The Catalog of Good Deeds

My son, the first degree of the Priesthood is that of Reader. It behooveth thee therefore, to peruse the divine Scriptures daily, to the end that the hearers, regarding thee may receive edification; that thou in nowise shaming thine election, mayest prepare thyself for a higher degree. For by a chaste, holy and upright life thou shalt gain the favour of the God of loving-kindness, and shalt render thyself worthy of a greater ministry, through Jesus Christ our Lord; to whom be glory unto ages of ages. Amen. (From the Service for setting apart of a Reader)

***

… It is truly a great honor for a person to take the holy books such as the Epistles into his hands and read them to the people when they are congregated in the church. His voice must be clear. The words must be heard perfectly and the diction of the reader must show a person who believes in what he reads that he feels and is moved by them. They are words that have unimaginable grandeur. They are words that embody life and strength inside them. They are the heavenly seed that God continues to sow in the hearts of people. (From the writings of Bishop Augoustinos of Florina (Orthodox House of Worship))

***

Those who read the Psalms and the Daily Offices, that is, Vespers, Matins, and the Hours, should prepare in good time and find the troparions and kontakions of the day beforehand, so as not to make mistakes during the reading in church and not to have to stop to look for troparions and kontakions and thereby spoil the spirit of prayer. The reader should stand straight, with his hands at his sides; he should read without hurrying and without dragging, and he should pronounce the words clearly and distinctly.

In reading the Apostle (Epistle), one should on no account shout excessively or indecorously, out of vainglory. On the contrary, one should read in a natural voice, reverently, distinctly, majestically, without that exertion which is offensive both to the ear and the conscience, so that our sacrifice of praise may be acceptable to God, lest we offer to God only the fruit of our lips (Heb 13:15), and offer the fruit of our mind and heart to vanity, while even the fruit of our lips is rejected by God as a polluted sacrifice. (From the writings of Bishop Ignatius (An Offering to Contemporary Monasticism, The Arena))

Source: http://www.orthodox.net/ustav/reader.html

The Church preserves its identity thoroughly. 2000 years that passed did not manage to change the Gospel. It remains the same good news and bright God’s message addressed to people. Sometimes it seems to us that the rite has replaced the faith, that we have stumbled into the traditions of the past, that the life of the Church has become darkened like the image on the miraculous icon and has been covered with a thik cover. But then the day of Pascha arrives and makes all the doubts and fears go away. Any dualism of the soul and any blasphemy against the Truth disappear in the sound of Paschal bells and victorious “Christ is Risen!” chants.

We should not just live only one week a year with this Paschal joy. We need to catch it and hold it just like Elisha, the disciple of Prophet Elijah, did when he held Elijah’s mantle in his hands.

The Church stretches the Paschal string through the whole year so that we can follow the commandment of Apostle Paul: “Rejoice evermore”. And there are ties on this string, which are Sundays. It is a minor Pascha; an antipascha, not in the meaning "against", but in the meaning "instead". Of course, when Apostles Peter and Paul were alive, the Church did not celebrate the feast of the All-Praised Leaders of the Apostles. While the Mother of God was still alive, there was no feast of the Dormition. What did the Church have, when there was no Dormition, Intercession, Entrance into the Temple and the Apostles’ feast days? The Church had Sunday. It is the first feast of the new humanity, thanks to which our connection with the early Church and the cradle remains firm and does not break.

The world is contraucted on the basis of seven days(week). The number six points to the created world while the number seven reminds us that the created world is blessed. Here lies the key to understanding of the meaning of Saturday celebrations. On the seventh day, which is Saturday, God blessed everything that he had created. Thus, on Saturday a person had to rest from his everyday work, think about the Creator’s work and glorify Him for how perfectly He had everything organized. It was supposed that on Saturday a man did not reveal his power over the created world: he was supposed to spend that day without digging, cutting or lighting a fire. This day should have been filled with prayer, rest and thoughts about God. However, a man has sinned and fallen victim to the seducer. He needed to be saved from sin. Saturday could not save the man, because it was only there to support his spiritual life. Christ healed humanity and He did that on Sunday, the first day of the week.

