The Catalog of Good Deeds

I grew up in a house of contradictions. We loved each other and we fought. I had a brother who was five years my senior, and we somehow developed a style of contradiction. If he said white, I said black. If I said red, he said blue. Or after either of us made a perfectly reasonable statement, whatever exceptions might exist, the other was sure to note them. It came to be that in any discussion, the last one talking won. Our conversations still have something of this flavor. (I can hear him saying, “No they don’t”).

Our exchanges point to an inescapable aspect of reality: it is filled with contradictions or at least something that we perceive as contradictions. Reason, as it is commonly used, is quite abstract. Syllogisms step back from reality and speak in terms that are actually quite removed. If two people are discussing a tree, there are many agreeable, scientific observations that can be made. However, none of the observations is the tree itself, and a contradiction rests in that very fact.

Orthodox worship not only notes various contradictions, it raises them to the level of wonder. The teaching of the Fathers frequently hovers over various juxtapositions of opposites. Christ is the God/Man. Mary is the Mother of God. The Trinity is three, yet one. God dies. The Uncontainable is contained. There is an instinct within Orthodox thought that the truth is most profoundly known precisely in the form of contradiction.

One Russian theologian who gave voice to this was Pavel Florensky. Born in 1882, he combined a brilliant scientific/mathematical mind with a profound theological soul. His greatest work, The Pillar and Ground of Truth, was written as his master’s thesis in 1908, and published in 1914. It is particularly remarkable as a theological work by one so young. Florensky was executed by the NKVD in 1937.

He gives an entire section of his thesis to the theme of contradiction. In it, he says, “Love is the renunciation of reason.” This is not a disparaging of reason as a useful tool, but the recognition that the nature of reality always contains contradictions:

We can, however, only express the Truth if we foresee the extreme expression of all the contradictions inherent in it, from which it follows that Truth itself encompasses the ultimate projection of all its invalidations, is antonymic and cannot be otherwise.

The contradictions are resolved in the ascetic life, according to Florensky, a life which he followed with great energy, throughout his time as a student, married man, scientist, engineer, and martyr. And in this, he was fully Orthodox. It is also difficult to describe.

Christ points to this when He tells us that the “pure in heart shall see God.” There is always the great risk in reason in that it becomes the primary tool in the hands of those who care nothing for the purity of heart. The modern world has harnessed reason to great effect, but has, as often as not, used it to create weapons of mass destruction and to monitor and control its own citizens (and in this I think as much about the tools of consumerism as anything). We have become possessors of a “reasonable” truth but do not have the purity of heart to live with its contradictions.

The ascetic life is, at its heart, one of voluntary self-denial and suffering. It is not the embracing of needless pain, nor is it masochistic in the least. Rather, it is a recognition that the desires and passions that rage within us cloud our understanding, darken our motives, and obscure the truth. Contradiction itself can be seen as a form of suffering. It is the “push-back” of reality that refuses to be mastered and controlled. The universe remains stubbornly opaque. More than this, God hides Himself within the opacity of contradiction, in the “Cloud of Unknowing.”

Florensky grasped the true heart of asceticism. He said, “Love is the renunciation of reason.” By this, he does not mean that we embrace the chaos and anarchy of irrationality. Rather, we recognize and accept the limits of reason, and offer ourselves to the contradiction of the reality around us. Every human being stands as a contradiction. They are always more than we think they are, and whatever we think or imagine them to be, they are also something else as well. The refusal to acknowledge the “something else” (the contradiction), is the refusal to renounce reason and, instead, to place reason where love alone belongs.

St. Paul notes that “faith works through love” (Gal. 5:6). This describes the very heart of the ascetic life. Only love extends itself in the self-emptying struggle against the passions without becoming lost in the solipsism of asceticism for its own sake. It is love that endures the contradictions of reality without turning away or reducing them. And it is love that finally comprehends the reality hidden within the contradictions that confront us.

An article by Fr. Stephen Freeman

Source: https://blogs.ancientfaith.com/glory2godforallthings/2016/06/14/the-renunciation-of-reason/

In the middle of the first century, the Apostle Thomas arrived in India, bearing the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. Laboring in southern India, he performed numerous miracles and was eventually martyred for the Faith in Moulapore, an ancient city near Madras. Despite being geographically separated from the rest of the Orthodox world by Muslim empires for many centuries, Christianity survived in small pockets into modern times. Although many of these groups trace their lineage back to the Apostle Thomas, none of these churches remained in communion with the Orthodox Patriarchates.

In modern times the Orthodox Church returned to India. Greek merchants built a grand and richly endowed church dedicated to the Holy Transfiguration in Calcutta (Kolkata) in 1924, but it was not until the 1980s that an Orthodox mission to the Indians was established. This occurred with the arrival of Fr. Athanasios (Antheles), a Greek hieromonk from Egypt. Basing his mission in the village of Arambah, West Bengal (about ninety miles from Calcutta), Fr. Athanasios built there a church dedicated to the Apostle Thomas. For the next ten years he traveled on foot to the surrounding villages, preaching the Gospel. By the time of his repose in 1990 he had formed twenty-four clusters of believers and translated the Divine Liturgy, a Service Book, and an Orthodox Catechism into the local Bengali dialect.

