Total Pageviews

Search This Blog

Monday, August 14, 2023

Good News from the Covid Lockdown? ~ Archpriest Geoffrey Korz

 



Good News from the Covid Lockdown?

– Contributed by Archpriest Geoffrey Korz, an Orthodox priest in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.

We Must Learn Spiritual Lessons – Not Just Smile Silently and Move On

Recently, I traveled to a Church meeting in Canada, at which a major event for Orthodox faithful and clergy was being planned. This major event was to be the first such event since the three-year Covid lockdowns and related measures.

Expecting to find something on the agenda related to the effect of Covid and its impact on the faithful of the Church, I was surprised when I could locate nothing of the kind in the draft notes. As it turned out, I was mistaken, and had misread the agenda: during the planned four day event, we were scheduled to receive a thirty minute presentation on the subject, followed by fifteen minutes of questions.

The title of the item was, Good News from the Coronavirus Lockdown.

Good News? Really?

Of course, the lockdowns were anything but good news, especially for Christians, and especially in Canada. Naturally the title was puzzling.

I suggested this important question called for a fulsome conversation at our upcoming event, to discuss the lessons we have learned, and the mistakes which had been made.

I suggested the excellent study and report by the Assembly of Bishops in the United States, How the Pandemic Has Reshaped American Orthodox Christian Churches, might be an ideal starting point for comparisons, since the United States had both states with strict measures and those with more lenient ones (Canada had only strict ones). The study surveyed hundreds of parishes and clergy across the United States, and provided scores of objective insights from which our faithful and clergy could learn.

I suggested that, in light of the fact that the lockdown – lived over years, not weeks or months – was the most traumatic event for our faithful in a generation (and possibly, since the Second World War), it would be pastorally unwise to gloss it over, to wave it away as nothing, and to act as if the impact of it was fleeting and spiritually insignificant.

I clearly misread the room.

Most of my Canadian brethren at the meeting wanted to avoid the “negativity” coming out of the Church in the United States, where many American faithful had expressed anger against some bishops and priests as a result of measures taken during the lockdown.

There was a desire not to stir up emotions, which may have calmed down by now. Such a desire is naïve at best – especially at times when the world has been turned upside down, when false news rules the day, when it is as foolish for anyone now as it was for those living at the time of the Prophet Jeremiah to say, Peace, peace; when there is no peace (Jeremiah 6:14). Too much has happened.

In true Canadian fashion, there was a desire to avoid any “radical” opinions – much as the Canadian government had tried to do in our national capital during the truckers protest of 2022, in that case through arrest and freezing bank accounts.

One person present voiced the audacious view that everything during the Covid lockdown was good. “Everything… was good?” I asked, just to clarify, assuming I had heard him incorrectly.

“Yes – everything was good.”

Apparently he was living in an alternate reality.

During the Covid lockdowns in Canada, I can think of no faithful Orthodox Christian who could have listed anything that was good. On the contrary, the experience tested the faith of everyone – not because of the virus, but because of the lockdowns, and the divisions and distrust between the faithful caused by them.

More from Archpriest Geoffrey (Scroll Down to Continue)

Yet in hindsight, we remember that all things work together for good for those who love God (Romans 8:28). In light of this, and with the Covid lockdowns in our rearview mirror, let us consider some of the lessons that came out of the oppressive months of the lockdowns:

1. God revealed parishes that trust in Him, and those that trust in secular science. A multitude of Orthodox parishes took the unprecedented step of closing their doors during the Covid lockdown, isolating both sick people and the healthy majority from the holy services. None of the Church Fathers saw this, even during plagues. Rather, they assembled for the holy services, and prayed that God would deliver His people from death – or save the souls of those who perished. The opposite advice was taken from secular public health “experts” – completely ignoring every precedent from Holy Tradition and the experience of the saints who have governed the Orthodox Church since Apostolic times. Not surprisingly, the news continued to report panic-causing statistics every day. While many parishes flew into masquerade fever over masking during the holy services at the start of the lockdown, the most hysterical continued to insist on these disguises in perpetuity – some doing so even after their bishops had directed an end to the absurd practice. Others stationed sentries to prevent the faithful from venerating icons – in direct contradiction of the Seventh Ecumenical Council. (Presumably, these parishes will not need to celebrate the Sunday of Orthodoxy and the Triumph of the Holy Icons ever again, since they have declared this an optional practice). When secular science trumps Orthodoxy, weirdness wins. The lockdown shed a light on this faith in so-called “science” over faith in Christ and His Church.