The redemption of the world is even greater example of love than its creation. The fact that God easily created a beautiful world beyond compare shows that He is almighty and wise. At the same time, the fact that He sent His only Son to save the world shows His love. What should we do then? For what should we love God more? For His Almightiness or for His love toward us as fallen creations? The Church states: for His love. The Church does not cancel Saturday but instead calls it a feast day and fills it with prayer. Nevertheless, the Church places Sunday, the first day of the week, above Saturday. We celebrate it more passionately, because it is our constant reminder of the One Who loves us and sacrificed Himself for us.

Sunday is the first and the eighth day of the week at the same time. It is the first day in terms of the weekly cycle, and it becomes the eighth day when it breaks the cycle and goes beyond it. On that very first day, God created light and separated it from darkness. It is joyful that we can see the similarity between this day and the day of Resurrection. The thing is, the Resurrected Christ defeated darkness. He made it visible and let the man get out from it and step into the light. Concerning the eighth day, the liturgical Sunday celebration turns us into participants of blessed eternity, the everlasting feast described in the Gospel. The Holy Fathers referred to it as the eighth day. The seventh day, is when God does not create anything new and rules over what is already create. With Christ’s coming and His righteous Judgement, a new day will come – the eighth day - and the Kingdom of Heaven, of which there shall be no end. The Sunday celebration unites the two ends of history – its artistic beginning and its dramatic end. All the beauty of this theological meal is open for any person who takes part in the Sunday prayer.

By the way, the Resurrection of Christ is the eighth resurrection in the Bible, and the first one by its meaning. Before it there were three resurrections in the Old Testament: Elijah and Elisha resurrected the adolescents, and one dead man revived after he had fallen on the Elisha’s bones. In the New Testament, the Lord resurrected the son of the widow, the daughter of Jair and Lazarus. The seventh resurrection was the resurrection of many saints in Jerusalem during the Savior’s sufferings on the cross (Matthew 27:52-53). The Lord Himself was the eighth. But what kind of a resurrection was it? He resurrected for everlasting eternal life, over which death has no power. All the people who had been resurrected before died later, because their nature was not transfigured. Only the Lord opened the gates to Eternity for us with His total victory over death. Therefore, it turns out that His Resurrection is the eighth in its order and the first in its meaning. The same is with His day, the Lord’s day.

An article by Fr. Andrew Tkachev

Source: http://otrok-ua.ru/sections/art/show/den_vosmoi.html

The holy ones of the Orthodox Church have various customary saint titles with which they are commemorated on the Church Calendar and in divine services.

The following list explains the references:

Confessor: one who has suffered for the faith but not martyred outright.

Hiero-confessor: one who has suffered for the faith, but not martyred, who is also a clergyman.

Enlightener of N. or Illuminator of N.: the saint who first brought the faith to a people or region, or who did major work of evangelization there.

Equal-to-the-Apostles: one whose work greatly built up the Church, whether through direct missionary work or through assisting the Church's place in society.

Fool-for-Christ: a saint known for his apparent, yet holy, insanity.

God-bearer: one who bears God within himself and is aflame in heart with love for Him.

Great-martyr: one who was martyred for the faith and suffered torture.

Hieromartyr: a martyr who is also a clergyman.

Martyr: one who has died for the faith.

Merciful: one known for charitable work, especially toward the poor.

Myrrh-bearer: one of the women who were present at Christ's passion and went to the tomb to anoint the body of Jesus.

Myrrh-streaming, Myrrh-gusher, or Myroblete: the relics of the saint exude holy and sweet-smelling (and often miraculous) oil.

New-martyr: a martyr often bearing the same name as a more ancient martyr, but usually more recent in the Church's history.

Passion-bearer: one who faced his death in a Christ-like manner.

Protomartyr: the first martyr in a given region (in the case of Stephen the Protomartyr, the first martyr of the whole Church).

Right-believing: an epithet used for sainted secular rulers.

Righteous: a holy person under the Old Covenant (Old Testament Israel) but also sometimes used for married saints of the New Covenant (the Church); righteous may also used as a translation for the Greek hosios, which is usually translated as "venerable."

Unmercenary: a saint who refused to take payment for healing.

Venerable: a monastic saint.

Venerable-martyr: a martyred monastic.

Virgin-martyr: an unmarried, non-monastic, chaste female martyr.

Wonderworker: a saint renowned for performing miracles, also called "miracle-worker".

