The Catalog of Good Deeds

Hieromonk Pavel is an archondar of Dionysiou Monastery. For many years, he gives guidance to hundreds of laypeople who come from Greece, Cyprus and other countries of the Orthodox world and visit the Holy Mount Athos. Fr. Pavel refers to the words of St. Basil the Great and states that the first confession of a child should occur at the age of ten.

According to elder Nicodemus, who was the disciple of Archimandrite Cherubim Karambelas, children can begin to confess even at a younger age: “If a child feels the need for repentance, then we should encourage this desire, even if the child will say something insignificant during the Sacrament of Confession”.

Archimandrite Parthenius (Murelatos) thinks that the first confession can take place even if the child is just three years old: “The earlier the child begins to live spiritually, the better. Childhood education has the strongest effect on a person. There is a national proverb in Greece: your child will become the one whom you will teach him to be.

We need to explain to children what is Repentance. They can confess even at the age of three. Participation in this and other Sacraments will strengthen the child in his Faith.

Parents can feed their children with material food, while the spiritual father will provide them with spiritual food. Such children grow up and become full-fledged people, who listen to elders and live a grace-filled church life.

A document, which is not sealed, has no value. The same is with people. During the Sacrament of Confession, we receive the seal of the Holy Spirit. Yes, a little child has no sins, but he receives the Lord’s grace when he kneels before the Cross and the Gospel with a humble heart, and when the priest covers his head with the epitrachelion and reads the prayer of absolution.

A child, who is fully involved in the life of the Church, is protected on all sides and is full of grace and joy”.

Archimandrite Parthenius and other elders point out that the Sacrament of Confession should not be turned into a formality. Confession should not be just an additional part of the Sacrament of Eucharist. Repentance is a separate Sacrament, which should occur only when a person feels that it is necessary, but not just every time a person is going to partake of the Holy Communion.

Elder Macarius (the spiritual father of Maruda cell), a well-known Athonite spiritual father, notes: “To bring a child to Confession against his own will is a crime. What is more, it is unacceptable to bring a child who is not ready for this Sacrament. We cannot let Repentance turn into a formal habit. A child must understand what he confesses and what is the essence and meaning of Repentance, of other Sacraments and the spiritual life as a whole. If a child does not understand the meaning of the Sacrament, but sees it just as a necessary action for admission to the Eucharist or for moral justification, then later it can happen so that this child will leave the Church. There is also another course of events: after many years of confession of such sins as “did not listen to my mom and dad, quarreled with my brother, did not do my homework”, sins that are more serious will appear. It can be so that such a child (who does not understand the essence of Repentance) can conceal them at Confession because he will be afraid of falling in the eyes of his spiritual father. Leaving the Church can become his next step”.

Elder Macarius reminds the the true Repentance is “neither a report on misconducts committed for a certain period of time, nor an attempt to clear your conscience. It is your desire to change yourself and to devote your life to God”.

The Athonite elders point out that our conscious participation in the church Sacraments gives us God’s grace and strengthens us on our spiritual path. It is possible for a child to participate in the Sacrament of Confession only in case his parents not just bring him to Confession, but explain to him the meaning of this Sacrament. At the same time, we should remember that the age of the first Confession should be defined individually in each case.

Translated from: http://www.agionoros.ru/docs/1466.html

Q: I attended a Byzantine Catholic Church for many years.

When the Liturgy started the priest would open all the doors and leave them open until the end of the Liturgy. He was transferred and the new priest would open the doors occasionally. Most of the Liturgy was celebrated with the doors closed. Most of the parishoners complained to him about this and he said it was tradition.

Now I have been to many Orthodox Liturgies (Greek, Romanian, Russian, ...) and the Royal Doors were always opened.

My question is this what is the tradition of the Royal Doors and if they were always closed why have I not seen this in this age? I find it very annoying. I like to see what is happening at the altar.

A: While I cannot speak for the traditions of Byzantine Rite Catholicsm, I can say that within the Orthodox Church there are various traditions surrounding the opening and closing of the Royal Doors.

There is a tradition, especially among the Great Russians, where the Royal Doors are left closed throughout the Liturgy. When there is need—for example, for the Little and Great Entrances, reading of the Gospel, distribution of the Holy Gifts, etc.—the doors are opened. At all other times—specifically when there is no liturgical action which would require opened doors—they are closed. At certain points, such as during the Litany which follows the Cherubic Hymn or during the Communion of the clergy, the curtain is also drawn shut.