2. God revealed false friends. Many Orthodox Christians assumed other faithful and clergy would be there for them in times of need, defending them if they were ever accused of something, or in jeopardy of losing their means of making a living. The Covid litmus test changed all that, and revealed those who cowardly remained silent when times got tough. Even more, the events of the lockdown brought to light those Church leaders who were willing to lend their voices to state propaganda, and to have that state propaganda used in thousands of firings from jobs of Orthodox faithful who would not comply with untested gene therapies. Now we know where such people stand, and this is a good thing, even though it has cost many Orthodox Christians lifelong friendships that were sacrificed to state loyalties and saving public face.

3. It is good to know which of our clergy are willing to claim medical knowledge about untested medicines, especially when those claims will gain the approval of the authorities – even when those clergy have no expertise at all. The Church has had these experiences before, of course, from the time of the Sadducees who conspired with the Romans, to the more recent Living Church leaders who conspired with the Soviets. When times are easy, the faithful of the Orthodox Church assume no one among them would adopt an ideology foreign to the faith of Christ. When times turn tough, however, divisions in the Church reveal both the enemies of Christ and His faithful, just as the Apostle said they would (1 Corinthians 11:19). This is important to know, especially since such circumstances can and will arise in the future. Such people can publically acknowledge the mistakes they have made, and be reconciled to their brethren in the Church, or silent estrangement can be maintained. Time will tell.

4. The lockdowns revealed those bishops and clergy who were willing to fight for their Orthodox brethren, and those who would throw them under the bus. Hundreds – perhaps thousands – of Orthodox Christians in Canada objected to taking the Covid shot because of its connection to the abortion industry. In almost every case, employers used the public statements of a few North American Orthodox bishops and priests to rule against religious exemptions for these faithful employees, and to justify their firing. Such situations were spiritually very good for the faithful, forcing them to draw close to God and His saints, and to the prayers of the faithful – to reject such apostate bishops and priests, and to leave their churches. The Report of the Assembly of Bishops tells this story in technicolour, as do the annual financial statements of certain Orthodox jurisdictions, who faced financial abandonment by their faithful. While a few hierarchs forbade their priests from writing letters of pastoral support for such faithful in their time of need, scores of other priests wrote hundreds of letters of support, saving the jobs of many faithful at a time those faithful needed it most. If times of division come upon the Church again, as seems likely, one can only imagine these faithful will remember those who were shepherds, and those who were wolves. That is a good thing.

5. God revealed Orthodox clergy who become papal and heavy-handed under pressure. The lockdowns saw some governments try to enforce the tracking of movement, as well as limiting or stopping the distribution of the Holy Mysteries. Some jurisdictions even implemented vaccine apartheid in their parishes, banning those without vaccine passports from entering church buildings. In light of the many truths revealed in the aftermath of the lockdowns, such churches might publically state to their faithful that such moves were an error in judgement, and that taking such unprecedented steps during a period of great testing and pressure marked a sign of human failing. This would be an example of repentance for the faithful, one which might even draw back some who have left the Church. If the report by the Assembly of Bishops in the United States, How the Pandemic Has Reshaped American Orthodox Christian Churches, is correct, however, the faithful who have left are gone for good, along with their donations and their children. The Orthodox Church will grow elsewhere, in places which are spiritually healthy – and in these spiritually dead places, unwilling to speak openly about their mistakes, it will die.

6. Our college-aged faithful – like other religious young people – also learned which of their leaders stood with them during the lockdowns. Most schools in Canada expelled those who refused, because of conscience, to submit to the untested shots, despite the relative lack of Covid risk to their age group and the demonstrated heart risk to young males. Once again, the statements of certain Orthodox leaders were used by colleges and universities as a grounds to expel such students. In Canada, one court appeal even decided on this basis that such claims were not religious, that they were a “political” statement, placing in jeopardy the capacity for Orthodox Christians and others on campuses to exercise their religious freedoms in the future – a result in part of the careless ramblings of a few approval-seeking false shepherds. These students who lost their academic years were blessed with a formative experience, one that gave them an insight into the kind of bishops and priests one should seek out in the Church – and the ones they should avoid.

7. God continues to reveal those who make excuses for the explosion of unexplained deaths of young people, and the skyrocketing suicide rates. Active clergy have a unique opportunity to speak with funeral directors, and any honest ones will tell you about the massive increase in deaths since the experimental cure some Orthodox mouthpieces advocated during the lockdown. This advocacy was irresponsible: clergy were not speaking of that which they knew, and even medical “experts” were speculating about experimental treatments, under conditions of public panic. Yet many clergy were also swept away by this panic, and offered endorsements with certainty, where they should have remained silent. Some tried to sidestep the matter, advising their faithful to consult their doctors – while knowing full well the advice the doctors would give. Such “spiritual” advice was fallacious, and marked another example of a time priests and bishops should have at least remained silent, if not sounding words of caution. In some cases, endorsements led to people taking shots which may have led to premature deaths. Having stood over the deceased bodies of such people and watched their loved ones weep over the effects of such ill-advised choices, one can only hope such Church leaders – wildly eager to jump on the trends of government certainties – will now make public repentance for their very foolish endorsements of untested gene therapy “cures”. If they would like to publically debate the matter, however, I would be happy to escort them to the graves of those who died – graves that speak louder than words to the losses that remain with us.