Source: https://orthodoxwiki.org/Saint_titles

Editor's Note: Please comment below if a title was not included in the following list or if the description for any of the titles can be expanded.

The Pukhtitsa Dormition Convent is one of the most beloved monasteries of the Russian Orthodox Church, bearing the special distinction of having never been closed during the godless Soviet years. The monastery’s unbroken line of spiritual continuity has given rise to several notable spiritual figures, such as the previous abbess, the ever-memorable Schema-Abbess Barbara (Trofimova), who reposed on February 8, 2011. Matushka bore the obedience entrusted to her by the hierarchy for more than forty years. In the patriarchal words of condolence about matushka it says, “It is largely thanks to the labors of Schema-Abbess Barbara that Pukhtitsa Monastery became a true outpost of Orthodoxy in Estonia.”

How does a monastery that was never closed in the Soviet years and that has raised up abbesses for many convents in various dioceses of the Russian Orthodox Church live today? Does it preserve the inheritance left by Mother Barbara? We spoke with the current Pukhtitsa mother superior, Abbess Philareta (Kalacheva) on these questions and on monastic life in general.

—Matushka Philareta, in what ways are the peculiarities of the residency of a Russian Orthodox monastery in Estonia manifested today?

—Pukhtitsa Monastery is often called the Zion of the Baltic region. It is a place sanctified by the appearance of the Mother of God and the finding of her wonderworking icon, especially blessed and dear to the heart of every Orthodox person. As a century ago, our monastery realizes a service to the Church and people in Estonia under the protection of the Most-Pure Mother of God. Pukhtitsa Monastery was created as an abode of love and mercy. Receiving guests and pilgrims, we feel the mutual sympathy, respect and love of the locals for the monastery. We want to continue to preserve this tradition of warm, peaceful relations in the future.

—By today’s standards, your monastery is fairly large—more than 100 nuns. There is developed farming—of the land, and livestock. Not long ago, you said in an interview that few young people come to the monastery now, and therefore, few working hands. What do you see as the course of action—to reduce the volume of work or, perhaps, attract more workers from outside? Is the former useful for the monastery, from your point of view?

—We absolutely cannot reduce the amount of work: We live on what we grow and receive from our natural resources and we also receive and provide all that is necessary for the many pilgrims flocking to Pukhtitsa year-round. In modern times, we have the possibility to more mechanize our manual labor, widely using farming machinery, and this enables us to significantly alleviate the sister’s obediences.

—In connection with the necessity of engaging hired labor, do you manage to avoid the loss or neglect of the sisters’ spiritual and prayer life?

—Of course, the monastery has permanent workers, doing the work that the sisters of the monastery cannot. This includes maintenance and plumbing, and work in carpentry and metal workshops. As a rule, they are believers, family people, and such a practice can in no way influence the prayer life of the sisters of the monastery, because these are different planes, existing separately from one another.

—Do many pilgrims come to the monastery today? What do the sisters try to tell guests about, besides the history of the monastery?

—Yes, quite a number of pilgrims come to the monastery today. The sisters lead tours for them, tell them about the history of the monastery, and pilgrims visit the museum. Whoever wants to stay for a longer time helps out with obediences, in the garden, on the farm, in cleaning up the grounds. The sisters serving the pilgrims in the guest houses can answer their questions and help those just beginning their Church lives. Pilgrims have the opportunity to turn to priests in confession with questions of a spiritual nature, and also to speak with the older nuns having more life and spiritual experience; but pilgrims and guests of the monastery must remember that the life of monastics is intimate and should be filled with prayerful attention and bodily labor, therefore to distract the sisters and to persist in wanting to talk is a sinful desire.

—Does the monastery engage in social services?

—Of course! The tradition of Pukhtitsa Monastery as an abode of love and mercy always highly values self-sacrificing service to God in the person of those around us in need of help. And in the very hardest of times, pilgrims have always received room and board in the monastery guest houses, and this tradition of monastery charity is preserved in Pukhtitsa to this day. The monastery has always provided and continues to provide all possible assistance to the poor, a tradition of sharing the gathered harvests with orphanages and hospitals has developed, and on Nativity and Pascha we deliver books and gifts to children with disabilities.

