my brethren so that they can get to know this genuine person and the holy will of God as it was formulated through his lips with the wish that it will become their own will for salvation.

 

 

Thanks to John Sanidopoulos:

 

http://www.johnsanidopoulos.com/2013/07/a-personal-encounter-with-elder-paisios.html

 

Source: Edited by John Sanidopoulos

Elder Porphyrios: "I Don't Like To Prophesy"

Elder Porphyrios: "I Don't Like To Prophesy"

By Hieromonk Fr. George Kaufsokalyvites

(From the Holy Kalyva of Zoodochos Pege, of the Holy Skete of Kaufsokalyvia on Mount Athos)

At a time when more and more people feel the need, because of the profound crisis affecting mankind, to deal with eschatological events as described in the Apocalypse of Saint John the Theologian, as well as those things revealed by the Grace of God to the Prophets, the Fathers of the Church and contemporary saintly elders like Elder Paisios, we must especially stand with the view of Elder Porphyrios, and decode why such a great Saint of our time, while knowing with precision and detail everything that we are living and where things come from, avoided talking about these things.

It must especially puzzle us why the Elder didn't speak at all about what is coming, but only revealed what was necessarily required for certain people.

The core thought of Elder Porphyrios was that people need to consolidate and grow in love towards their Creator, not through fear of things to come, but through a selfless relationship, as an affectionate father towards his child.

Because the unity that was the greatest legacy of Christ to His Apostles, can be ensured when the child is joined with his Father primarily through love and not fear.

Elder Porphyrios aptly likened the times we live in to the years just before Jesus came.

What existed then? A Roman "peace" in power and idolatry, and a priesthood alienated by the passion for power that was hypocritical without being beneficial, but rather distanced the people from God. And finally there was a small portion of pure and good people.

All this describes in detail what is going on today, and the repetition of this in our era should probably strongly trouble us.

Before Christ there existed prophecies about His coming as well as warnings for repentance to the people of God, as in the case of Jonah and Ninevah.

However, these prophecies were sent by God for those few good and pure people of each era, as I said before, because they had the goodwill to receive the messages and know what to do.

Elder Porphyrios acted with this in mind, calling people to approach Christ with love and not the fear of terrible events.

He knew but he did not say. He spoke laconically and in codes, understanding that in our era there was a great gap between the spirituality of people on Mount Athos with the outside world.

For this reason he sent a man to notify Elder Paisios to stop speaking about the Antichrist, the mark, imminent wars, etc.

Not because it was wrong that which was informed to Elder Paisios through Divine Illumination, but because the spiritual measure of the world is at such a level that fear has no practical effect and that the only approach needed was love for Christ.

For if man loved God, then God, when people change, will change history. The same happened with the imminent destruction of Ninevah.

The same Elder Porphyrios, during his last days, stressed the moral degradation and misery which we find ourselves in as people, and stressed to his spiritual children to find a verse in the Old Testament that says "You have a cloak, you be our leader" (Is. 3:6).

There we were told describes clearly the current situation. The same situations of "old Israel" with the "new Israel" and the same symptoms.

The "old Israel" lost its unity with God and the "new Israel" lost exactly this path of unity with Christ.

This was the great longing of the Elder and he served it literally till his last breath.

The Hierarchical Prayer of Christ, "that all may be one", was what the Elder served as long as he lived and he slept with it on his lips. Because he knew that when mankind is ensured with unity with Christ, then they will fear neither wars nor the Antichrist.

In contrast, today we approach evil and examine those things that are coming as an inevitable evil. Here we lose the entire essence.

Wars, calamities and upcoming events are the ultimate remedy to human apostasy, which is why Elder Porphyrios would say: "The Apocalypse was written for it not to happen".

The Apocalypse has as its purpose to alert, and the way to avoid it is to serve the unity which Christ left to us as a legacy.

This is the therapeutical treatment to the sick, because if the sickness progresses, the events of the Apocalypse will be the amputation caused by the physician when gangrene sets.

The Elder would say: "Our time is like the time of Christ. Then the world had reached a terrible state. But God spared us. And now we must not despair. I see through the calamity to appear some very important person of God, who will rally and unite the world for good."

It was one of the few occasions when the Elder spoke about that which we are living and is upcoming. He stressed that the justice of God is changing and that our situation is miserable.

But he saw that the mercy of God will once again visit mankind. Elder Paisios said the same thing when visitors approached him with evident anxiety about upcoming events and when he was asked when the wrath of God will come. He would say: "We need to ask that His mercy comes, not His wrath."

This is what humanity needs and this is how we must approach what the Saints told us. That which was prophesied in our time are for those few who, like before the time of Christ, have the goodwill to serve their unity in Christ.

The tabloids, the foreign press, the electronic media channels deal systematically with what Elder Paisios and other contemporary elders said. I don't know if they do it for the sake of advertising, trade, etc. But we must think. We must think to look for the substance in all this.

In 2009 while visiting Russia, as part of the effort of issuing the letters of the first Ruler of Greece, Ioannis Kapodistrias, we met with senior officials of the Russian Federation. With surprise I heard a question that relates to all of the above.

He asked me:

"Elder George, the fathers of Mount Athos say there will be a war between Russia and Turkey for Constantinople. What do you say about this?"

I answered him without thinking, in a way I believe Elder Porphyrios would answer:

"Saint Kosmas Aitolos, who is a great Saint of Orthodoxy, said: 'They will try to resolve it with the pen, but will not be able to. 99 times with war, and once with the pen.' However, us, we are with the pen," I said.