There is an old saying, if you cannot say anything nice, don’t say anything at all. Here in Canada, many people live by such an adage, often to the point of avoiding the truth.

But silence does provide one opportunity, which our Orthodox faith teaches us. Silence provides us the opportunity to pray, to repent, and to reconcile. If it is used responsibly, the silence left to us in the wake of the Covid lockdown can be a time of great lessons for Orthodox Christians, and a time for great reconciliation for those in the Church. Broken friendships can be rebuilt, trust can be rejuvenated, and the integrity of leaders who made mistakes can be rehabilitated – if repentance comes first.

It is the very nature of the Orthodox Church to keep alive memories – especially the most painful ones. The memory of the witness of the martyrs of Christ is kept alive in each feast and service of the Church. The memory of the Death and Resurrection of Christ is revisited each Holy Week and Pascha.

What a loss it would be if the silent aftermath of the Covid lockdowns were used to try to forget the sins of a very evil time, to bury sins rather than repenting of them, and to charge unprepared into the future only to repeat them.

– Archpriest Geoffrey Korz is an Orthodox priest in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.


thanks to source:

https://orthodoxreflections.com/good-news-from-the-covid-lockdown/

Thursday, August 10, 2023

Three Big Questions for Protestants ~ Nicholas

 



Three Big Questions for Protestants

Having family that is still Protestant, I sometimes find myself at their church for various reasons. Never at services, but the church is a convenient place to rent for family events. Last time I was there for an anniversary party, I picked up the weekly bulletin and was reading it when the pastor came over to chat. I showed him the schedule for the previous Sunday and asked him, “Where did you learn how to conduct a worship service?”

He laughed and said, “Seminary.”

I then asked him, “Where did the people who taught you how to conduct a worship service learn how to conduct a worship service?”

He started to look uncomfortable. “From the Bible, I guess,” he finally answered.

“This order of worship,” I pointed at the bulletin, “Is in the Bible?”

“Well,” he answered, “It’s based on the Bible.”

“How?” I asked.

At that point, he made an excuse to go see some other guests. I hope I gave him something to think about, without ruining his event for him. It can be tough to be a Protestant pastor since you often really are making it all up as you go along.

As Orthodox Christians we have all the answers. Not us personally. We’re all miserable sinners. But the Church has all the answers. After 2,000 years of guidance by the Holy Spirit, the Church has seen, heard, and responded to everything. There is so much knowledge within the Church that it can be attractive to dump as much of it as possible on our Protestant neighbors.

Which can work, of course, if someone is genuinely seeking to learn about the Orthodox Faith. However, many aren’t. Rather, we often find ourselves up against Protestants who are convinced Orthodoxy is wrong. Rebuffing their assertions sets up arguments, and may not be the best way to go in every case. Which is why asking questions can be an effective way to engage others. Instead of defending Orthodoxy, sometimes asking Protestants to explain aspects of their faith can be very enlightening for them.

Protestantism is ahistorical and self-contradictory. If you can lead people to see that for themselves, the path to Orthodoxy can become clear. For cradle Orthodox, the questions below may seem strange, especially if you are not familiar with common Protestant doctrines. All the more reason to keep reading.

1) Where was your “church” in the early Christian centuries?

All Protestantism is founded on the same assumption – at some point the historic, visible Christian Church fell away from the True Christian Faith found in the New Testament. This Apostate Church persecuted True Christians, and was only finally overcome via the Protestant Reformation at which point the True Church reappeared. (The Reformation actually didn’t happen in the Orthodox lands, but let’s not quibble over that.)

Answers to when this Great Apostasy occurred vary among low-church Protestants. Some will tell you the 4th Century and blame it all on Constantine. Some will tell you as far back as the close of the Book of Acts. Others pick different dates in between. Few low-church Protestants are willing to claim even the First Ecumenical Council of Nicaea, though I have met brave Baptists who tried to sell a gathering of Orthodox Bishops as a Baptist convention.

So, if the early Church of the Book of Acts was Baptist or some other flavor of Evangelical, where did it go? Who were its leaders? Who are the writers that testified to its existence? It had to go somewhere, because the visible Church became apostate. So where was the True Church?

This question is a rhetorical trap for low-church Protestants. It really doesn’t matter which timeframe they pick for the slide into apostasy, the problems with their answers are the same. No matter the era, any Protestant researching Church history will quickly discover that the Church was not Baptist or Pentecostal or anything else of the kind. In both the New Testament and the writings of the ante-Nicene fathers, you find a Church that is hierarchical, liturgical, and centered around the Eucharist. The best thing for his soul, that a low-church Protestant can do, is go in search of the historic Christian Church to prove it was Baptist.