—At the monastic conference in the fall of 2013 in the Trinity-St. Sergius Lavra, the question was often heard during the discussion about how inhabitants of the monasteries are overworked and little time and strength remain for the cell rule of prayer. How is the day organized for the sisters in your monastery?

—The foundation of the Pukhtitsa routine has always been a harmonious combination of prayer and labor. Today the day is arranged just as in the first years of the founding of the monastery. The righteous St. John of Kronstadt loved the Pukhtitsa sisters and said of them, “The Pukhtitsa sisters are taking large steps towards the Heavenly Kingdom.” And actually, the work then was almost unbearable—the first Pukhtitsa nuns had to combine building, the building up of the newly-created monastic habitation, laborious agricultural work on more than 250 acres of land, and the monastic rule. The full monastic liturgical cycle was introduced here in the first year and two monastic choirs were created. Besides that, the Pukhtitsa nuns labored in charitable institutions, cared for the sick in the monastery hospital, and taught orphans to read and handicrafts to children at the monastery’s orphanage. I’m saying all this for comparison.

As our reposed matushka Schema-Abbess Barbara (Trofimova) would often say, labor can be equated with prayer if it is performed with a feeling of especial gratitude to God, as if in His presence, and is perceived as service to the Lord for the good of this holy abode. Such work, done for the glory of God, is called spiritual. The older sisters have said concerning prayer, “You cannot take a fish from a pond without labor,” that is, if you do not work in the sweat of your brow, then your prayer will be empty. Even in the biggest jobs, our sisters do not forget about prayer.

—Can physically weak sisters stay in the monastery?

—What kind of physical weakness are we talking about? About poor health? There are no such healthy monastics—it’s an illusion. Sickness is a necessary cross which monastics bear.

But in the monastery, every person, despite any infirmity, is important and necessary in his own place, as in a complex machine where even the smallest cog is necessary. And each person finds his necessary place of obedience in the monastery, provided that he has love for God and a firm resolve to live and labor in this holy habitation.

The history of Orthodox asceticism shows that physical strength and health are not necessary for salvation. The apostle Paul himself says, [The] strength [of God] is made perfect in weakness (2 Cor. 12:9).

—Matushka, your monastery was never closed in the Soviet years. Everyone who is interested in questions of the spiritual life and women’s monasteries has heard a great deal about the Pukhtitsa eldresses—Matushka Lyubov, Matushka Catherine, Matushka Sergiya. Have you managed to maintain the continuity of spirit and monastic traditions?

—Indeed, Pukhtitsa Monastery has a great advantage—it was never closed for even a day, and that’s very important, because the continuity of monastic traditions was preserved here. Many of the first Pukhtitsa sisters were spiritual children of righteous St. John of Kronstadt and passed on his legacy, preserving his living memory. In the postwar years, many of our sisters were cared for by the experienced God-bearing elder Hiero-Schemamonk Simeon (Zhelnin) of the Pskov Caves Monastery, now numbered among the saints, and were guided by his instructions. Moreover, about eight decades of the monastery’s history were consecrated by the spiritual feats of our blessed eldresses the nuns Elena (Kushaneva) and the nun Catherine (Malkov-Panina), who bore the heavy asceticism of foolishness-for-Christ’s-sake in the monastery.

There were spiritually-experienced nuns laboring in Pukhtitsa, and the younger generation had the opportunity not only to see their examples, but were blessed to serve them: living in one cell, to speak with spiritually-experienced sisters, to feel and to see their hardships and the grace of the monastic life with their own eyes. Therefore, continuity is a living tradition which is transmitted as the spiritual experience of the life of a wise generation to the young generation. It is always touching… After all, the life of the older nuns remains in our memory, because they themselves gave us a piece of their hearts and souls. So many experiences, prayers, and their involvement has been invested in the life of young novices. There are wonderful sisters—Matushka Schema-Abbess Barbara, Schemanun Photina, Schemanun Lyubov, Schemanun Iona, Nun Euphrosynia, and so on—who are unforgetable and whose spiritual feats are difficult to overestimate. In complex, unresolvable, difficult situations for the heart, one cannot help but think of how they would act in your place.

—Tell us, please, a little about the Pukhtitsa eldresses.