In 1991 Fr. Ignatios (Sennis), a hieromonk from Mount Athos, arrived in West Bengal to continue Fr. Athanasios’ work. Soon after his arrival Fr. Ignatios established the Philanthropic Society of the Orthodox Church. The society was formed for two reasons: first, to provide basic health care and food for the destitute and starving in a state that has practically no social services; and second, to protect the Orthodox mission from the West Bengal Communist regime, which prohibits any kind of missionary activity. While ministering to the physical needs of the Indian people, the missionaries are also able to spread the Orthodox Faith.

In 2004 Fr. Ignatios was consecrated Bishop of Madagascar under the Patriarchate of Alexandria. By the time of his departure from India, the Orthodox Church had grown to include sixteen parishes, five thousand faithful, ten priests and two deacons — all under the jurisdiction of Metropolitan Nikitas of Hong Kong and South East Asia (Ecumenical Patriarchate).

Since 1995 the Orthodox Christian Mission Center (OCMC) has been sending teams to Calcutta annually. Working with the local clergy, team-members offer catechism and seminars, and assist with the ongoing mission outreach. In 2006, an American priest, Fr. Paul Martin, traveled to India as part of an OCMC team, in order to spiritually and physically feed the hungry of Calcutta.

Our mission team leader, Fr. Stephen Callos, warned us that Calcutta would be an assault to all of the senses, and he was right. The eyes, the ears and the nostrils — but especially the nostrils — find ample reason to take offense. To say that the city is overpopulated would be an understatement. The eye is glutted, busy with impressions, and most of these are unpleasant: people squeezed together in cardboard sheds; shops all a jumble, tightly pressed within congested

stalls, bringing to mind the bas-relief on a Hindu temple — or a closed accordion; noise unremitting, the cries of peddlers and beggars, automobile horns by day and night, packs of stray dogs howling at the moon. And then there is the chaos of traffic, no emission control, few stop lights, signs or speed limits; a multitude of cars, rickshaws, and buses racing about every which way, riders like rag dolls sitting precariously atop or clinging for dear life to bumpers — all madness to an occidental. In Calcutta entire families squat near trash heaps in the streets, with plastic tarps their only protection from the elements.

But what is most offensive about this place, and most distinctive, is the smell — the scent of decay in the hot, wet air — urine, dung, and disease. An essay on Calcutta, "The City of Dreadful Night," speaks of "The Great Calcutta Stink": "It is faint, it is sickly, and it is indescribable. It resembles the essence of corruption that has rotted for the second time — the clammy odor of blue slime. And there is no escape from it."

Rudyard Kipling wrote this around the year 1890, but it is as true today as ever. Some things never change. I still have the dreadful smell of the City in my nostrils, and there I expect it will stay for some time. Fr. Stephen, who has represented OCMC in Calcutta four times, says the smell remains with him long after returning home. As far as I’m concerned, it may never go away.

While serving the OCMC mission in India I kept recalling the 17th chapter of the Acts of the Holy Apostles. There St. Paul addresses the Athenians. He sees the shrines to the gods and acknowledges the Greeks to be in all things very religious (Acts 17:22). It is telling to see Paul choosing a Greek word that can mean both "religious" and "superstitious" — and here, I think, is the key to understanding the people of India, the vast majority of whom are Hindu. These people are very religious, but also very superstitious. They worship many strange gods, and one finds little shrines to the gods on every street — shrines to Kali, Krishna, Shiva, Durga, and others. But towering above them all is Kali Temple, one of the largest temples in the world dedicated to any Hindu deity. In a section of town called Kalighat it stands, an assault to all reason and civility, decayed and primeval, just next door to Mother Theresa’s Home for the Dying and only blocks away from Holy Transfiguration Greek Orthodox Church, our home in Calcutta. Gangs of Kali priests gather in front, hawking, gesticulating. Take note: daily animal sacrifices are offered here, and the sanctum sanctorum is open to all for a price! I am accosted when passing in civilian clothes, but when in cassock I am left alone. See the viscera of goats, thrown in the streets where they decay in the dust and slime! The stink is intensified, as if the essence of Calcutta is located here, so near the ancient river Hughli.

I do not understand this dark Kali and her appeal. I do not understand her heart of darkness. Yet in Bengal Kali is most popular of all, the goddess of destruction, black, depicted with bloody tongue, a necklace of skulls and a skirt of severed arms. Cherubim Ghosh, a young convert to Orthodox Christianity and our guide in West Bengal, tells me that he had once been devoted to Kali and at first had difficulty resisting the almost incessant nagging of his mother and companions to return to the goddess. Knowing something about British India, I ask him about the Thaggies or "Thugs," a sect of Kali worshippers whose practice of ritual murder had been outlawed in the nineteenth century. He says that ritual murder is still practiced, though not openly, and that the Thugs have long been underground. Is this possible? It has the ring of a ghost story. Nevertheless, I get chills just thinking of it.