The New Testament presents less of a problem for Protestants than ante-Nicene Patristic writings. Protestants have traditional scriptural misinterpretations that have convinced them the Apostles really were Protestants of some flavor or another. They will confidently butcher the interpretation of even the clearest New Testament passage to deny the truth of Orthodoxy. Ante-Nicene Patristic writings, however, are tricky for them. Christian writings from the 1st and 2nd Centuries testify to an Orthodox Faith in full bloom with hierarchy, liturgy, and the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist. Their witness has nothing in common with modern low-church Protestantism, and there is no way to pretend it does.

So where in the historical record is the “True Church” of sing-alongs, grape juice, and praise bands?

Nowhere. 

Many Protestants will simply shut down at this point, as they have no answer for who their spiritual forbears among the early Christians could have been. In fact, many of them have never even thought about that question. Some of them have answers worked out that avoid the True Church being missing for 1,500 or so years. The True Church, according to them, went underground and persisted as a holy “remnant”. There were True Christians “everywhere” or “somewhere” or “hidden in plain sight”. There’s no actual evidence of that, so they can’t tell you who any of the holy “remnant” were, but they are completely convinced they must have existed.

Sometimes Protestants do have a theory about who the “remnant” were. This usually involves claiming multiple heretical groups as having been the “True Church” which was bloodily suppressed by the evil Catholic Church. This belief is most often found among Baptists. Groups frequently included in the “Baptist succession line” (“Trail of Blood”) are the Montanists, Novationists, Donatists, Paulicians, Cathars, Waldenses, Petrobrusians, Arnoldists, Henricians, Hussites (partly), Lollards, and Anabaptists. They got the Anabaptist part right, at least, but they didn’t show up until the 17th Century. As any historically-minded person is aware, the listed groups did not even agree with each other on doctrine, much less with modern Evangelicals such as Baptists. The succession line also often puts the existence of these groups wildly out of chronological order.  Curiously, most of those groups were Gnostics. Which makes any affinity modern Evangelicals feel for their teachings…. interesting. The standard timelines also portray many Orthodox practices and beliefs as later innovations. Reading the ante-Nicene Church Fathers quickly blows that up, firmly establishing that “Catholic” innovations were right there in the 1st and 2nd Centuries.

Once a Protestant starts to ask, “Where was my church in history?”, a crisis of Faith can ensue because the standard Protestant answers to that question are less-than-convincing.

2) If the Bible was meant to stand alone, why is it so incomplete, and where did it come from anyway?

“All we need is the Bible. It is the all-sufficient guide to Christian Faith,” so say many modern Protestants. But at the very beginning of this article, I noted something important.

The Bible does not provide directions on how to run a worship service. Nowhere in the NT does any writer tell you how to do that, yet the Evangelicals have an order of worship. Where did they get it from, if they just believe and practice what is in the Bible?

Here are some other things the NT provides no guidance on:

  • How does one conduct a baptismal service and at what age?
  • How does one conduct an ordination?
  • How does one convert to Christianity? Are there steps? Requirements? What constitutes membership in the Church?
  • How does one prepare for and conduct a wedding?
  • Since Matthew, Mark, and Luke are not signed, how do you know they wrote those Gospels?
  • Which books actually belong in the New Testament? The New Testament doesn’t contain a list. The books in the NT were canonized by the Orthodox Church.
  • The Gospels and the Apostle Paul mentioned other teachings and traditions, what are those since they are not in the NT?

Those are just a few examples. For a set of books that was intended to be “all sufficient”, the New Testament certainly leaves out a lot of important details on how to run a church. Which, frankly, is not surprising. The New Testament arose within functioning Churches. The Churches had been established by the Apostles and their disciples. The local clergy and the people had been taught how to be Christians in-person. Not through a book. There was no need, and really no way, to write down everything that the Apostles spent years teaching people orally and by example. The New Testament books, after they were written and began circulating, were selected for authenticity based on their conforming to what the Church was already doing and teaching. That is why a book such as the “Gospel of Thomas” was rejected, despite being the purported work of an Apostle. Reading “Thomas” in light of Church teaching clearly indicates its Gnostic nature.

The Church created the Bible. The Bible did not create the Church.

Until the 16th and 17th Centuries, that is, when radicals, cut off from an authentic sacerdotal priesthood, had no choice but to invent their own flavors of Gnosticism based on their misreading of the Christian Bible. The newly available printed Bibles really did create those churches, in a twisted sort of way.