—The book Abbess as a Holy Obedience, the fruit of the labors of the sisters of the monastery, dedicated to the memory of Schema-Abbess Barbara (Trofimova), who led Pukhtitsa Monastery for more than forty years, was just published. The book was presented at the Second Pukhtitsa Readings in December 2013. Already-prepared and awaiting publication is a book about the Blessed Nun Ekaterina (Maklov-Panina),[1] widely known beyond the borders of Estonia. Readers will have the chance to learn more about the ascetical life of the remarkable Pukhtitsa ascetics of piety of the twentieth and twenty-first centuries.

—Do the sisters practice the Jesus Prayer?

—Upon monastic tonsure, the sisters receive a cell rule of prayer, and every nun is charged with prayer as a duty. Our cell rule includes the so-called 500. As you know, monastics pray for the whole world, they pray for all people, and they are a mystery: Monks pray in secret.

I must note that our monastery is cenobitic, and laborious, and there are many people. Over the course of 120 years, the experience of total immersion in contemplative prayer has not been here. The prayer of the heart must be taken up with a blessing and under the direction of an experience doer of the Jesus Prayer. The older sisters say that the Lord hears the humble. First, we must learn humility…

—Modern people often hear that the monastic spirit is dying out in our day. What do you think about it?

—People tend to observe, evaluate, and sometimes criticize monastics, but there is a saying: “People see how a monk cavorts, but they don’t see how he weeps.” Of course, it’s impossible to compare us with the ancient ascetics of Egypt, who could, for example, fast for many days, eating nothing, undertaking many hours of prayerful vigil—unfortunately, modern people no longer have the strength for such asceticism. But monasticism is always the same, just as man is one and the same.

I think every time has its own podvig, and modern monastics can also labor according to their strength and receive Divine grace like the ancient ascetics. Thus, in my view, it’s premature to talk about the extinction of the monastic spirit. It is revealed only to the Lord, and only the Lord can judge each man’s labors, asceticism, and cross-bearing. Monasticism is a mystery; it is intimate.

—Matushka, must a girl who wants to become a nun first receive a secular education? Is there a demand in Pukhtitsa for knowledge gained in the world?

—I don’t think these things are interconnected, and secular education is not a condition or prerequisite for entering a monastery; but knowledge gained by the sisters in the world, is, of course, used when necessary, and there are many such examples in our monastery.

—Tell us, please, a bit about how you became a nun. Who did you learn monasticism from; who was your example in the monastic life?

—My path to monasticism wasn’t anything special or unusual. During my summer breaks from school, I would visit Pukhtitsa Monastery with the blessing of my spiritual father, working together with the sisters in the “hot” time of haymaking, and I saw the monastic life with my own eyes and was so imbued with the blessed atmosphere, the prayer life, the spiritual work of obediences, the feeling of a united monastic life, that by the end of the summer I didn’t want to leave. When it came time to leave, I found no place for myself anywhere, and as soon as I graduated and received my diploma, I immediately came to the monastery for permanent residence, and any other kind of life was simply impossible for me. I attribute all of this to the work of grace—only Divine grace can wrest a man from his environment and lead him to monasticism.

—How would you advise a girl desiring monasticism to choose a monastery? What is necessary to consider, in your view (perhaps climate, obediences, the spirit of the monastery), and what must you know about yourself and about the monastery, having decided to leave the world?

—There is only one case in which someone can become a monastic: If there is a calling from God. It is expressed in a strong, irresistible desire for the monastic life. All that was dear and sweet for your heart in the world becomes unbearably oppressive. The sisters have said, “All is well; you have your mama, papa, brother, and sister at home; everyone loves you; but it is impossible for you to be there, just as you choke without air.”

As for choosing a monastery, I think the heart will tell you, it won’t deceive you, and you will feel that precisely here is your place. Then you should consult about it and receive a blessing from your spiritual father.

For those desiring to enter a monastery, it’s important to know what they are searching for when they go to a monastery, and what they expect when they turn to Christ. Then, they either go to find the wholeness and fullness of the inner life, or for Christ to resolve this or that theoretical question for them which concerned them. It’s very important. Will you go to Christ as to your Deliverer from spiritual sorrow, from weakness of will, which each of us bears within ourselves, that the Lord might give us strength to labor, or as to a philosopher for resolving our doubts? It’s necessary to understand, because in this or that case you receive different results. One of the greats said that the realm of doubt is just as endless as the realm of thoughts. Now it is one of the reasons to advise those desiring to enter a monastery again and again to test themselves and make sure that the path of your spiritual life is going not from theory to life, but from life to theory, not from doubts to Christ, but from Christ to the resolution of doubts, not from the mind to the heart, but from the heart to the mind.