I have said that the Indians of West Bengal are superstitious. They appeal to their gods for favors and relief from suffering, which is perfectly understandable, given their deplorable living conditions. But they seem to do this with superstitious dread. The Hindus include in their pantheon Christ, the Theotokos, and even Mother Theresa. Some of them come to our Matins and Vespers services, venerating our icons and praying with us. Tim Arestou, administrator of the Orthodox orphanage near Calcutta, tells me that thousands come every year to worship Christ at His Nativity. I have the sense that they are covering all the bases, so they see nothing contradictory about turning to Christ and the Mother of God and then returning to Krishna and Kali, the mother of destruction.

But clearly these people are also very religious, and parts of what they have can be baptized, brought into Christianity. They are a pious and gracious people. When Hindus come to our services, they have an unusual way of venerating icons that is very beautiful, waving their hands over the lighted candle next to the icon and then patting their heads and faces before pressing their cheeks on the icon surface. Then they kiss and make prostrations. In our distribution of food to the poor — and we ministered to thousands in one morning — some made prostrations before us, touching our feet with both hands.

The Hindus have three major gods — Brahma, Shiva and Vishnu — and in theory, at least, they believe in a single deity. This one God or single Reality they call Brahman. Although this belief is fundamentally different from Christian belief in the Holy Trinity, it may help prepare Hindus to accept Trinitarian doctrine when they come to the true revelation of God in Orthodox Christianity.

Many know that the Hindus greet one another with joined hands, palms touching, and a bow. This form of greeting is actually widespread throughout Asia, and is interpreted in different ways by various traditions. In the context of Orthodox Christianity, it may be accepted as a gesture of love, respect, and the recognition of the image of God within each person. I love this gesture and am pleased to say that it is has been assimilated into the indigenous Orthodox Christian culture.

India is such a strange world. It seemed to me another planet, or at least centuries removed from our modern existence — though in many ways I had the sense that this world is more "real" than ours. The people in Calcutta are in touch with the realities of existence, suffering and death, while we often live artificial lives, plugged into our computers and seeking escape in our pleasures and our work.

I am still overwhelmed, just beginning to make sense of my stay of nearly one month in West Bengal. Fr. Stephen Callos of the Greek Archdiocese, Fr. Nathan Kroll of the Orthodox Church in America, and I spent most of our time at St. Nektarios Greek Orthodox Church and Compound near the village of Akina about sixty miles from Calcutta. Our mission was to teach the native clergy, catechists, and the newly baptized, some of whom came long distances to participate in our seminars. This was far and away the most satisfying of all my experiences in India. Our brothers and sisters in India are hungry for the truth, and they respond with great love and gratitude. But communication is not always easy. My translator, Fr. Andrew Mondale, was excellent, though even with his help there were obstacles to overcome. Several instances come to mind. During a class on the Eucharist some were having difficulty with the Christian concept of sacrifice, until I alluded to an offering made to the god Shiva at a shrine just outside the compound gates — a potato set before a clay idol. I asked whether we should bring our potatoes, goats, fruits, and vegetables to church and place them on the altar. They replied with a resounding, "No!" "What then does God want?" Their response, almost in unison, delighted me beyond words — "He wants our hearts!" After this I was able to speak of the "sacrifice of praise" and the lifting up of our hearts as essential elements of Eucharistic worship.

During a class on creation I used the analogy of the sun’s heat when speaking of God’s creative love, His energies, and there was a misunderstanding. One man asked, "Is God the sun?" The people can be very simple and literal, but they have no difficulty understanding that God is Love.

I have said that the situation in India recalls St. Paul among the pagans. At no time was this clearer than when a question was raised concerning eating foods offered to the gods. This is a pressing matter among the Christians in India, since all of them have Hindu relatives and friends, and often they are expected to eat of these foods.-Of course, the problem is addressed in I Corinthians, chapter 8, but before India I had never expected to find this passage of any practical value, at least not in this quite literal sense.

After morning classes Fr. Nathan and I took walks in the village. The natives live in mud huts with grass roofs. I am convinced that we were some of the first whites ever encountered there. The people gaped at us — we might as well have been alien life forms — but all were excited to see our cameras. Often they would draw near and hint for us to take their pictures, as if they would thereby attain a kind of immortality. Rice paddies are all around, of course, as are shrines to the gods. And palms trees. Cobras are common. Gregory, a fifteen-year-old Christian boy, told me that a cobra had taken his father’s life two years before. He lives in a two-room mud hut with his mother, but she is the sole supporter and rarely home. He has to fend for himself, yet he is full of joy and still innocent.

In the countryside around Akina we saw a cremation site or ghat, with earthen jars, sticks, and charred human bones. After a recent burning ceremony those paying homage had placed sticks topped with rags onto the ghat. These are like little flags, and their purpose is to indicate a favor owed the deceased, so as to avoid the reprisals of an angry spirit. The pots contain body parts that didn’t burn — mostly belly buttons, I am told. But the Hindus do not always practice cremation. Cherubim explained to me that the bodies of little children and wandering ascetics (called sannyasis) are sometimes buried, since it is believed that the fire of God burns clean the souls of such as these.