Protestants will fight you on this. You will hear all kinds of things from them. For example, the New Testament is the eternal Word of God that dropped from Heaven fully formed. (That is Christ, by the way, Who is the eternal Word of God, and not a collection of books.) Arguing for the NT as a purely divine action, divorced from human history, doesn’t work. Even the hardest shell Baptists imagainable know it doesn’t work.  They know that the Bible arose within living communities, and that the Church selected the books to include, even if they desperately try to avoid admitting that. It is a hard argument to make that the Church which collected, preserved, and canonized the New Testament was, simultaneously, in deep apostasy.

The low-church know that they believe and follow all kinds of traditions that are not recorded in the Bible. Some of these are authentic (names of the Gospel writers, the composition of the canon), but many aren’t. They are also aware, on some level, that their preferred interpretations of scripture are not, in fact, actually scripture. They are traditions of men far removed from the Early Church, and any real study of history will show them that.

The Bible is neither a liturgical handbook nor is it systematic theology. The books of the New Testament were meant to be read within the Church and interpreted by the Church through the leadership of the Holy Spirit with the guidance of Holy Tradition. Any attempt to understand the scriptures outside the Church leads to unavoidable error, which is why we have 30,000 plus denominations in the US alone.

Once a Protestant sees the error of “scripture alone”, he can’t unsee it. Trust me, I’ve been there.

3) How did the first Christians worship?

Modern low-church Protestants don’t think much about how the Early Church worshipped. Not deeply, anyway, as most just assume the Early Church worshipped exactly the way they do. Even the Evangelicals who are very into the Jewish / Hebraic Roots of Christianity, and so realize that Jews use liturgies, usually can’t connect the dots. Early Christian worship is simply a blank space many Protestants never try to fill in.

The earliest Christians in Jerusalem continued to worship in the Temple and met, on the first day of the week, to celebrate the Eucharist. When away from Jerusalem, they would have participated in the Synagogue on the Sabbath instead of the Temple. Eventually the Church separated from the synagogue and the Temple (even before it was destroyed), but Orthodox Christians continued the traditions of both in their worship.

This is simply historical fact. The early Church worshipped liturgically centered around the Eucharist. There were no altar calls, praise and worship bands, pop songs, guitars, choreographed dance routines, or excited pastors jumping around. Coming face-to-face with that fact has caused more than a few low-church Protestants to convert to Orthodoxy.

The video below is a great introduction to Orthodox Worship as the continuation of Old Testament worship.

The Eucharist especially is a stumbling block for many low-church Protestants. They are cut off from a valid, sacerdotal priesthood and so deny the Eucharist, even though it was instituted by Christ and confirmed by the Apostle Paul in his 1st Letter to Corinthians (Chapter 11):

23 For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread:

24 And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me.

25 After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, this cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me.

26 For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord’s death till he come.

27 Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.

28 But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup.

29 For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord’s body.

30 For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep.

31 For if we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged.

32 But when we are judged, we are chastened of the Lord, that we should not be condemned with the world.

33 Wherefore, my brethren, when ye come together to eat, tarry one for another.

34 And if any man hunger, let him eat at home; that ye come not together unto condemnation. And the rest will I set in order when I come.

Protestants, out of necessity, have misinterpreted the Biblical references to the Eucharist in a “spiritual” manner as referring to the teachings of Christ, and not to the actual Bread and Wine. Therefore, engaging in Bible quote battles is usually not going to avail much for anyone. Protestants often have an ironclad belief in their interpretation of scripture, especially on this topic.

But it gets harder for them with ante-Nicene writers such as St. Irenaeus. This is from his 2nd Century work Against Heresies:

When, therefore, the mingled cup and the manufactured bread receives the Word of God, and the Eucharist of the blood and the body of Christ is made,(14) from which things the substance of our flesh is increased and supported, how can they affirm that the flesh is incapable of receiving the gift of God, which is life eternal, which [flesh] is nourished from the body and blood of the Lord, and is a member of Him?-even as the blessed Paul declares in his Epistle to the Ephesians, that “we are members of His body, of His flesh, and of His bones.”

The ante-Nicene Patristic writings are not in the canon of scripture. That was a decision made by the Orthodox Church. Even so, they were preserved by the Church and are accorded great authority for their early Christian witness. These writings testify to a 1st and 2nd Century Church that was already hierarchical, liturgical, and centered around the Eucharist. These historical facts present a difficult challenge for Protestants, especially for those who teach that the Church only went “apostate” during the 3rd or 4th Centuries.

Conclusion 

Protestants in America are getting nervous about Orthodoxy. Many of them have friends, family, and former pastors that have converted. They clearly see us as a threat. Expect the attacks to continue. While it is frustrating, we need to remember that our job is not to win arguments or put other people down. The Holy Spirit must soften their hearts and prepare them to authentically receive Christ through His Church. All we can do is be examples of Christian holiness, and perhaps get as many Protestants as possible interested in learning more about the Early Church and the authentic roots of Christianity. For many of us, learning the real truth about historic Christianity was all it took to get us into the catechumenate.