The Greeks I believe had the blessing to be sent by God a revealing personality like Elder Porphyrios to show us the way and the path to avoid calamities and difficulties.

It is up to us to manage the legacy he left to us, and not wait for the ship to collide with the iceberg.

If each of us acts alone and cut off from Christ, it is certain that we will say that which the Holy Elder said: "He may, however, according to the plan of God, come; to come so that people can acquire an awareness, to see the chaos alive in front of them, and to say: 'Oh, we are falling into chaos, we are being lost. Everyone back, everyone back, turn back, we have been deluded.' And they will return again to the path of God and the Orthodox faith will shine."

The last days of Elder Porphyrios were the most revealing for his spiritual children and for all of humanity. The Elder gathered us in his Cell in Kaufsokalyvia and told us: "I don't like to prophesy, but I will tell you one prophecy."

The Elder told us about what will happen in Greece and what its future will be. It was revealing for the future of Greece. All of these have now begun to be realized. Today we are living all that he told us and began to take place with exactitude.

The greatest revelation of God was the last night of his life, when for a half hour he prayer the Hierarchical Prayer of Jesus: "That all may be one".

The same Holy Spirit prayed within Elder Porphyrios for the unity in Christ of all Christians and for all of humanity, so that the sufferings of the Apocalypse would not come.

This prayer is the greatest legacy of Christ to humanity. May the unity of humanity with God materialize.

This legacy today, 21 years after the repose of Elder Porphyrios, remains alive and is depicted in an icon:  the Panagia "That All May Be One" Patriotissa, a prophetic and escatological icon, which all of Christendom knows.

We his children serve today this legacy and hope in it.

Source: Translated by John Sanidopoulos

 

 

 

 

Thanks to John Sanidopoulos:

 

 

http://www.johnsanidopoulos.com/2012/12/elder-porphyrios-i-dont-like-to-prophesy.html

 

Elder Porphyrios of Kapsokalyva --- Correcting, Not Condemning, Evil

Correcting, Not Condemning, Evil

By Elder Porphyrios of Kapsokalyva

Our purpose is not to condemn evil, but to correct it. With condemnation people can get lost, with understanding and assistance they will be saved.

Evil begins from bad thoughts.

When you are bitter and indignant, even just with your thoughts, you spoil a spiritual atmosphere. You prevent the Holy Spirit from acting and allow the devil to increase the evil.

You should always pray, love and forgive, driving out of yourself every evil thought.

 

 

 

thanks to John Sanidopoulos:

 

http://www.johnsanidopoulos.com/2013/07/correcting-not-condemning-evil.html

 

Quote by St. John Chrysostom - christian not by force /secular ...

Christians above all men are not permitted forcibly to correct the failings of those who sin. Secular judges indeed, when they have captured malefactors under the law, show their authority to be great, and prevent them even against their will from following their own devices: but in our case the wrong-doer must be made better, not by force, but by persuasion.


St. John Chrysostom


source of quote:

http://paxexsistovos.blogspot.com/2013/07/capital-punishment-part-4-steve-builder.html

Quote by St. John Crysostom

For do not tell me of someone who makes an ill use of (the institutions of government), but look to the good order that is in the institution itself, and you will see the great wisdom of Him who enacted this law from the first….

 St. John Chrysostom

source of Quote:

http://paxexsistovos.blogspot.com/2013/07/capital-punishment-part-4-steve-builder.html

Capital Punishment, Final -- Steve the Builder

In the final podcast in the capital punishment series Steve discusses punishment, retribution and hell in light of "God is love". Can Christians legitimately believe in retributive punishment and a loving God? And finally, what is the responsibility of Christians to those on death row?