Rubrics for the opening and closing of the Royal Doors is no where more complex, I believe, than in the celebration of the Vigil—Vespers and Matins—where it is quite clear that the doors are opened when there is a need for someone to exit the altar while they remain closed when no obvious reason exists.

Further, within the Russian tradition, the possibility of celebrating the Liturgy with the Royal Doors opened, either for greater portions of the Divine Liturgy or for the majority of the Liturgy, is often granted to clergy as a mark of distinction for outstanding service or in recognition of an individual priest’s ministry.

What I have described is not necessarily common among Orthodox Christians of other traditions, such as among the Greeks or Antiochians. In some cases, in place of the Royal Doors as we know them, a large panel, often with an icon of Christ portrayed as the “Hierarch of Hierarchs,” stands in their place. In such cases the icon, which generally completely covers the entire opening of the doorway, is placed on a track by which it might be slid to the side during services. I have even visited churches in the Middle East, some of which are hundreds of years old, in which one finds an iconostasis but no doors whatsoever, even though there are openings.

What is unusual, at least in my uneducated opinion on Byzantine Catholicism, is that a practice which is common among Russians, but surely not common among Byzantine Catholics—many of whose ancestors come from the Carpathian mountains which span what is presently southeastern Poland, far western Ukraine, eastern Slovakia, and portions of Hungary—would be introduced among people who traditionally had not known the custom. In fact, in many Byzantine Catholic churches in these regions, the iconostasis as we know it does not exist. Many Byzantine churches in the US did not even have iconostases until recent times, and especially after Vatican II urged the Eastern Rites to rediscover and preserve their heritage in its fullness rather than to continue on a course of latinization.

Perhaps in earlier times, before the Unions of Brest-Litovsk and Uzhorod, every church in the Carpathian region did in fact have an iconostasis and did in fact follow the Russian practice of closed doors, but this would be very difficult to confirm for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is that since this period is at least 400 years in the past, no one personally remembers it.

So, with regard to the specific scenario you describe, it is correct, on the one hand, to say that celebrating the Liturgy with the doors closed for a greater portion of the service is indeed “a tradition,” but it is not necessarily accurate to imply that it is a tradition which is indigenous to the regions in which Byzantine Rite Catholicism was introduced. The real question, then, revolves around why this is being introduced: as a return to full Byzantine Rite tradition [as opposed to the Byzantine Rite tradition of the Russian Typikon]? as a restoration of the full Byzantine Rite as observed in Ruthenia [where many churches did not have iconostases and did not have to contempate whether or not doors would remain opened or closed]? or as a matter of taste and preference on the part of the pastor?

With regard to seeing what the priest does, I do not mean to be glib, but as a priest I would have to say that there is very little to see. Most of the time the priest stands at the altar in simple prayer. Of course, there are certain actions, such as the waving of the aer over the Gifts during the Creed, the making of the Sign of the Cross over the Gifts during the Epiklesis, the elevation and fractioning of the Lamb, etc., which one may not be able to see when the doors are closed, but in general even when the doors are opened there is little to see. We might be reminded of the words of Saint John Chrysostom who said “Christ will not appear until the priest disappears.” The goal of our liturgical worship is to look beyond the priest, beyond his individual physical or psychological characteristics, and beyond his unique personality, and to come face to face with the Living God. If we do not encounter Him in our worship, even the celebration of the Liturgy facing the people, as in the contemporary Roman Rite, would only serve to enlighten us as to the priest’s actions, and nothing more. Watching the priest’s every action can, in fact, become an end in itself and an obstacle to “keeping watch” to the Lord’s every action.

Source: https://oca.org/questions/liturgicalservices/royal-doors

By Fr. Stephen Freeman

My parish is having its first festival this Saturday (May 14). It was decided that since it fell on St. Brendan’s Day, we would make the festival a celebration of Celtic Christianity. It has given the parish an opportunity to study and think about the wonderful Orthodox history of the British Isles and to think about Orthodoxy in a context beyond Eastern Europe and the Mediterranean. One of the great champions of the Orthodox saints in Britain, Ireland and Western Europe, was the great saint, John of Shanghai and San Francisco (Maximovitch). I offer some thoughts on the Celts. If you’re in the area, join us on Saturday anytime from 11 am-7 pm.

My “inside minor” when I was doing doctoral studies in theology at Duke, was the history of the Church in the British Isles, particularly during what is now termed “Late Antiquity.” That period was formerly known as the “Dark Ages,” but this was a title invented by moderns in order to create a narrative of history in which all things were wondrously evolving towards modernity. Most of the narrative surrounding the Dark Ages is false. It shows up in movies in strange ways as well. Film makers seem to think that everything should be dirty, poorly lit, and foggy. A few choice scenes in Monty Python films do a wonderful send up of such nonsense.