Nicholas – member of the Western Rite Vicariate, a part of the Antiochian Orthodox Christian Archdiocese in America

thanks to source:

https://orthodoxreflections.com/three-big-questions-for-protestants/

Thursday, August 3, 2023

“WE MUST BE CAREFUL ABOUT HOW WE TALK WITH OTHERS” Seventh Talk on the Divine Liturgy, Part A ~ Metropolitan Athanasios of Limassol

 


“WE MUST BE CAREFUL ABOUT HOW WE TALK WITH OTHERS”

Seventh Talk on the Divine Liturgy, Part A

Talk 6

    

We continue to analyze the text of the Divine Liturgy. Last time, we examined the petition of the Litany of Peace, “For travelers by sea, land, and air; for the sick, the suffering; the imprisoned...”

Then the deacon proclaims: “That we may be delivered from all tribulation, wrath, danger, and necessity, let us pray to the Lord.” In other words, let us entreat the Lord to deliver us from all sorrow, anger, danger, and difficult circumstances. This petition, one of the last in the litany, seems to sum up our needs in general terms: We pray to God to deliver us from any sorrow at all. You might ask: But don’t sorrows bring us spiritual benefit? Yes, indeed, they are good for the soul. There’s no one in this world who hasn’t experienced sorrows in his life. As Scripture says: The whole head is sick, and the whole heart faint (Is. 1:5). The point is how we relate to the sorrows that befall us. If you endure them with patience and fortitude, if you try to extract some spiritual benefit from them, then even if you are to blame for your sorrows, even if you brought them upon yourself, they become a blessed phenomenon in your life. But if you receive sorrows incorrectly—if you grumble, get nervous, rebel against God, against your neighbors and others—you’ll fall into despair; and then, of course, you receive no benefit.

Here’s an example. A man commits a crime, the police arrest him, and he goes to jail. If the man admits that he’s in prison because of the crime he committed, if he admits his fault in winding up behind bars: “I got what I deserved,” if he humbles himself, if he shows patience and endures the severity of imprisonment with prayer and praise of God, saying, “Glory to Thee, O God!” with the realization that his suffering is cleansing and sanctifying him, cutting off many sins, then the sorrow of imprisonment will bring him spiritual benefit.

We have to know that we’ll never rid ourselves of sorrows by our own efforts, no matter how hard we try, no matter what we do. Such is the nature of our lives.

Let’s imagine the following utopian picture. Let’s say a man managed to arrange it so that he never encountered a single sorrow his entire life. Everything is great and joyful for him; it couldn’t be better. What will become of such a man? At the last moment of his life, he’ll still have to face some sorrow—the sorrow of death.

Speaking of sorrow (θλίψις), we mean something really serious, not something funny. Not those minor upsets that we experience from time to time, but sorrow in the truest sense of the word. The verb θλίβω (to sorrow) in ancient Greek originally meant, “to press, to push, to knead.” How do they make oil? The olives are pressed, pressed, put under pressure, turning them into a mash, with oil flowing out. To get oil, olives have to be well squeezed, pressed, kneaded.

Do you understand now what meaning is put into the noun “sorrow” (θλίψις)? This wonderful Greek word fully conveys the meaning: Sorrow is not just grief, not just sadness; sorrow constricts a man from all sides, presses on him with terrible force, trying to crush him completely.

Everyone, even the great saints, experiences a state like this. The Lord Jesus Christ experienced it too in the hour of His temptation. He permitted His human nature to endure great sorrow such that no one has ever endured before. Not a single person in the world has known or will know greater sorrow than that which Christ knew. He sorrowed to such an extent that He sweated drops of blood. After Christ, the Most Holy Theotokos suffered the greatest sorrow.

And yet the Lord created us not so that we might grieve—we were not created for sorrow at all. Having created the Forefather Adam, God placed him in the Garden of Eden—in a beautiful garden of joy and pleasure. And although we know that sorrows bring a man benefits, and that it’s impossible to avoid them, nevertheless, grief is still an undesirable, unpleasant phenomenon for us. When it comes to us, we feel as if we’ve been put on burning coals. When a fish is baked on coals, it’s turned from side to side so it’s thoroughly baked and delicious. If the fish could speak, we would hear it shouting, “Help! Get me off these coals right now!” But we don’t hear anything and we keep turning it. If it remains raw, it will be inedible and we’ll have to throw it out. During the sorrows that befall us, we are like this fish. Sorrows for us are what the burning coals are for the fish; thanks to sorrows we become spiritually mature people.