So, last week we left off with a discussion of punishment, vengeance and retribution.  As I noted these words have fallen into disrepute in the last few decades, even among Christians, and the death penalty debate is often framed by definitions of these terms. Punishment, retribution and vengeance are seen as concepts unfit for the modern “Enlightened Man” who has evolved beyond belief in the primitive moralistic gods of religiosity.  While we would reject the notion that the God of Christianity is primitive, the problem is that, as I mentioned, Christians are often letting humanistic philosophy define our vocabulary and thus frame our understanding of capital punishment as a consequence for heinous crimes.
The reality is Christians do have some issues to dance with when it comes to a God that St. John says “is love”.  His responses to sinners in the pages of the Scriptures, including wrath, punishment, vengeance, retribution and yes, the eternal fires of hell just don’t sound well…very loving.  Like every other serious Christian, I’ve struggled with those concepts for decades now, and when I became Orthodox I was immediately taken with Alexander Kalomiros’ article “The River of Fire” that outlines how many of the Church Fathers understand the wrath of God in light of His nature.  Basically, Kalomiros explains hell in terms of Hebrews 12:29 that says “our God is a consuming fire”: the fire is the love of God that is experienced by sinners as wrath, punishment or even hell.  The typological Biblical illustration of this truth is put before us in every Matins service with the song of the Three Holy Children in the Furnace.  There is one fire, and it consumes the Chaldeans but is experienced by the Holy Children as a “dewey breeze”.  So, there is one God and He is experienced by faith as “love” and by sinners as “fire”.  There is one Father and He is experienced by the Prodigal as loving, and by the elder brother as unjust and unfair. 
I believe framing the wrath and punishments of God visited on sinners in this way makes sense, but it does not exhaust the Fathers’ vocabulary and teachings on God’s dealing with the sinner and ultimately with the unrepentant.  One of the realities we have to face is that if the love of God is experienced by sinners as punishment, wrath, and even hell, it is still a very real experience and it is a proper definition of how they are experiencing God.  You could tell someone who has jumped into a bonfire and is burning that what they are really experiencing is a dewey breeze, but the intellectual theological fine point will not lessen the heat or the pain. And we have to acknowledge that this vocabulary is the Scriptures’ and the Church Fathers’ definition of the experience also, even from the Fathers who in other places explicate “the river of fire” idea in other places.  We could say that words like retribution and punishment are problematic when trying to communicate the love of God to the sinner, but they are only problematic if they are the only words that are used, just like it would be a problem if the only words we use are love, mercy and kindness.  St. John Chrysostom mentions they had the same issue with the juxtaposition of a loving God and a just and punishing God in the 4th century in his commentary on Romans 2:14.  He notes that there were those who denied the reality of God’s punishment and justice because St. Paul says He is forebearing and kind.  There is nothing new under the sun.  So to deny the usefulness of these terms and their ability to communicate something of how God regards sin and unrepentance is to deny the entirety of the Biblical and Patristic witness. It’s not that we need to eliminate these words from our vocabulary any more than Christ and the writers of Scripture did, but we need to use them wisely, fully and precisely when communicating the goodness and love of God and His action toward un-godliness.  Pastorally, it is a harsh reality that there are people whose spiritual states require threats of punishment, vengeance and retribution to motivate them to repentance, and the fear of God is the beginning of wisdom for them. 
So when we look at the Fathers, we see that they did not shrink from declaring God’s vengeance, retribution and punishment on sinners.  Here’s a few quotes I’ve gathered and I’m sure they could be multiplied.
St. John Chrysostom commentary on Romans: For now what takes place is for correction; but then for vengeance. And this also St. Paul showed, when he said, “We are chastened now, that we should not be condemned with the world.” (1 Corinthians 11:32.)…. But then the punishment from God shall be manifest, when the Judge, sitting upon the fearful tribunal, shall command some to be dragged to the furnaces, and some to the outer darkness, and some to other inexorable and intolerable punishments.
St. Polycarp: The Martyrdom of Polycarp, Ch. XI: “Thou threatenest me with fire which burneth for an hour, and after a little is extinguished, but thou art ignorant of the fire of the coming judgment and of eternal punishment reserved for the ungodly.”
St. Justin Martyr: First Apology 12:  “No more is it possible for the evildoer, the avaricious, and the treacherous to hide from God than it is for the virtuous. Every man will receive the eternal punishment or reward which his actions deserve. Indeed, if all men recognized this, no one would choose evil even for a short time, knowing that he would incur the eternal sentence of fire. On the contrary, he would take every means to control himself and to adorn himself in virtue, so that he might obtain the good gifts of God and escape the punishments.”
St. Cyprian: To Demetrian 24: “An ever-burning Gehenna and the punishment of being devoured by living flames will consume the condemned; nor will there be any way in which the tormented can ever have respite or be at an end. Souls along with their bodies will be preserved for suffering in unlimited agonies. . . . The grief at punishment will then be without the fruit of repentance; weeping will be useless, and prayer ineffectual. Too late will they believe in eternal punishment, who would not believe in eternal life.”
St. Cyril of Jerusalem: Catechetical Lecture 18:10: “We shall be raised therefore, all with our bodies eternal, but not all with bodies alike: for if a man is righteous, he will receive a heavenly body, that he may be able worthily to hold converse with angels; but if a man is a sinner, he shall receive an eternal body, fitted to endure the penalties of sins, that he may burn eternally in fire, nor ever be consumed. …Since then the body has been our minister in all things, it shall also share with us in the future the fruits of the past.”
St. Gregory of Nazianzus: -Oration on the Holy Lights, Ch. XXXVI: “I know a cleansing fire which Christ came to hurl upon the earth and He Himself is called fire in words anagogically applied….I know also a fire that is not cleansing but avenging, that fire either of Sodom, which mixed with a storm of brimstone, He pours down on all sinners, or that which is prepared for the devil and his angels, or that which proceeds from the face of the Lord and burns up all His enemies all around. And still there is a fire more fearsome than these, that with which the sleepless worm is associated, and which is never extinguished but belongs eternally to the wicked.”… its is better to be punished and cleansed now than to be sent to the torment to come, when it will be time for punishing only, and not for cleansing.”
St. Jerome in the 4th century addresses the modern psychological view of hell: Jurgens, Vol. 2, Commentary on Ephesians, pg. 193:  “There are many who say there are no future punishments for sins nor any torments extrinsically applied, but that sin itself and the consciousness of guilt serve as punishment, while the worm in the heart does not die, and a fire is kindled in the mind, much like a fever…These arguments and fraudulent fancies are but inane and empty words having the semblance of a certain eloquence of speech but serving only to delude sinners; and if they give them credence they only add to the burden of eternal punishment which they will carry with them.”