Tim asked me to come to the orphanage on a Sunday after Liturgy to see the children and comfort those who had no visiting relatives. I did, and the orphans showered me with affection. In the evening, after I told them some stories, they even put on a show for me, with traditional dancing and singing. One fragile wisp of a blind child got up to sing "Twinkle, Twinkle Little Star" in English, and little Despeta — who is five or six and has a fatal brain tumor — spent the whole time clinging to me. This little girl had been abandoned at the orphanage gates. She is certainly well loved here, both by the teachers and the other orphans. She is not expected to live beyond the age of eight, but in her little, special way she has brought such joy to this place, and I am sure her spirit will continue to give blessings even after she is gone. Many, both here and in America, pray for her. The orphanage is a place where God’s light shines distinctly, in the faces of children and in the work of the teachers.

On a tour of the orphanage grounds, I was shown a large shop area where children are instructed in various practical skills, such as sewing. There is a house for the blind, and at present five blind children are in residence. The blind children sit together at mealtime with their teacher, a Christian woman of sixty-two years whose face fairly beams with the love of God.

It is important to see that the ministry at the orphanage is one of great, divine love — a love distributed to all, regardless of creed. Many of the orphans are not Christian. I met Rupa, a Hindu girl of about fifteen, who is very good and has a big heart. She worries about her friends and her little sister and wants them to do well in school. I spoke with her privately, praised her and offered some encouragement. She responded warmly, happily, and I noticed that she danced for me with a special joy.

But there are many Rupas. The point I want to make is that the area where children are instructed in various practical skills, such as sewing. There is a house for the blind, and at present five blind children are in residence. The blind children sit together at mealtime with their teacher, a Christian woman of sixty-two years whose face fairly beams with the love of God.

But there are many Rupas. The point I want to make is that the good people oflndia are ripe for Christ. As I have tried to say, they are religious by nature. They hunger and thirst for Christ, and some pray with us without understanding Who He is. It is our mission as Orthodox Christians to reveal Christ in our actions, to show these dear people the meaning of God’s love. And I can assure you that this is exactly what is being done in Calcutta, in Akina, and at the orphanage.

Every Monday at the church in Calcutta rice, beans, salt, sugar, and soap are distributed to the poor. Fr. Stephen arranged it so that Fr. Nathan and I had a chance to participate, not together but separately, since at least two priests were needed in Akina to conduct classes. Preparing for the distribution is heavy work in the heat. Many bags need to be weighed and put into stacks. During the preparation, long lines formed around the church — armies of the poor and the maimed, numbering in the thousands. I saw an old midget in rags leading his tall, blind friend. Both were crippled. I saw several people without hands or legs. Many had large tumors and growths. All were grateful to receive from us. To see the love and gratitude on their faces as I gave them food and soap, to have them prostrate themselves before me and touch my feet, was deeply humbling. I am writing this with some trepidation. I am not worthy, but the story needs to be told.

On my last day in Akina, Sarbojit Dalle, an English-speaking boy who will be baptized soon, came to me with a group, saying that the people think we have been "very good, very clear, very good teachers." "You understand us," he says, and they ask if I am a teacher at home. When I say that I used to teach English, they give wide smiles and many nods. Sarbojit explains that they all want Fr. Stephen, Fr. Nathan and me to return. He asks that we pray for them, and we ask that they pray for us.

Then we three priests give speeches. I tell the people that they will be in my heart always, that we will be joined in Christ by our prayers and thoughts and in the Sacraments. Fr. Nathan speaks briefly and sincerely — as he says, "with words locked in my heart." And Fr. Stephen finishes with loving sentiments. As usual, Fr. Andrew Mondal translates, since few of the people speak English. Then George, one of the catechists, comes forward as a representative of the people with something to say. He thanks Fr. Stephen for being so faithful over the years to the mission, and Fr. Nathan for his dedicated service. I do not know what I said or when I said it, but he thanks me for having helped him resolve some trouble he had. Indeed, God works in strange ways.

Over the weeks we all heard many inspiring stories demonstrating the strong faith of our Orthodox brothers and sisters in India. Fr. Stephen told us about a man whose employer threatened to fire him should he be baptized. He ignored the threat, and nothing happened. Eventually, the employer began expressing an interest in Christianity and even came to one of the seminars sponsored by OCMC. It takes real courage to become a Christian in India — and it takes courage to remain Christian. Converts are often rejected by family and friends, but they know that to be rejected for love of Christ is cause for rejoicing. One man told me that, when he converted and his home became a center of Christian worship, the villagers threatened him and his family with bodily harm. He remained firm, however, and now years later many in his village are Orthodox. Unfortunately, this does not always happen. And even when it does, acceptance and peace come gradually and often with pain. One of the catechists said that his parents still will not talk to him years after his baptism. He prays for a change of heart in his parents, and he longs for it. But the point is that there is a price to pay in India for converting to Christianity, and we all should be aware of this. The witness of such people is inspiring. It demonstrates the power of our Faith, as well as God’s loving-kindness and care for His children.