Besides cleansing the soul of passions, sins, and everything else that burdens it, sorrows make us generally better than we were before: humbler, more internally collected. He who suffers, grieves, and endures temptations doesn’t want to condemn others, accuse them, speak rudely to them. He’s immersed in his own problems and sufferings, his own pain. Thanks to sorrows, we become more compassionate. When we hear or see that others are suffering, are sick, that they’re facing certain difficulties, then since we ourselves have experienced sufferings and sorrows, our soul immediately begins to sympathize with our neighbors, to have compassion on them. We partake of someone else’s pain and suffering, and this rouses us to prayer. Our prayer can be very brief—one “Lord, have mercy,” but all our love and concern for those whom we see suffering are put into it.

Can someone who has never faced pain and suffering in his life, never had to endure the smallest sorrow, really be able to understand someone else? As the saying goes, the satiated man doesn’t understand the famished man. Indeed, it’s true. If you don’t know the feeling of hunger, how will you understand the starving man? In extreme cases, you’ll tell him: “Be patient. Going hungry is good for keeping slim.” I’m not kidding. You hear such things sometimes.

In the petition of the litany we’re analyzing, it’s not about simply avoiding some sorrows. I think the Church means here precisely those sorrows that can deal us a crushing, fatal blow. Christ Himself taught us to pray for deliverance from such sorrows: And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from the evil one (Mt. 6:13, Lk. 11:4). Although we know that a Christian must wage a battle against the evil one, nevertheless we must ask God to save us from these temptations that exceed our strength.

You may ask: Is it actually possible that Christ would allow us to be tempted beyond our strength? No. As the Apostle Paul says: God is faithful, Who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able (1 Cor. 10:13). Therefore, whatever temptation may befall us, it won’t exceed our strength, because otherwise God wouldn’t have allowed it to come upon us. Most often we simply don’t know how far our strength can go, and therefore we don’t use it fully, and often leave it altogether inactive. Man has a huge potential of forces. Let each of you remember the sorrowful events you’ve had to face in your life. You’ll discover something amazing: Had we known ahead of time that we’d have to go through this or that sorrow, we wouldn’t have dared to believe that we could handle it. But when this grief came to us, although we were shocked, amazed, knocked off our feet, nevertheless we managed to survive it. This testifies to the fact that we don’t know our own strength.

God is near to those who suffer or are tempted. But we, weak and pitiful, forget about it. It happens that people caught in the very maelstrom of sorrows can be drowned by them and become mentally and physically sick. They can also become spiritually ill if their relationship with God is upset. In such a painful state, they can cause terrible harm to themselves and others. In other words, sorrow, which could be a blessing for a man and bring him great spiritual benefit, becomes the cause of great evil and destruction. And this happens not because God left us without His providence, but because we have little faith.

Remember how the Apostle Peter walked on the water. Seeing Christ walking on the sea, Peter turned to Him with a request: Bid me come unto Thee on the water, to which Christ responded: Come. Peter got out of the boat and went to the Lord on the waves. But then he turned on his logic and thought: “I’m walking right on the water. I could drown at any moment”; and he immediately submerged into the water and began to sink. He started sinking not because Christ’s command had lost its power. The command of Christ: “Come to Me on the waves,” was not canceled for Peter. So what did he lose? He lost his faith. Therefore, the Lord stretched out His hand to him and said: O thou of little faith, wherefore didst thou doubt? (Mt. 14:31). Peter began to sink because of lack of faith. The same thing happens to us. As soon as we lose faith, as soon as we stop beholding Christ with the eye of our mind, we immediately fall.

And another thing we should know: Every person has his own measure of spiritual strength. You give one a kick, and he just smiles. It’s like he doesn’t care. Another one you politely ask: “Forgive me. Please, take a step back”—and despite your “please” and “forgive,” he gets offended and embarrassed. Everyone is different. And this forces us to be extremely attentive to how we communicate with others. People’s spiritual strength varies greatly, and various factors influence this difference. A man has one type of spiritual strength, a woman has another; a young man has one, an old man another; a holy man has one, a passionate man another; a mentally healthy man has one, a mentally ill man another.

People’s internal states are manifested differently in their external appearance. Some have what is going on in their souls written on their foreheads, but for others, it’s impossible to guess the state of their inner man by their appearance. Some may have laugh though they’re experiencing great sorrows. This laughter doesn’t mean the man doesn’t have deep and painful experiences because of what he faces in life.

It’s a mistake if we judge the condition of someone else based on our own measure. In my youth, I used to make mistakes like this when I heard Confessions. It still happens sometimes now, but I’ve gotten a little better over the years. Now I at least try not to outwardly show my feelings and emotions in response to what I sometimes have to hear in Confession.