St. Basil the Great: Jurgens, pg. 21, On Psalm 28, No. 6: “The voice of the Lord divides the flame of fire. I believe that the fire prepared in punishment for the devil and his angels is divided by the voice of the Lord. Thus, since there are two capacities in fire, one of burning and the other of illuminating, the fierce and punitive property of the fire may await those who deserve to burn…”
St. John of Damascus, Exact Exposition, Ibid. Bk. 2:29: “Also one must bear in mind that God’s original wish was that all should be saved and come to His Kingdom 1 Timothy 2:4. For it was not for punishment that He formed us but to share in His goodness, inasmuch as He is a good God. But inasmuch as He is a just God, His will is that sinners should suffer punishment.”
And finally, a quote from the Synodikon of Orthodoxy which is to be read on the Sunday of Orthodoxy (but is usually shortened to just the section on iconography in most parishes…)
Synodikon of Orthodoxy: “Those who prefer the folly of the so-called wisdom of the profane philosophers and follow their teachers and accept the migrations of human souls or that they are destroyed like the souls of the animals and return to nothingness and on account of this deny the resurrection, judgment, and final retribution of the acts of their lives, anathema.”
http://www.pelagia.org/htm/b12.en.the_mind_of_the_orthodox_church.09
So the bottom line is, as Christians we cannot appeal to “God is love” as a rationale for eliminating the death penalty as a retributive, vengeful or punishing consequence.  St. John Chrysostom says, in his “Exhortation to Theodore” Letter 1, that the wrath of God is not a human passion but an expression of His tender care and lovingkindness. He says even if God threatens us with vengeance and punishments, He inflicts them in order to bring us to return to Him. God is like a doctor who does not listen to the insults and complaints of those he is treating and does not administer treatments for his own benefit but for the ultimate wellbeing of the patient. So within this framework, as I mentioned last week, the death penalty may in fact be the final medicine for the healing of the soul of the sickest of the human race.
EXACT QUOTE: For if the wrath of God were a passion, one might well despair as being unable to quench the flame which he had kindled by so many evil doings; but since the Divine nature is passionless, even if He punishes, even if He takes vengeance, he does this not with wrath, but with tender care, and much loving-kindness; wherefore it behooves us to be of much good courage, and to trust in the power of repentance. For even those who have sinned against Him He is not wont to visit with punishment for His own sake; for no harm can traverse that divine nature; but He acts with a view to our advantage, and to prevent our perverseness becoming worse by our making a practice of despising and neglecting Him. For even as one who places himself outside the light inflicts no loss on the light, but the greatest upon himself being shut up in darkness; even so he who has become accustomed to despise that almighty power, does no injury to the power, but inflicts the greatest possible injury upon himself. And for this reason God threatens us with punishments, and often inflicts them, not as avenging Himself, but by way of attracting us to Himself. For a physician also is not distressed or vexed at the insults of those who are out of their minds, but yet does and contrives everything for the purpose of stopping those who do such unseemly acts, not looking to his own interests but to their profit; and if they manifest some small degree of self-control and sobriety he rejoices and is glad, and applies his remedies much more earnestly, not as revenging himself upon them for their former conduct, but as wishing to increase their advantage, and to bring them back to a purely sound state of health. Even so God when we fall into the very extremity of madness, says and does everything, not by way of avenging Himself on account of our former deeds; but because He wishes to release us from our disorder; and by means of right reason it is quite possible to be convinced of this.
So how can the Christian support punishment, vengeance or retribution as a legitimate response to evil? In the “The Bases of the Social Concept of the Russian Orthodox Church”  http://orthodoxeurope.org/page/3/14.aspx  the Bishops note that the iconographic tradition of the Church can help frame this issue (and the issue of killing in war) for us. In the icons of St. George, the black dragon is trampled by the hooves of the horse always painted brightly white. This teaches us that evil is an objective reality, and our struggle with evil is another issue entirely. In overcoming evil we cannot participate in it.  They say that the Scriptures and the Fathers do not condemn the struggle with sin, nor do they condemn the use of force to restrain and punish evildoers, and not even taking another’s life in the last resort, but rather they condemn the passions in the human heart.  One indeed can kill, but do so with sorrow at the necessity of it rather than hatred for one’s enemies.  Fr. Alexander Webster notes that our tradition is antinomical in the sense that one may be Orthodox and an absolute pacifist—or one may be Orthodox and a just warrior. While no person can be both at once, the Church embraces both the absolute pacifist perspective on war and that of the just warrior.  And I would add, the Church embraces both mercy and clemency and the necessity for the State to exact capital punishment.
Well, there is one final issue for both the Christian and atheist, and that is the question: “What if a convicted felon has repented, or learned to love, or has been reformed”? (However one determines “reformation” without an objective measure).  If a murderer shows some sign of humanistic redemption or societal benefit, should society go ahead and execute them like California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger did to Tookie Williams in California recently, or give them clemency?  Under the laws of the civil authority, that is for society to judge from whatever philosophical framework it wishes to use. His temporal fate is not the concern of the Christian because from the Church’s perspective, God has already judged and forgiven him if he has repented.  And if he has repented, he is prepared to meet his Creator. If that is the case, then he is ultimately better off than we who are left behind and have to continue the struggle to avoid evil, repent and prepare to meet our God. As St. Paul says in Romans 14, whether he lives or dies, he is the Lord’s. If someone is prepared, physical death, whether sooner or later and by what means is not the ultimate issue for the Church. Let the atheist work out his own reasoning. 
In the end, in light of Scripture and the Fathers, I believe that Christians cannot be categorically anti death penalty.  However, we CAN be anti death penalty for individual persons, like Augustine was.  In this sense Bp. Seraphim is ultimately correct: the call of the gospel is for us to visit those in prison regardless of what they are in prison for. In my opinion it is unchristian to light candles outside a prison wall when someone is executed and we’ve never met the person.  It IS Christian to visit those in prison and then to advocate for justice or mercy based on a personal relationship.  Jesus said, I was in prison and you visited me, not, I was on death row and you wrote philosophical journal articles,  passed joint statements, blogged and lit a candle when I died. 
So, ultimately, can someone believe in the sanctity of life and mercy, work with prisoners and convicts and still believe in the death penalty?
I think so. I do today. 