When you begin reading primary materials from the period, they seem strangely familiar, particularly if you happen to be an Orthodox Christian. The Venerable Bede’s History of the English People is, doubtless, the best place to start. Although his work is not primarily concerned with the Celts, they do play an important part.

What is seen is not some alternative version of Christianity (as many moderns would like to pretend), but a thoroughly Orthodox incarnation of the Church with proper attention to its native culture. This is a hallmark of the Orthodox – we love cultures! Many people today like to point to the Orthodox and our ethnic groups (Greek, Russian, Romanian, Serbian, etc.), and mock such divisions as being an ethnic captivity of the Church. It is nothing of the sort. From the beginning, the early Church carried the gospel into various lands and immediately began the task of translation and enculturation. One and the same faith was planted everywhere, but was everywhere unique and appropriate to its people.

It was only later that Latin became a “Church language” in the West, suppressing other cultures. The mission to the English (Angles) had a decidedly Latin flavor (it was initiated by St. Gregory the Great of Rome). But even this early work had a very Orthodox take. The missionary Bishop, Augustine of Canterbury, wrote letters to St. Gregory asking for guidance. He noticed that there were different customs and practices in place among the Celtic Christians (as well as in the Church in Gaul). St. Gregory’s answer reveals the Orthodox approach:

Augustine’s Second Question. Whereas the faith is one and the same, why are there different customs in different churches? and why is one custom of masses observed in the holy Roman church, and another in the Gailican church?

Pope Gregory answers. You know, my brother, the custom of the Roman church in which you remember you were bred up. But it pleases me, that if you have found anything, either in the Roman, or the Gallican, or any other church, which may be more acceptable to Almighty God, you carefully make choice of the same, and sedulously teach the church of the English, which as yet is new ln the faith, whatsoever you can gather from the several churches. For things are not to be loved for the sake of places, but places for the sake of good things. Choose, therefore, from every church those things that are pious, religious, and upright, and when you have, as it were, made them up into one body, let the minds of the English be accustomed thereto.

The regularization of all things was a much later development in the West (as well as in the East to a certain degree). But, to this day, there remain many different practices among various Orthodox Churches.

Perhaps the most striking aspect of Celtic Christianity was the role of monasticism. The missions to the Celts occurred mostly after the rise of desert monasticism, indeed, they were pretty much coincident. For whatever reason, monastic Christianity and all that accompanies it took deep root among the Celts and the English as well. Some historians seem to exaggerate monastic authority among the Celts and suggest that even bishops were subject to them. Lately that claim has been largely refuted.

But the monastics in the British Isles, like the monastics across the Christian world of Late Antiquity, became a primary force within the whole of Church life. They were missionaries. They were librarians. They were copyists. They were authors. They were hymnographers. They were a hedge against the power of the state. They were protectors of Orthodox teaching.

The notion popularized in the eponymous book, How the Irish Saved Civilization, does not exaggerate the importance and the role played by monastics. Today’s conversations surrounding the “Benedict Option,” are referring to an essential part of this monastic role. Frankly, I do not think anything less than a radical renewal and growth of monasticism within Orthodoxy will meet the crisis of the coming deluge.

It is exciting to me that people want to study and understand this part of Orthodoxy, whether among the Celts, the Brits, the Russians, Greeks or whomever. The suburbanized consumer Church of contemporary Christianity is a vanguard of failure and apostasy. Civilization needs saving yet again.

Source: https://blogs.ancientfaith.com/glory2godforallthings/2016/05/12/festival-celtic-orthodoxy/

Prince Vladimir was the son of Svyatoslav and Drevlyan princess Malusha. He was born in the year 963. He was raised by his pagan uncle Dobrynya. In the year 972, Vladimir began to reign in Novgorod. In 980 in the midst of war between the brothers, Vladimir went to war against Kiev, where his elder brother Yaropolk was reigning. Having defeated his brother, Vladimir began to rule in Kiev as well. He extended his power limits from the Baltic Sea on the North to the river Boog on the South. He had five wives and numerous concubines. On the Kiev Mountains he set up the idols, to which people were sacrificed. At that time Varangians Feodor and John suffered for Christ. The circumstances of their death made a strong impression on Vladimir and he started to doubt his pagan faith. His search for truth had begun.