Let’s say someone comes and he’s weeping because his cat is sick. To me, this is a frivolous reason to be crying. But for this man, his cat’s sickness is a cause of true sorrow; it fills his heart with anxiety and suffering. And you should try to understand his sorrow. You can’t laugh and say: “Ha! What nonsense! Is it worth weeping over a cat?” No, you have to understand him. For him, his cat’s sickness is a serious matter; it’s important to him.

It gives me the impression that there are people who can be incurably traumatized by the simplest of things, which we don’t even pay attention to, which for us don’t even exist. For you it’s nothing, but it matters a lot to someone else. We, priests, or you, parents, as well as anyone else who has to communicate with others often, should always remember this, be very condescending, put yourself in the other’s place, and not declare: “What you’re saying is all far-fetched; it’s not serious.” If someone says he’s suffering, that he’s grieving, then he is. Of course, sometimes, to cheer someone up, you can tell him: “No worries, it’s not as bad as it seems at first.” But at the same time, you have to show him that you understand: “Yes, indeed, what happened is causing you pain and suffering.” You shouldn’t dismiss him and say, “There’s nothing sorrowful in this.”

I remember one case that left a deep impression on me. When I was living on the Holy Mountain with Elder Joseph [of Vatopedi—OC], our brotherhood had a really serious temptation, a great sorrow. The Elder and I visited various Athonite spiritual fathers—Elder Joseph wanted to talk with them to discuss what we should do to overcome our difficulties. The Elder had to sort out the situation. We went around nearly the entire Mountain, meeting with many elders. They all spoke some spiritual words to us, supporting us with their prayers and parting words. But it was the meeting with Elder Aimilianos, the abbot of Simonopetra, that made an impression on me. Listening to Elder Joseph describe the temptation that had befallen our brotherhood, I thought at that moment that Fr. Aimilianos would say: “It’s a temptation. You have to endure it. Don’t worry, it will all pass,” and so on. But after listening to our Elder, Fr. Aimilianos said something completely different:

“Indeed, Geronda, a great temptation has come your way. Very big. You’re in an incredibly difficult situation. I absolutely understand how tragic this situation is. You even came to Simonopetra to share your problem with me.”

At his first words, the thought flashed through my mind: “Is that how he wants to support us? His words only plunge us deeper into the depths.” But then I realized that Fr. Aimilianos was showing with his words how well he understood us. He entered into Elder Joseph’s situation. Others might not have found our situation so difficult. They might have thought it was all easy and we just had to endure. But for us, it was a matter of life and death for our brotherhood, a matter of its spiritual and physical existence. And Fr. Aimilianos understood this perfectly.

I repeat: It’s important to understand that every person has his own strengths, his own capabilities, his own sensitivities. What’s insignificant and non-existent for you might be an incredibly important and serious matter for someone else.

I still remember what mistakes I made in this regard. For example, there was an accident once on the Holy Mountain. No one died, but in the first hours after the accident, there was a rumor that a monk had crashed. And in my youthful immaturity, I dashed in to Elder Joseph, knocked on his door, hurriedly went in, and blurted out on the move:

“Geronda, a monk was in a car crash! We were told from Daphne. There was a terrible accident.”

I wasn’t even thinking about the fact that Elder Joseph had a weak heart, and I was bringing him terrible news. You can’t do that with people who have heart problems. You have to tell them such terrible things with caution, not so directly.

When I ran in like that to the Elder, he was sitting and reading a book. Having heard this terrible news from me, the Elder’s face completely changed, as though he were at a loss, he crossed himself, and said in a weak voice:

“Oh, what a disaster…”

A little later I realized how serious a mistake I had made. What if after my news he had had a heart attack? I gave him the news and then calmed down. The subject was closed for me, as they say. But others have different strengths, especially the elderly. Now, having come of age, I see that a thirty-year-old has completely different strength from a sixty-year-old.

Thus, it’s good that the Church prays to God for our deliverance from every sorrow. The Church thereby warns us to stay away from the storm. After all, if you fall into it, will you be able to get out of it unharmed? But sooner or later, you will inevitably find yourself in a storm. It comes to you, and from a place that you’re not expecting. People might see this storm as big or small, but you’ll look at it through the prism of your own perception. Everyone relates to the temptations and difficulties that befall him according to his own perception.

May the Lord deliver us from every sorrow—or at least give us prudence to use the sorrows that befall us correctly. That’s what’s really necessary for us—to relate to our sorrows correctly. And above all, to our last sorrow, which will visit us in the hour of our departure from this world. May the Lord grant us prudence and wisdom in that hour so we might meet death in a manner pleasing to him.

Part 7B

Metropolitan Athanasios of Limassol
Translation by Jesse Dominick

Pravoslavie.ru

7/25/2023


much thanks to:

https://orthochristian.com/155042.html