Thanks to Steve and Ancient Faith Radio:

http://www.ancientfaith.com/podcasts/stevethebuilder/capital_punishment_final

Capital Punishment, Part 7 -- Steve the Builder

Is the death penalty really a deterrent? Is there a need to kill evildoers if we can keep society safe through the prison systems? Is punishment a primitive concept not fit for modern enlightened society?

In this podcast we’re going to deal with what are usually the hot button issues brought up regarding the “effectiveness” of the death penalty. Is it a deterrent to capital crime?  Does it restrain the evildoer?  Does punishment accomplish anything?  In one sense these are secondary issues because as I mentioned last week we do not use utilitarian “effectiveness based on statistics” as a hermeneutic by which we decide “hath God said…”  But they are indeed talking points about the seriousness of taking the lives of human beings even if they have committed capital crimes.  So let’s take a look at the issues of deterrent, restraint and punishment.
Is the death penalty a deterrent to those who might do evil? For some, yes. Realistically, for others, no. St. Paul says fear of retribution by the state is a fundamental basis for civil order.  Does that work?  Yes. Even the most enlightened and spiritually advanced people would have to admit they obey some civil laws at some level out of fear. Some people probably do obey laws from a higher ethical and moral plane than others, but most of us don’t speed because we fear getting a ticket. We don’t cheat on our taxes, not because we love how the government spends our money but because we fear the IRS. But we also have to face the reality that there are human beings so bent and broken that not even certain death will deter them from planning and doing evil any more than the threat of a speeding ticket keeps some of us from driving too fast. There will always be those who do not fear a particular consequence for breaking some law. So, the death penalty is not for those people, at least not as a deterrent. As with all other civil laws, we do not remove what works for many because it does not work for a few. We can all agree that the deterrent effect will never be 100% for any law and consequence, so then the question is, what percentage even if it could be proved would be an acceptable level?
And yes, I’ve read tons of statistics on deterrent and there are tons. The bottom line is that they are inconclusive.  For every paper that says the death penalty is not a deterrent, there is another that says it is, all based on statistics.  The problem is, regardless of how many people DO murder with or without the death penalty, we really do not know how many people DON’T murder because of fear of the consequence.  The fact that numbers go up or down does not prove causality either way.  Hyam Barshay made the following observation, “The death penalty is a warning, just like a lighthouse throwing beams out to sea. We hear about shipwrecks, but we do not hear about the ships the lighthouse guides safely on their way. We do not have proof of the number of ships it saves, but we do not tear the lighthouse down.” Prof. Ernest van den Haag, “On Deterrence and The Death Penalty”, Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology and Police Science, vol. 60, no.2 (1969). 
Deterrent framed as the primary consideration whether to exact the death penalty or not is ultimately a red herring.  Killing the evildoer has never been done ONLY to put the fear of consequence in others.  It is PART of the reality of the fact that we are social beings, but the consequence ultimately addresses the anti-social act of the evildoer and it is addressed to HIS violation of humanity and social order. 
A second issue with the death penalty is the concept of restraint.  Does the death penalty restrain the one who has done evil? You bet, once and for all. But, we can legitimately ask, can he be restrained by confinement? Maybe. I remember Banzai Bob here in Arizona who, while awaiting execution for murder, killed two fellow death row inmates.  He strangled one and finished him by stabbing him multiple times with a sharpened toothbrush, then carving his name in the corpse.  The other (while again, still on death row) he burned to death by tossing a makeshift firebomb into his cell. Six other inmates died from smoke inhalation from the blaze. Restraint, like the death penalty doesn’t always work perfectly it seems. In a sense Banzai Bob executed eight people before the state finally took his life.  The reality is, that if Arizona had been a “life in prison without parole”, his last eight murders meant nothing to anyone except the judicial formality of adding more life sentences, and he had even less motivation to not murder again. 
One could argue that the death penalty is unnecessary because of improvements in the prison system and society is protected from repeat offenders because we have the technology to build nearly perfect restraint now. In Pope John Paul II’s “Gospel of Life” he states that the only time executions can be justified is when they are required “to defend society” and that “as a result of steady improvements . . . in the penal system that such cases are very rare if not practically non existent.”  I believe this is another red herring on two levels.  The first and practical one is, unfortunately, like the fallibility of the death penalty, no system of restraint is perfect and it is clear from recent news articles that prisons are not currently safe and people get killed in them, both guards and prisoners, and people escape from them. One could argue that we should continue to execute capital offenders until it is clearly demonstrable that the perfect prison has indeed been built.  But secondly, and more importantly, I don’t believe that, like deterrent, the “defense of society” is the paramount rationale for the death penalty in the Scriptures.  If we reduce the issue down to keeping the evildoer from repeat offense then the concepts of moral responsibility, justice, and even rehabilitative punishment are irrelevant.  The standard for the application of capital punishment in the Scripture has never been “how secure is your prison system to isolate the evildoer, it has always been a consequence for “what capital crimes do to the image of God in human beings”.
And finally, we are left with the currently politically incorrect and ugly, but necessary topic of retribution.  The notion of punishment as a pure consequence of an evil act has somehow been deemed “primitive”, unspiritual, unchristian and unenlightened. Part of this is because retribution is often framed as a purely utilitarian act that somehow balances the cosmic ledger of the insult suffered by a victim (and in the penal substitutionary model of atonement, the insult to God Himself). But that begs the question of “what is punishment” and what is its ultimate purpose?  In terms of the death penalty, opponents tend to frame the death penalty as merely visceral retributive punishment but life in prison is merciful opportunity for rehabilitation. What is a sentence of life in a ten by ten metal cage for someone like Banzai Bob who cannot be let out or he kills?  We can call it “rehabilitative restraint”, but it is still restraint as a consequence or punishment. So it is not truly about punishment per se, but a definition of punishment properly understood.  To be forcibly removed from normal human society against one’s will is punishment, to be put to death against one’s will is punishment. The question is really, “are they legitimate and by what authority?”  An ugly reality of fallen human nature is that inflicted pain or punishment relative to a behavior can be corrective, it can be an aspect of rehabilitation by its nature.  This is clear in the Judeo-Christian scriptures and by human experience. If one rejects the concept as primitive, then one must reject the natural operation of the universe’s laws and the reality of our own human nature.  The fact of all human experience is that human beings mostly only learn “the hard way”.  We learn and are motivated to re-learn from personal pain and consequences, and if we are truly wise we consider the pain of others before doing wrong.  No one can read Proverbs, the Psalter or the New Testament and escape the notion of suffering and even death inflicted either by natural consequences, directly from God or man as God’s agent being discipline, chastisement and corrective.
In the case of the death penalty we can indeed understand it merely as “an eye for an eye, a life for a life”. We can see it as a juridical quid pro quo disconnected from any overarching theological, philosophical or metaphysical framework that addresses an ontological point for the human being. “Punishment” can be seen as merely pure retribution or just balancing the cosmic books of body counts and pain. “Payback” may seem primitive and passionate, but ultimately this visceral response to evil has its roots in the concept of the depth of relationship we have to other human beings.  Why “payback”? Why “retribution”?  If there is no one who cares, no connection between human beings, no communion, no responsibility to a greater thing than just my own existence, in short, no love, “payback” or retribution would have no meaning.  When you “pay” someone for something, it is a transaction based on a relationship. The doing away with the concept of “retributive justice” is framed as a compassionate and enlightened response to evil, but I believe it is a step child of radical humanistic individualism, and ultimately a metaphysical denial of the interconnectedness of humanity.  Retribution assumes the evil doer violated more than his individual personhood or just the sole life of another individual he victimized. His actions corrupted the entire order of the cosmos which was intended to shape him into a true human being.  “Retribution”, technically defined, is the payment of a tribute to someone for an action.  When one is punished for evil, the tribute is an acknowledgment of and reward for the violation of what it means to be human for all to see. An eye for an eye is not merely accounting, it means my eye is inextricably intertwined with yours. A life for a life says we are all inextricably intertwined with God. In God I am related to all other human beings, body, soul and spirit. The existence of human society is the evidence of that truth, and human societies innately understand they must teach that truth to their members in some way.
The killing of the murderer is the ultimate statement of the importance of communion and the heinousness of the violation of it.  The further we move toward individualism and away from a metaphysic of “communion”, the more compassion we will have on those who violate it, but not because we are more loving, but because we are indeed less loving and unable to see the horror of the depravity of the violation of our Trinitarian imaged human existence.  The notion that capital punishment only adds one more injustice or more suffering into the universe is not a Christian concept, it is pop eastern philosophy.  Suffering exists in the world because of sin, but suffering is not always a manifestation of evil, one can suffer for the sake of love.  Indeed it is through suffering and death motivated by love that the world is cosmically redeemed.  Because of our fallen minds and hearts, God has prescribed as a cure for sin the punishment or chastisement of sinners or evildoers.  Godly chastisement is a bitter pill whose ingredients are an amalgam of retribution, deterrent and punishment, each of which addresses a symptom of our human illness. As difficult as it is to hand out or to swallow, it is given for the purpose of healing the human person: a restoration of the image of a God-in-communion.  One does not need to know the chemistry of a medicine for it to work, one merely needs to administer it or take it.  Capital punishment is prescribed by God whether we as Christians or secular civil authority understand how it works or God’s purposes for it or not.  For Christians to lobby the state for the wholesale removal of the death penalty under the rubric of mercy, and make it unavailable for the sickest members of the human race, we are perhaps denying them the only God prescribed cure left for their disease, which is the ultimate and eternal merciless act. 