So I am pleased to report that the Church in West Bengal, India is alive and well. Needless to say, I’m also pleased to have survived to tell about it. Notwithstanding the terrible jet lag and culture shock, both coming and going; in spite of the swarming gnats, mosquitoes and other pests; regardless of intestinal problems and the sweltering heat and humidity — even in consideration of that Great Calcutta Stink — it was a deeply rewarding experience, one I’ll cherish until my dying day. Now just weeks after my return I long to go back, if it is God’s will. But there remains so much to assimilate, so much more to understand and talk about before I can think of returning. I am not finished with India. My writing and thinking about it has become a daily obsession. But I offer here some of my thoughts, hoping that something will capture your interest and move you to pray for our brothers and sisters there and be generous with your time and money. Missionaries are needed, but if you cannot go, please remember these people in your prayers and in your offerings.

I am sure Frs. Stephen and Nathan join me in thanking the many good and generous people who have supported our trip to India with their prayers and offerings. And we pray that God will continue to bless His Church, and that He will open our hearts to the wonderful possibilities for Orthodox Christian missionary work in India and throughout the world. Amen!

***

Fr. Paul Martin is attached to the Sts. Peter and Paul Ukrainian Orthodox Church in Palos Park, Illinois, and is serving as priest at the Annunciation-Agia Paraskevi Greek Orthodox Church in New Buffalo, Michigan.

An article from"The Orthodox Word"

magazine 2006, № 5

10/30/2007

The Holy Apostle Thomas was born in the Galilean city of Pansada and was a fisherman. Hearing the good tidings of the Jesus Christ, he left all and followed Him.

According to Holy Scripture, the Holy Apostle Thomas did not believe the reports of the other Disciples about the Resurrection of Jesus Christ: "Unless I see in His hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into His side, I will not believe" (St. John 20:25).

On the eighth day after the Resurrection, the Lord appeared to the Apostle Thomas and showed him His wounds, "My Lord and my God," the Apostle cried out (St. John 20:28). "Thomas, being once weaker in faith than the other apostles," says Saint John Chrysostom, "toiled through the grace of God more bravely, more zealously and tirelessly than them all, so that he went preaching over nearly all the earth, not fearing to proclaim the Logos/Word of God to savage nations."

Some icons depicting this event are inscribed "The Doubting Thomas." This is incorrect. In Greek, the inscription reads, "The Touching of Thomas." In Slavonic, it says, "The Belief of Thomas." When Saint Thomas touched the Life-Giving side of the Lord, he no longer had any doubts. What is more, in the English language, the nickname of "Doubting Thomas" can convey the false impression of Thomas as being timid, lacking the full conviction of faith, or even being cowardly; this concept of Thomas is neither historical nor Biblical, except in consideration of the vitality important moment in which Thomas touched the Resurrected Christ; the momentary sinful fluctuation in faith being spectacularly reversed through Divine Grace as an opportunity to validate the bodily Resurrection. In Saint John 11:16, Thomas expressed a desire to die with the Lord, in response to the other disciples' fear that the Pharisees would seek to kill Jesus should they re-enter Judea. The notion of Saint Thomas as wavering or pusillanimous in his faith can be further dispelled in light of the Church Holy Tradition regarding his evangelism, according to which, the Holy Apostle founded Christian Churches in Palestine, Mesopotamia, Parthia, Ethiopia and India. Church Holy Tradition also indicates that the Holy Apostle Thomas baptized the Magi.

Preaching the Holy Gospel earned the Holy Apostle Thomas a Martyr's death. For having converted the wife and son of the Prefect of the Indian city of Maliapur (Melipur) the Holy Apostle was locked up in prison, suffered torture, and finally, pierced with five spears, he departed to the Lord. Parts of his holy relics of the Holy Apostle Thomas are in India, in Hungary and on Mt. Athos. The name of the Holy Apostle Thomas is associated with the Arabian (or Arapet) Icon of the Mother of God (September 6th).

The Holy Apostle Thomas should therefore be considered not merely as "Doubting Thomas", but rather, as someone whose faith did waver at one crucial moment, yet through the Divine grace of Christ, this wavering was reversed into an opportunity for the demonstration of the actual bodily Resurrection of the Lord, and for the concomitant scriptural refutation of Docetism and the Gnostic heresy. The false association of Thomas with Gnostic heretical works is all the more extraordinary in light of the fact that heresy that lies at the heart of the works allegedly authored by St. Thomas. In addition to having been the instrument by which the Lord disproved that pernicious heresy, through a remarkable application of grace reversing a sin into a moment of Divine revelation, the Apostle Thomas should also be remembered as a Great Evangelist; just as Saints Peter and Paul made their way to Rome to evangelize the gentiles therein, and Saint Andrew the Apostle proceeded to the Northwest, Saint Thomas ventured East in order to spread the same Gospel of peace.

Apolytikion (Dismissal) Hymn of the Feast. Tone II

You were a disciple of Christ And a member of the divine college of Apostles. Having been weak in faith you doubted the Resurrection of Christ. But by feeling the wounds you believed in His All-Pure Passion: Pray now to Him, O all-praised Thomas to grant us peace and great mercy.

Kontakion Hymn. Tone IV

Thomas, the faithful servant and disciple of Christ, Filled with Divine grace, cried out from the depth of his love: 'You are my Lord and my God!' (Source: Orthodox Church in America)

Source: http://saintandrewgoc.org/home/2017/10/6/the-holy-glorious-and-all-laudable-apostle-thomas

Q: Why Do the Orthodox not Use Musical Instruments in Worship?