Preachers from different countries came to Kiev by invitation of Prince Vladimir: ambassadors from Muslim-Bulgarians, living near the Volga river, German-Latins, Hebrews and Greeks. The Prince questioned them all about their faith and everyone offered him his own belief. But an Orthodox Greek representative made the strongest impression on Vladimir by showing him a painting of The Last Judgement at the end of his visit. With the boyar’s advice, Vladimir sent ten wise men to test whose faith is better. When these Russian ambassadors arrived in Constantinople, the magnificence of the Hagia Sofia Church, the harmonious singing of court chanters and Patriarchal service’s solemnity touched them deeply: “We didn’t know – whether we were on the earth or in the heavens – they said later to Vladimir. The boyars immediately noticed: “If the Greek faithwasn’t the true faith, your grandmother Olga, the wisest of the people,wouldn’t choose it.”

Vladimir decided to be baptized, but he did not want Rus’ to be subjected to another empire. That is why as soon as the ambassadors returned, he declared war on Greece and conquered Chersonesus. From there he sent the ambassadors to Constantinople to emperors Basil and Constantine, asking for their sister’s hand – princess Anna. They answered him, that she will only marry a Christian. Vladimir declared that he wants to accept Christianity. But before his bride arrived to Chersonesus, Vladimir was slain with blindness. Stricken with such an illness he understood the weakness of his spirit just as apostle Paul, and prepared for the great sacrament of revival (baptism). When the princess came to him, she advised him to be baptized as soon as possible. Vladimir was baptized under the name of Basil in the year 988. Coming out of the laver he saw the light with his eyes and his heart: “Now I know the true God”.

Vladimir returned to Kiev with the Korsun and Greek priests and first of all he asked his twelve sons to be baptised. They did as he asked, and many of the boyars followed suit. Vladimir began to destroy pagan idols. The main of them – Perun – was cursed and drown in the river Dnepr. At the same time the priests gathered people and taught them the basics of Christianity. Finally, Saint Vladimir proclaimed in Kiev, that all the people – rich and poor – came in the stated day to bank of the river to take the baptism. People accepted the appeal willingly: “If the faith was not good, then the prince and boyars would never accept it”.

The citizens of Kiev gathered on the river bank. Vladimir and the priests came there too. All of them went into the water. The grown-up took the infants on their hands, while the priests were praying. Saint Vladimir was praying as well. He confided his people to God’s will.

Later Christianity was set up in Novgorod. The first metropolitan of Kiev arrived there in 990 together with Dobrynya, Vladimir’s uncle. At first they stroke of dawn the idol of Perun was thrown it into the river Volkhov, and then the locals were baptized. Then he moved on to the city of Rostov, and there many people were baptized and a cathedral was build. Paganism remained strong for many years in Rostov, but eventually was rooted out. In the year 992 Christianity was spread over the region of Suzdal, when Saint Vladimir came here with two bishops. People there were happy to accept the new faith.

After accepting Christianity Vladimir reigned for another 28 years, and was the Prince of Kiev for 33 years. He passed away on July 15 in the year 1015 in Berestovo village. The Prince’s body was placed into the marble reliquary which was buried under the Church of the Tithes.

The children of Vladimir, who each recieved parts of the land, worked on spreading of Christianity on their territories. Thus, in 10th century Christianity continued to spread not only in Kiev, Novgorod, Rostov, and Suzdal, but also in Murom, Polotsk, Volodymyr-Volynskyi, Smolensk, Pskov, Lutsk, Tmutarakan and other regions. Influenced by Christianity, the Slavic tribes began to form a unified state.

The peaceful methods, with which Christianity was set up in the Rus’ territory, led to its successful and quick acceptance by the locals. The work of saint Kirill and Mefody, over a century prior to the events, contributed to it as well; thanks to them the preachers could say the sermons in native Slavic language. Christianity was set up with words, and without aggression and violence.

Another means of preaching, were the famous feasts held by Vladimir. On Sundays and the days of great church feasts, long festive tables were put on the streets of Kiev. The bells tolled and the choirs sang. For example, on May 12, 996 - the day when the Church of the Tithes was blessed – the Prince organized the great feast and made donations to the weak, the poor, and the pilgrims, and of course monasteries and churches. The sick and poor got barrels of wine and honey, bread, meat fish, and cheese. Vladimir wanted that people came to take those gifts and glorify God. The bowls were hold also in honor of great warriors and their victories.

From there, orthodoxy spread over the lands of the neighboring states and tribes lived on the borders of Rus. Thus, in the 10-13th centuries some Finnish tribes accepted Christianity as well. In the beginning of the 13th century the city of Nizhny Novgorod was built on the bank of the rivers Volga and Oka. It became a great stronghold of orthodoxy in the middle part of Russia.