Thanks to Steve and Ancient Faith Radio:

http://www.ancientfaith.com/podcasts/stevethebuilder/capital_punishment_part_7

Capital Punishment, Part 6 -- Steve the Builder

This week Steve discusses the woman taken in adultery, would Jesus "flip the switch" on the electric chair, and should evildoers be given life in prison in hopes that they will eventually repent?

Welcome to part six of the ongoing series on the death penalty.  I appreciate those who have taken the time to respond to the podcasts with good questions, challenges and comments.  A couple of folks who emailed me mentioned Jesus and the woman taken in adultery, and basically cast the anti-death penalty people in the role of Jesus and its supporters as Pharisees or legalists.  This goes back to the muddy thinking I mentioned in previous podcasts regarding the boundaries of the roles of the Church, State and the individual.  I think at the bottom line we’d all agree that it is absurd to believe that the state should bring each felon before the court and tell them “Go your way, sin no more” and release them back into society with no penalty for their crimes in the name of Jesus. We may as well dismantle the entire justice systems of the world if we really believed that. Again, the issue is not Phariseeism or Jesus-ism, but “what hath God said”, and what does that look like in terms of civil order?  The particular instance was in the context of “the Church” (Israel’s religious leaders) and their conflict with Christ’s authority.  Jesus knew EVERYONE’S heart in the situation and responded wisely…this was not a commentary or instruction on the function of and nature of civil order in general. 