A: While there are parishes throughout the U.S. that have organs and use organs, traditionally, Orthodox Christian worship uses only the human voice (the greatest musical instrument given to humanity by God). In part, this is to manifest Psalm 150:6, “Let everything that has breath praise the Lord.”

There is a practical reason for this as well. Byzantine Chant (the style of music traditionally used by the Orthodox Church) takes full advantage of the human voice and uses several musical scales that have micro-tones (as opposed to full and half-tones). Though it is possible to use these same scales on some instruments, it isn’t with many. Thus, it is most practical to stick with the instrument the music was written for — the human voice.

Perhaps more to the point is the fact that the Apostles and early Churches did not use instruments in worship, and indeed emphasized this “absence” as being significant, even normative:

Clement of Alexandria: “Leave the pipe to the shepherd, the flute to the men who are in fear of gods and are intent on their idol-worshipping. Such musical instruments must be excluded from our wineless feasts, for they are more suited for beasts and for the class of men that is least capable of reason than for men… In general, we must completely eliminate every such base sight or sound – in a word, everything immodest that strikes the senses (for this is an abuse of the senses) – if we would avoid pleasures that merely fascinate the eye or ear, and emasculate.”

Eusebius: “Of old at the time those of the circumcision were worshipping with symbols and types it was not inappropriate to send up hymns to God with the psalterion and cithara and to do this on Sabbath days… We render our hymn with a living psalterion and a living cithara with spiritual songs. The unison voices of Christians would be more acceptable to God than any musical instrument. Accordingly in all the churches of God, united in soul and attitude, with one mind and in agreement of faith and piety we send up a unison melody in the words of the Psalms.” (Commentary on Psalms 91)

John Chrysostom: “David formerly sang songs, also today we sing hymns. He had a lyre with lifeless strings, the church has a lyre with living strings. Our tongues are the strings of the lyre with a different tone indeed but much more in accordance with piety. Here there is no need for the cithara, or for stretched strings, or for the plectrum, or for art, or for any instrument; but, if you like, you may yourself become a cithara, mortifying the members of the flesh and making a full harmony of mind and body. For when the flesh no longer lusts against the Spirit, but has submitted to its orders and has been led at length into the best and most admirable path, then will you create a spiritual melody.”

Source: https://www.orthodoxanswers.org/why-do-the-orthodox-not-use-musical-instruments-in-worship/

In this cycle of conversations on “The Grammar of family life” Archpriest Paul Gumerov speaks on how marriage is understood in the Orthodox Church, on what foundations it should be built, what kinds of problems people will face in family life, and how they can avoid or overcome them.

The first conversation in the cycle is devoted to problems that young men and women ask themselves as they consider marriage: what is the purpose of marriage from the point of view of a Christian, how to choose a partner in life, whether to blindly succumb to the feeling of infatuation, whether they should necessarily get married, and whether marriage with the heterodox and others is possible for an Orthodox Christian.

The first rule of marriage: “It is more blessed to give than to receive”

Hello, dear friends. The theme of our meeting today is the decision to enter into marriage. People who want to start a family come to me, as to any priest, quite often, and it’s wonderful. The family is one of the most beautiful creations of God. It is not good for man to be alone (Gen. 2:18) says the Lord. We are fulfilling the commandment of God when we want to create a family, and enter into marriage.

I think every person who doesn’t want to take up monasticism, that is, to strictly serve God in the monastic rank, should, of course, contemplate creating a family. But often enough it turns out that people are not able to start a family, and they are not always women. It’s known that women are more family-oriented, and the desire to start a family is, as a rule, stronger in them than in men, especially in the modern world—but we have more women than men in Russia. And, oddly enough, not only women remain single, unable for years to find their familial happiness, but men also. Men thirty to forty years old, who have no visible barriers to starting a family, come to me. These were people successful in life, well-brought up, with very pleasing looks, working, having received a good education… But they said they couldn’t decide, couldn’t find that one girl with whom they could go through life; or somehow they can’t communicate well with the opposite sex.

Archpriest Pavel Gumerov

Of course, there are various reason for this. Men of thirty to forty years, it would seem, meet all the conditions and have all the qualifications for starting a family. But it often happens that the reason they can’t do it lies within—an internal reason. One man is internally unprepared for family life; he incorrectly understands family life. He, maybe, had no such experience, no example from his parents: he was raised by a single mother or his father paid no attention to the family, and maybe he some saw conflicts in his family, or disorder, which now prevent him from forming a correct image about how a modern family should look. It’s one kind of immaturity about which Met. Anthony of Sourozh speaks, having written many fantastic books on family life. And although Met. Anthony himself was not a family man, he had great spiritual experience.

People, unfortunately, don’t really understand what a family is—it is first and foremost a ministry; it’s the desire to give someone your love: It is more blessed to give than to receive, as it says in the Acts of the Apostles. It’s great toil in the name of another person—a desire to make them happy, and not simply to receive from them some kind of “simple womanly happiness” or “simple manly happiness.”