The name of Saint Vladimir, who was called also the "krastnoe solnyshko" (the red sun), is connected with all further development and history of Russian Church and state. “He made us know the true Lord. He let us see the true life” – said Saint Hilarion of Kiev. His duty was continued by his children and great grand-children, who reigned there for about six centuries: from Yaroslav the Wise, who made the first step towards the independent Russian Church, to King Feodor Ioanovitsh.

The feast in honor of Saint Prince Vladimir was set up by Saint Prince Alexander Nevsky after May 15, 1240, when the prayer of Saint Vladimir helped him to defeat the army of Swedish crusaders.

Translated from: http://azbyka.ru/days/sv-vel-kn-vladimir-v-kreshchenii-vasilij

By Fr. Michael J. Buben

“Holy Chrismation is a Sacrament in which the baptized believer, being anointed with Holy Chrism on certain parts of the body, in the name of the Holy Spirit, receives the gifts of the Holy Spirit for growth and strength in spiritual life.” (Philaret’s Catechism)

This sacrament is administered immediately after baptism and like baptism cannot be administered twice to the same soul. Baptism cleans us from the pollution of original sin and makes us a member of the grace-giving living Orthodox Church of Christ. Chrismation nourishes and strengthens the baptised in the spiritual life. Just as a child needs the guidance of its parents, so a newly baptised soul receives the grace and guidance of the Holy Spirit. This is one of the reasons why Chrismation has never been performed separately in the Orthodox Church.

Our Lord and Savior instituted this Sacrament when at the Jerusalem Temple He said: “If any man thirst, let him come unto me and drink. He that believeth in me, as the Scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living waters etc., etc.” (John 7, 37-38). St. John explains this text as forecasting the Holy Spirit which believers would receive.

After the Apostles were strengthened with the “power from above”, they transferred gifts of this power to all who were baptized and “put on Christ.” As an example let us read the following texts from the book of Acts. “Now when the apostles which were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John: who when they were come down, prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Ghost. (For as yet He was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptised in the Name of the Lord Jesus.) Then laid they their hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost.” (8, 14-17)

When the Apostles could not be at all places to “lay hands” on the growing number of Christians as thousands began to accept Christianity, they instituted the use of Holy Chrism. Holy Chrism could easily be distributed to the bishops and priests in the settlements where they served. Only bishops received the power to make Chrism as it was needed, and priests used it only in the absence of the bishop, but always in the bishop’s name as centuries passed. “But ye have an unction from the Holy One, and ye know all things.” (I John 2, 20). St. John in his first epistle further explains the inward grace which anointing with Chrism brings; and the anointing which you have received of Him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you; but as the same anointing teaches you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie: and event it hath taught you, abide therein.” (27)

St. Paul also wrote about Holy Chrismation when he said: “Now He which establisheth us with you in Christ, and hath anointed us, is God: Who hath also sealed us, and given the earnest of the Spirit in our hearts.” (2 Cor.1,21-22).

St. Paul in this text says anointing with Holy Chrism establishes us in Christ, and it is from here that the Church takes its formula for this Sacrament: The Seal of the Gift of the Holy Spirit.

The anointing of the forehead signifies the sanctification of the mind, or thoughts.

The anointing of the chest signifies the sanctification of the heart, or desires.

The anointing of the eyes, ears, lips signifies the sanctification of the senses.

The anointing of the hands and feet signifies their sanctification to good works and the walk in the way of His commandments.

Orthodox brothers and sisters Through the Sacrament of Holy Chrismation you were Confirmed in the Orthodox Faith. You received the Holy Spirit and grace-giving gifts, without which it would have been impossible for you to have spiritual growth.

Does the Sacrament glow in your heart or has it dimmed like the last ember in the fireplace? “Stir up the Gift of God!” Do not dim the gifts of the Holy Spirit nor contradict their influence by vain thoughts and desires. Help thy neighbor. Make use of prayer and fasting. Follow His commandments.

Specific parts of your body were sealed with Chrism, that all your strength and abilities might be given to the service of God. “For ye were bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God’s.” (1 Cor. 6, 20)

Source: http://www.antiochian.org/Orthodox_Church_Who_What_Where_Why/What_Is_Holy_Chrismation.htm

Subscribe to: Posts ( Atom )

Search This Blog

featured Slider

Suggestions of Athonite Elders Concerning Children’s Confession

What is the tradition of the Royal Doors?

Personal Stories: An Interview with an Orthodox Christian Chinese

A Festival of Celtic Orthodoxy

The Life Story of St. Equal-to-Apostles Prince Vladimir

What Is Holy Chrismation?

Partners