I was also admonished by a few people to “Judge not, lest I be judged…” I have to say that in these podcasts, I’m judging no one in particular, I’m merely presenting the Church’s historic Tradition that God indeed has given civil governments the authority to do just that…judge good and evil and reward both appropriately according to the divine order. And again, it would be absurd to apply that gospel command to individuals to civil authorities or even Church authorities. No where in the Scripture is “judge not” applied to civil rule, or even to the governance of the Church.

And finally, someone asked point blank, “Would Jesus give a murderer the electric chair?” I admit the imagery gave me pause, but after some thought, I had three responses to that question: First, He had the ability as God, but He didn’t “save” the thief on the left.  As I mentioned in the last podcast, the crucifixion scene is a microcosm of the fallen world and civil order: One murder is justly condemned, another’s punishment might have been disproportionate, and one was unjustly condemned.  In the providence of God, one saves, another is saved and the other exemplifies the unrepentant human even in the presence of the love of God. Even though it would have been a perfect object lesson regarding capital punishment and forgiveness, Jesus died and let two die with Him, one saved and one damned. So perhaps we should go a little deeper and see the crucifixion scene as God’s view of civil authority, divine love and the fallen world fully explicated.  Secondly, if we hold to the Orthodox view of the Trinity (or even if we were Seballian modalists) we could ask, “Would Jesus kill all the firstborn of Egypt, over 50,000 in I Samuel 6, the entire populations of Sodom and Gomorrah, much less the entire planet?” And we’ve covered those issues in depth already in previous podcasts.  But, thirdly, even if I thought I know Jesus well enough to grant that He would not give someone the chair, or “personally pull the switch”, the Scriptures make it clear that He will come again to judge the living and the dead and cast the evildoers into a lake of eternal fire as punishment if they are unrepentant.  (And eternal punishment and retribution will probably be next week’s topic…so again, stay tuned.)  So if we remove the emotional impact from the question, it gets more complicated.
 