Many call society itself, in which we live, a consumer society, a hedonistic society. We are all oriented towards consumption, towards entertaining people; and people, often raised in an incomplete family, don’t have experience in serving other people: for them everything revolved around themselves. The head of the family in which this person grew up wasn’t even the man, not even the wife, but the child—he himself, around which the family built its life. And such a person is either searching for a woman who will serve him that way, and not him serve her, or he is simply generally not focused on the fact that marriage requires serious work.

Our talks, I hope, will help people find familial happiness, and the answers to the questions that are important to them to prepare themselves for family life… And these talks, of course, are first and foremost aimed at those people who want to start a family, who have as yet not started one; however it will be interesting for family people to listen to these talks too, in order to sort out some important questions and disputes that they have in their family life.

The closest people

What do the Holy Scriptures say about starting a family? We already noted the commandment, It is not good for man to be alone. Therefore the family is the creation of God. As Blessed Augustine said, “it is a shard, a remnant of Paradise on earth.” We know we cannot create Paradise on earth. That which the Communists offered us is a utopia. And such efforts usually end in a concentration camp: people who want to live better necessarily appear, grasp at something, and they begin to oppress others. How is it that families can be different? Because family life is built not on principles of joint effort, or business, or on the oppression of one person by another, but on the principles of love. It’s by love precisely that you can find Paradise and peace in your soul and find Paradise in a single family community.

Holy Scripture also says to us: and they twain shall be one flesh… What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder (Mt. 19:5-6). Mankind was created immediately as a family unit, as units of society, in which people’s lives are built on the principles of love; and in marriage they should become one soul and one body. Why did the Apostle Paul in his Epistle to the Ephesians, which is read in the Mystery of Matrimony, call marriage a mystery: This is a great mystery (Eph. 5:32)? Because marriage, even if it’s not crowned[1] but is concluded by law, is always a mystery. Imagine: two people of different upbringings, from completely different families (that is, they shouldn’t be blood relatives, by definition), man and woman—inherently two very different creatures meet and become the closest, immediate family—such that a closer one doesn’t exist! They are even closer than children and parents, because parents and children are the first degree of kinship, but man and woman in marriage, husband and wife, is the zero-degree of kinship. Closer can’t even be conceived of. Even our secular, completely non-ecclesiastical laws have some points saying that husband and wife are the closest relatives. It concerns, for example, inheritances and other material points. And modern people, unfortunately, often don’t understand the mystery of this closeness. They consider that if a guy and a girl love one another it’s enough, and no formalities are necessary to begin living together, and this “great love is more than enough for us,” so that it’s a marriage. No, that’s no kind of marriage and no kind of family, because a family is when two people become one whole, the closest, the very closest of kin to one another, before one another, before God, and before the law.

When marriage is impossible

What kinds of obstacles to marriage exist? Indeed, not every person can start a family—not for those reasons I talked about in the beginning, but because of their ineptitude for family life or because it is impossible for some reason. First is an already-existing marriage. A man, finding himself in marriage, can’t begin a new family: he’s not free. Polygamy is not allowed by law here in Russia—even in traditional Islamic regions polygamy is outlawed. You can start a family only with one person.

There are rules concerning particularly Christians. Many people, especially girls, want to start a family with a person of a different faith—another Christian confession or even an altogether other religion, for example with a Muslim. Such problems are often encountered. The rules of the Church categorically reject such marriages. For example, Canon 72 of the Sixth Ecumenical Council says that to unite in marriage is impossible in every case not only with a non-Christian, but even with a heterodox Christian, that is, with those aren’t Orthodox Christians, confessing some sort of heresy, but yet calling themselves Christians. Until the era of Peter I in Russia no one was crowned, no one concluded a marriage with a heterodox—with a Catholic, a Protestant or other non-Orthodox Christians. Under Peter a “window to Europe” was hacked open, and a flood of foreigners came to Russia to serve and work, and the problem of mixed-marriages began to appear. Under certain conditions it was permitted to conclude such spousal unions. What conditions? Spouses should be crowned only in the Orthodox Church and children should be raised according to Orthodox Tradition, even if the husband—the head of the family—was, for example, a Lutheran. Again, such marriages appeared only in the eighteenth century from the times of Peter.

What kinds of age restrictions are laid upon Orthodox Christians? The same as are defined by the laws of our state. If people have reached the marriageable age adopted by the state, they can marry. In 1830 the Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church adopted a resolution according to which the marriageable age for men is 18 and for girls 16. In the Caucasus region slightly different ages were prescribed.

Kinship is also an obstacle to marriage. Marriage is categorically prohibited for any degree of direct kinship in any vertical branch: parents, children, grandparents, and so on. As for horizontal branches: brothers, sisters, uncles, aunts, nephews, cousins, second cousins and so on—it’s prohibited to enter into marriage up to and including the fourth degree of kinship. If it’s the fifth degree of kinship then usually you take the blessing of the diocesan hierarch, and then you can get married. But in modern cities such situations are very rarely met. Such familial considerations are more often met in rural areas, where relatives live not far from one another.

About spiritual kinship, which we enter into when we become Godparents of someone’s children … Such relationships also connect people, and in some situations marriages are not permitted. For example, a man, having become the Godfather of a woman’s child, cannot get married to this woman, if she becomes a widow. Here there isn’t a relation by blood, or by marriage, but these people are bound by ties of spiritual kinship.