The logic of those desiring it is strange: “I love the Lord and I want to go to a monastery, but I’m afraid and I have doubts!” This cannot be. If you love Christ, then you believe firmly, and if you believe, then you trust, and if it is so, then there can be no doubts!

Ekaterina Orlova spoke with Abbess Filareta (Kalacheva)

Translated by Jesse Dominick

Source: http://orthochristian.com/106014.html

St. Irenaeus of Lyons was a disciple of St. Polycarp of Smyrna, who was a disciple of St. John the Apostle. Irenaeus' greatest achievement, and the one for which he is most remembered, was his five-volume Against Heresies in which he thoroughly examines and refutes the Gnostic heretics. Every time I read anything from this great writing, I have to wonder if Irenaeus was a prophet; he often seems to be arguing against Protestantism over a thousand years before that particular heresy ever existed.

Of particular interest in examining St. Irenaeus' position on Sola Scriptura are the first five chapters of Book 3 of Against Heresies. Let's look at the common Protestant proof-text:

"We have learned from none others the plan of our salvation, than from those [the Apostles] through whom the Gospel has come down to us, which they did at one time proclaim in public, and, at a later period, by the will of God, handed down to us in the Scriptures, to be the ground and pillar of our Faith." - St. Irenaeus of Lyons, Against Heresies, 3, 1, 1

In order to really understand what Irenaeus is saying here, we need to examine the context. This statement is only the beginning of his argument which extends until the end of chapter 5 in the same book. His argument is so intricate (and great, by the way) and his every word so important to that argument, that a summary can't do it justice.

Now, I'll try to explain what Irenaeus is saying; forgive me if I oversimplify his argument. First, let's note two very important things which it may be easy for some to miss in the quote above:

1. A careful reading of the quote reveals that St. Irenaeus is not referring to all Scripture as "the ground and pillar of our Faith;" he's referring specifically to the Gospels, and, even more specifically, to the message of the Gospels which he outlines in the paragraph that follows the quote above:

"These [the Gospels] have all declared to us that there is one God, Creator of heaven and earth, announced by the law and the prophets; and one Christ the Son of God." - AH, 3, 1, 2

These statements are "the ground and pillar of our Faith" which Irenaeus is referring to. And, in saying this, he's paraphrasing the dialogue between St. Peter the Apostle and Christ in Matthew 16:15-18:

"He [Christ] said to them, 'But who do you say that I am?' Simon Peter answered and said, 'You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.' Jesus answered and said to him, 'Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but My Father who is in heaven. And I also say to you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build My Church, and the gates of hades shall not prevail against it." (NKJV)

2. His wording is very intentional. He's calling his reader's attention back to the words of St. Paul in 1 Timothy 3:15, in which the Apostle says that the Church is "the ground and pillar of the truth." St. Irenaeus is hearkening back to this statement of the Apostle for a reason: he's identifying the message of the Gospel with the Church as being our "ground and pillar," and also identifying "our Faith" with "the truth." And he's doing all of this, as he explains in the chapters following, in contradistinction to the "secret traditions" of the Gnostics, which conflict with the True Faith taught by the Apostles about Christ and handed down in the Church via Apostolic Succession (but more on that in a moment).

Another common Protestant proof-text comes from the next chapter:

"When, however, they are confuted from the Scriptures, they turn round and accuse these same Scriptures, as if they were not correct, nor of authority, and [assert] that they are ambiguous, and that the truth cannot be extracted from them by those who are ignorant of tradition. For [they allege] that the truth was not delivered by means of written documents, but vivâ voce." - AH, 3, 2, 1

Taken alone, this is often made to sound as if Irenaeus is condemning tradition in general; he's not, though. As in the previous quotes, in which he juxtaposes Scripture with the Gnostic's "secret traditions," he now juxtaposes these "secret traditions" with Holy Tradition. Comparing Holy Tradition with the Gnostic's "secret traditions," he enumerates two major differences:

1. Contrary to the “secret traditions” of the Gnostics, which often contradict each other and trace their lineage back to men like Basilides, Marcion, Valentinus, and Cerinthus, and which are passed down only to “the perfect,” Irenaeus asserts that Holy Tradition comes from the Apostles themselves and is passed down through the Priests whom the Apostles appointed to oversee the Church:

“But, again, when we refer them to that Tradition which originates from the Apostles, [and] which is preserved by means of the succession of Priests in the Churches, they object to Tradition, saying that they themselves are wiser not merely than the Priests, but even than the Apostles, because they have discovered the unadulterated truth. … It comes to this, therefore, that these men do now consent neither to Scripture nor to Tradition.” – AH, 3, 2, 2

2. In contradistinction to the secretive, "hidden" nature of the Gnostics' "traditions," Irenaeus contrasts Holy Tradition, which is open all people through the Church:

"It is within the power of all, therefore, in every Church, who may wish to see the truth, to contemplate clearly the Tradition of the Apostles manifested throughout the whole world; and we are in a position to reckon up those who were by the Apostles instituted Bishops in the Churches, and [to demonstrate] the succession of these men to our own times; those who neither taught nor knew of anything like what these [Gnostic heretics] rave about." - AH, 3, 3, 1

In Book 5 of Against Heresies he also makes very clear the Scripture can only be interpreted rightly in the context of the Church, building on the identification of Scripture and Church which he laid out in the quotes above:

"Those, therefore, who desert the preaching of the Church, call in question the knowledge of the holy Priests, not taking into consideration of how much greater consequence is a religious man, even in a private station, than a blasphemous and impudent sophist. Now, such are all the heretics, and those who imagine that they have hit upon something more beyond the truth, so that by following those things already mentioned, proceeding on their way variously, inharmoniously, and foolishly, not keeping always to the same opinions with regard to the same things, as blind men are led by the blind, they shall deservedly fall into the ditch of ignorance lying in their path, ever seeking and never finding out the truth. It behoves us, therefore, to avoid their doctrines, and to take careful heed lest we suffer any injury from them; but to flee to the Church, and be brought up in her bosom, and be nourished with the Lord’s Scriptures. For the Church has been planted as a garden in this world; therefore says the Spirit of God, 'Thou mayest freely eat from every tree of the garden' that is, Eat ye from every Scripture of the Lord; but ye shall not eat with an uplifted mind, nor touch any heretical discord." - AH, 5, 20, 2

So, we've now established that Irenaeus is not arguing for the authority of Scripture alone, nor does he assert Scripture's authority over or outside of the Church. Instead, Irenaeus asserts that Scripture is a part of the Holy Tradition of the Church whose Truth is preserved by means of Apostolic Succession from the Apostles. And I'll close this post with a quote from Irenaeus in which he tells us exactly where that Church is to be found -- even in our own day:

"Since therefore we have such proofs, it is not necessary to seek the truth among others which it is easy to obtain from the Church; since the Apostles, like a rich man [depositing his money] in a bank, lodged in her hands most copiously all things pertaining to the truth: so that every man, whosoever will, can draw from her the water of life. For she is the entrance to life; all others are thieves and robbers. On this account are we bound to avoid them, but to make choice of the thing pertaining to the Church with the utmost diligence, and to lay hold of the Tradition of the truth. For how stands the case? Suppose there arise a dispute relative to some important question among us, should we not have recourse to the most ancient Churches with which the Apostles held constant intercourse, and learn from them what is certain and clear in regard to the present question? For how should it be if the Apostles themselves had not left us writings? Would it not be necessary, [in that case,] to follow the course of the Tradition which they handed down to those to whom they did commit the Churches?" - AH, 3, 4, 1

Source: http://orthodox-apologetics.blogspot.com.by/2010/03/st-irenaeus-of-lyons-sola-scriptura.html

Subscribe to: Posts ( Atom )

Search This Blog

featured Slider

Thoughts About the Office of Reader in the Orthodox Church

Photo Blog: Moleben for the Beginning of the School Year in St. Elisabeth Convent

Understanding the Meaning of the Eighth Day

A List and Explanation of Titles of Orthodox Christian Saints

An Uninterrupted Tradition of Female Monasticism at the Pukhtitsa Dormition Convent

Examining St. Irenaeus' Position on Sola Scriptura

Partners