So to begin this week, I want to summarize a bit of last week’s thoughts. We looked at the question, is the death penalty inhuman and ungodly? I concluded that the issue has been framed in this way for Christians by the atheist humanists. It is not “ungodly” because God Himself did it and required it of His people.  It is not “inhuman” because it addresses what “true humanity” looks like from God’s point of view.  It is, in some way even if we cannot fully grasp it, a Godly order for the communion of human beings in the context of the fallen world. In the Orthodox theology of the incarnation and the icon, we get the fullness of the meaning of Genesis 9: we fulfill our personhood in relationships, and we lose it in the same way.  If we reject our proper regard and relationship to other human beings through murder, the desecration of the image ultimately passes to God.  Thus, Godly justice is holding a person accountable, who by doing evil, rejects not only God, but his own personhood created in the image of God.  He has defiled the entirety of the meaning of what it is to be human in relationship to others, himself and God.
Now, before I go on to more meaty issues, I want to touch very briefly on the emotional aspects on both sides of the issue.  I’m not going to spend more than a paragraph on it because it IS emotional and has little true bearing on the issue except to a few individuals. There are those who cannot imagine participating in taking the life of another human being directly or indirectly because well, they would feel horrible about it.  (And of course our convictions play into our feelings…I’m not implying that anti-death penalty people are all codependent bleeding hearts with no substance). And there are those who demand the death penalty because of the anger they feel about the depth of depravity exhibited by some evildoers (nor am I implying that pro-death penalty people are angry, rage driven vigilantes.)  These visceral responses are at one level both legitimate reactions to the reality of the unnaturalness of death on the one hand for both the victim and evildoer, and to the horror of evil on the other, both for the harm done to the victim and the evildoer.  However, on both hands we ultimately realize we cannot order a society on the basis of any individual’s “feelings”, or visceral reactions.  That is why the death penalty is (or should be) a multi-layered, slow deliberative process and not handed over to individual victims, codependents, zealots or vigilantes. So, I don’t believe it is proper to say “Because of my personal convictions, I could not imagine “flipping the switch” to kill someone, therefore the state should not mete out a death penalty”.  Nor is it proper to say, “Because vigilantes are out for retributive vengeance based on blind anger, therefore the State should not mete out death as a consequence for evil.”  Systems of justice and objective civil laws are put in place in order to both reflect the proper anger and grief at human evil, and proper restraint and prudence in response to it.  Thus a judge or court can take into account the depth of evil of a crime and acknowledge its impact on loved ones and society at large, and still exact a just and proportionate response to it apart from one individual’s feelings or conscience.
So finally, I want to get into the issues that are usually presented as the core of the controversy:  Life in prison, deterrent, restraint, and punishment or retribution.
The first issue I want to deal with is the idea that we cannot kill the murderer in order to provide him with ample time to repent.  Should we allow an evildoer to die a “natural death” while being restrained by the state from further crimes through some form of secure incarceration in hopes that he will come to repentance?
We all die from something sooner or later. So I think we have to ask, in the end is it just about the “timing” of the death of the evildoer?  Is “sooner” as a consequence for doing evil categorically evil in itself, and how can we state that in the face of the clear command of God? Or, if we believe God is love and all consequences for sin are ultimately chastisement with the goal of repentance, did God intend that there is something redemptive about the death penalty for the evildoer that we as “innocents” can’t see or understand?
The reality is, except for isolated cases of crimes of passion, most murderers have long histories of criminal behavior.  So we have to ask, what about the time they’ve already had to repent? How have they used it? As Christians we believe that the opportunity for repentance abounds every minute of the day and God is constantly at work in people’s lives to bring them to repentance. It is always KAIROS, “the opportune time” to repent. One of the ways God brings us to repentance is through temporal consequences for our sins. One temporal consequence for exceedingly gross evil is death by the state.  The sentence of death on a killer is the first step to redemption because it is a clear statement that his sin is particularly depraved and a violation of all creation.  The sentence of death is also redemptive in that it provides the evildoer the only true motivation most sinners initially understand to repent: we are going to die and face eternal judgment for our sins.  Even though one of the Orthodox spiritual disciplines to keep ourselves in a repentant frame of mind is the “constant remembrance of death”, most of us do not live like we know we are going to die until we know we are going to die. The criminal having a date of execution has what most of us don’t have: a sure and exact knowledge of impending death.  In that sense he has more of a chance and motivation to repent than the person who was unexpectedly murdered, or someone who is T-boned in an intersection or keels over at the dinner table from an undetected aneurism. 
Dr. Gervas Carey, a Quaker Bible scholar and past President of George Fox College, says that executions represent mercy to the wrongdoer: In his book “A Bible Study” on capital punishment he says of the death penalty that, “. . . a secondary measure of the love of God may be said to appear. For capital punishment provides the murderer with incentive to repentance which the ordinary man does not have, that is a definite date on which he is to meet his God. It is as if God thus providentially granted him a special inducement to repentance out of consideration of the enormity of his crime . . . the law grants to the condemned an opportunity which he did not grant to his victim, the opportunity to prepare to meet his God. Even divine justice here may be said to be tempered with mercy.” (p. 116, A Bible Study).
St. Thomas Aquinas says, “The fact that the evil, as long as they live, can be corrected from their errors does not prohibit the fact that they may be justly executed, for the danger which threatens from their way of life is greater and more certain than the good which may be expected from their improvement. They also have at that critical point of death the opportunity to be converted to God through repentance. And if they are so stubborn that even at the point of death their heart does not draw back from evil, it is possible to make a highly probable judgment that they would never come away from evil to the right use of their powers.” (St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Contra Gentiles, Book III, 146.)  “… if he be not converted, it profits to put an end to the sin, because the sinner is thus deprived of the power to sin anymore.” (Summa Theologica, II-II, 25, 6 ad 2.)
So, in the end, we say we fear playing God by taking a life prematurely, before the evildoer has time to perhaps repent. But there are more ways to play God than killing… we can play God by letting people live whom God has commanded to die.  And it is clear from the OT that there are grave consequences for that too.  St. John Chrysostom in “On the Priesthood” says more priests fall from compassion than from lust. It clear from scripture that it is possible to be too merciful to the sinner and in every case I can think of that happens in scripture it is in disobedience to a command of God to separate or even kill the evildoer.  In regard to the death penalty an old Rabbinic saying seems to apply well, “Do not seek to be more righteous than your Creator.”
So, in the end, a juridical system that forces society to carefully premeditate its killing is probably one of the more “fair” deciders of who dies how and when in the fallen order. Unlike the natural order, at least the state gives you a fair warning, a last meal and a chance to say goodbye to your loved ones before you are handed a swift and painless departure from this world. For the Christian who would argue against the death penalty because “God is just, or God is love”, I’d say it seems that the state is more fair than God who allows people to die in their sins with no warning.  And for the atheist, the state is more fair than their gods of nature, fate, blind chance and other human beings who randomly commit evil.
If we are to make a decision for permitting the evildoer to live, I would say it must be made on some other basis than a vague hope that more time might be helpful…for some, more time is opportunity to do more evil.  We don’t know who is which, but we do know what God has commanded to do with the evildoer.  Just as God will judge those who might have done more evil, He is also the judge of those who may have repented if given more time. He knows the depths of the heart, we can only guess.  And I submit that we should not second guess God who has established the role and responsibility of civil authority in this area.
I read somewhere in one of the Fathers (and I confess I can’t remember who), that capital punishment is a temporal judgment and exacts the first death in order to bring about the fear of the eternal second judgment and second death.  If a Christian believes in eternal life, this is ultimately humane. We cannot push all matters of earthly order, consequences for sin, and judgment of evil onto God in eternity.  Romans 13 and I Timothy 2 make it clear that God did not remove Himself from the civil affairs of the human race after the Cross, nor did He remove Himself from judging sinful people within the Church.  We are not given the luxury of deferring all judgment of human behavior to the last day in either civil or Church governance. We do not believe the God of the Old Testament is no longer concerned about civil law and order in the New Testament world. Civil authority is still God ordained and has its authority from God even under the Gospel.  Death is still the blessed curse and a motivation to repent whether it comes from nature or the state.  And the scriptures also make it clear that the fear of immanent death brings some to repentance and some to curse God and die in their sins, even when they are being killed justly along side God Himself. 

Thanks to Steve and Ancient Faith Radio:

http://www.ancientfaith.com/podcasts/stevethebuilder/capital_punishment_part_6