Incapacity, caused by sickness, is also a barrier to concluding a marriage. If a man, on account of a psychological illness cannot perform some legal action (marriage is not only a spiritual institution, but also a state matter), he cannot enter into marriage, as well as if there is some physical disability towards marriage and the spousal life. We’re not talking about the inability to procreate, because procreation is not the sole purpose of marriage, but namely about the inability to enter into martial cohabitation.

Older, younger…

As concerns the age difference between the bride and groom, the canons don’t discuss it. Marriages, as we know, happen between different age groups; but speaking from my priestly experience, I think that the optimal situation is when the spouses are either peers, or of no more than a five year difference, especially if it’s the man who is five years older. If the woman is five years older it’s fraught with all kinds of negative consequences. It’s known that men age slower and their reproductive capabilities last much longer. When there is a difference between the husband and wife, for example, of ten-fifteen years, when they are still young, there isn’t a great impact: twenty and thirty-five. But the further along, the more temptations appear, and many people who not spiritually strong, and even those who are spiritually strong, can stumble on this. Therefore, it’s not banned, but all the same it’s common sense to avoid it.

What’s worth considering

I would like to switch to questions most often put forth in connection with this theme of getting married and starting a family.

—What should be the most important thing in deciding to get married? And isn’t there a risk in thinking too rationally about marital questions? After all, if we think, consider, and ponder everything beforehand, then it’s like we’re purchasing some item—for example, we’re deciding upon a cell phone, comparing options, functions, price, quality…

Naturally, in marriage we should shun such an approach. But to get married just because we like this person, because some kind of feeling welled-up, sparks flew between us, completely without thinking about whether this person has the qualities that are necessary in family life, without thinking about what kind of father he will be, what kind of mother she will be for our children—of course this we must not do, especially for a person who is planning to get ordained, for example. We had such a situation in seminary: one youngster was planning to get married to one young lady, but his classmates saw that this girl was totally secular and not ready to become a priest’s wife, a matushka, and unanimously advised him against taking this step. He got married anyways. It ended up quite sad, because after some time— actually pretty soon—they separated. This young man is now agonizing—he can’t get married a second time because he was ordained—although he isn’t to blame for the marriage disintegrating: the wife threw it away herself… And he didn’t become a priest; he remained a deacon, because of this as well, perhaps.

What qualities should we first of all look at in our future other half? The preparedness, as I already said, to get married, and the family of our chosen one. We must pay attention to what kind of family they come from. If they have some kind problem in their relationships with their relatives it could affect our marriage too. We’ll say more about this in the second talk.

Of course, every person has his requirements and criteria for choosing his co-traveler in life. But we, as rational creations, having reason from God, should all the same think seriously and imagine for ourselves what kind of qualities our chosen one, the mother or father of our future children, should possess.

Infatuation is not love!

—Infatuation and love—how not to confuse them? Is it important in the very beginning to wait for sincere love?

In short, I will say: infatuation and love, despite their outward appearances, are very different feelings. Infatuation has been very seriously medically studied. From infatuation, from this euphoria a person flies, as if on wings, has butterflies in his stomach, and has other kinds of purely bodily sensations … Even the composition of his blood changes. If you were to show him a picture of his beloved and immediately analyze his blood, it would become clear that he has elevated levels of certain substances. We know that hormones have a lot of influence on a person’s behavior. The brain produces dopamine, serotonin—“the happiness hormone,” in women oxytocin and in men testosterone. The hormonal field changes in a person and causes him to experience euphoria, like mild natural narcotics. If an infatuated person had an MRI, it would be clear that certain centers of his brain were working totally different. Of course, any sensible person understands that in marriage—ten-fifteen-twenty-twenty-five-fifty years—this won’t continue. In marriage there is something different—that which we call love. Love is a feeling of unity with our loved one, when their pain becomes our pain, their joy our joy, when you are willing to sacrifice something for this person, when you can’t live without them—not just because it’s pleasing for you to be with them, but when you are truly ready to give: It is more blessed to give than to receive.

—Is it necessary to be crowned? What if in the future the marriage suddenly falls apart, which is entirely possible? Isn’t it better after all to wait?

I think that for Orthodox people here the answer is unambiguous. Usually couples where one person is not very church-going ask this question. If speaking about Orthodox Christians, then their marriage should be crowned and blessed by the Orthodox Church—this is perfectly clear. But if one half is not ready to be crowned, then, I think, we should not drag and force them into it.

With that I would like to say goodbye until our next meeting, and to wish you all peace, joy, and love. May God protect you all!

An article by Archpriest Pavel Gumerov

Source: http://orthochristian.com/93610.html

Subscribe to: Posts ( Atom )

Search This Blog

featured Slider

Accepting the Limits of Reason

Following in the Footsteps of St. Thomas: Orthodoxy in West Bengal

The Life of the Holy Apostle Thomas

Why Are Musical Instruments Not Used in Orthodox Christian Worship?

Deciding to Enter into Marriage: The First Rule of Marriage...

Partners