__________________________
Prelest and Elders
check Joanna's Shared Library for pdf of book
two chapters from the book:
Chapter 6
PRELEST
THE MAIN DANGER in the way of ascetic endeavors lies in the possibility of prelest.
Bishop Ignatius writes that “men of prayer are subjected to all kinds of delusion if repentance does not form the foundation of their prayer, if it has not become the soul and the aim of prayer. Anyone trying to join the wedding feast of the Son of God without the clean and bright wedding garment1 prepared by repentance, but simply in rags, in a state of self-delusion and sin, will be thrown out into pitch darkness - into demonic delusion."2
Humility always accompanies sanctity. Sanctity is unthinkable without it. Professor Archimandrite Cyprian says: “The humility with which St. Simeon the New Theologian acknowledges his imperfection, and contritely confesses his past sins and falls, serves as a guarantee that his mystical experience is completely free of the element of prelest and spiritual pride. Ascetic literature abounds in warnings to novices not to yield to false visions and delusions, not to take an angel of darkness for an Angel of Light. St. Simeon warns against believing in all kinds of knocking noises, voices, intimidations, visions of sensory light, fragrances. etc.. which tempt the awareness of an ascetic at the time of prayer. . . . Along with humility, the mysterious bond with the Church protects mystics from fall- ing into any false mysticism."3
1. In ancient times. a king would send a special festive garment to those who were invi- ted to his feast. In one of the Savior's parables, the wedding garment symbolizes the grace of the Holy Spirit which God grants to a true ascetic.
2. Bishop Ignatius Brianchaninov, Works, Vol. I, p. 135.
3. Archimandriee Cyprian, "Spiritual Predecessors of Gregory Palamas " p. 113.
All varieties of self-delusion or prelest are of two kinds. They are caused, firstly, by improper activity of the mind and, secondly, by improper activity of the heart (feeling). “The desire and aspiration to perceive spiritual visions by a mind unpurified of passions and unrenewed by the Holy Spirit is filled with pride and lack of discernment; the same pride and lack of discernment make the heart desire and aspire to delight in holy and divine experiences while still being incapable and unworthy of receiving them."4
4. Bilhop Ignatius Brianehaninov, Works, Vol. I, p. 144.
The first kind of delusion, caused by the heating of the mind and imagination, frequently ends in mental derangement and suicide. The second kind is called “opinion," and it leads to such a tragic end less frequently because it deludes the mind but does not drive one to a frenzy. Nevertheless, it is just as ruinous: an ascetic who tries to awaken love for God in his heart and compels himself to experience delight and rapture while disregarding repentance, achieves just the opposite: "he enters into communion with Satan and begins to hate the Holy Spirit." "Opinion," in various degrees, is very widespread. "Anyone who does not have a contrite spirit and considers himself a person of virtue and merit. anyone who does not strictly adhere to the teaching of the Orthodox Church, but thinks freely according to his own opinion or a foreign teaching, is actually in this kind of prelest. The degree of deviation and the persistence in this deviation determine the degree of prelest. . . . "5 In our fallen state, only one kind of feeling is admissible in the unseen worship of God: the feeling of sorrow for one’s sins and sinfulness, one‘s fall and ruin, which is also called lamentation. repentance, contrition of spirit. . . .” A sacrifice unto God is a broken spirit. a broken and a contrite heart, O God, Thou wilt not despise (Ps. 50:17).6
5. Ibid.. p. 14:.
6. lbid., p. 145.
Bishop Ignatius Brianchaninov tells of a characteristic case of prelest caused by the heated mind and imagination. An Athonite monk paid him a visit and said: “Pray for me. Father, I sleep a lot and I eat a lot." As he was saying this, Bishop Ignatius felt heat exuding from the monk. In order to learn about the spiritual state of the Athonite, Bishop Ignatius asked the monk to instruct him in prayer. "Oh horrors!” This monk began teaching him a method of “ecstatic prayer, utilizing the imagination." Later it turned out that the Athonite was completely unfamiliar with the teaching of the Holy Fathers on prayer. Bishop Ignatius continues: ‘‘In the course of our conversation I said to him: ‘Look. Elder, when staying in Petersburg, under no circumstances take lodgings in an upper story; be sure you stay on the ground floor.’ ‘Why so?’ objected the monk. ‘Well,’ I answered, ‘if angels should suddenly decide to take you up and transport you from Petersburg to Mt. Athos, and if they would take you from the upper floor, they could drop you down and you would die on impact; if however, they would take you from the ground floor and drop you, you would only be bruised.’ ‘Believe me,’ answered the Athonite, ‘many times when I stood praying, a vivid thought would come to me that angels would take me up and carry me to Mt. Athos.’ It turned out that the hieroschemamonk was wearing chains on his body, was hardly sleeping, was eating very little, and that he was feeling warmth in his body and had no need of warm clothes in the wintertime. Towards the end of our conversation I decided to suggest to the monk that, being an ascetic and faster, he should try the method taught by the Holy Fathers. They advise to keep the mind free of any dream-like fantasies and wholly and at tentively immersed in the words of prayer, ‘to enclose the thought within the words of prayer‘ (St. John of the Ladder, Step 28:17). The heart then usually sympathizes with the mind, feeling salutary sorrow for the sins committed, as St. Mark the Ascetic said: ‘When the mind prays without distraction it afflicts the heart: a broken and contrite heart, O God, Thou wilt not despise‘ (Ch. 34, Philokalia, Part 1). ‘After you have tried this method,’ I said to the Athonite, ‘let me know about the fruit of your experiment; it is inconvenient for me to undertake such an experiment, considering my distracted way of life.’ The Athonite agreed. A few days later he came and said: ‘What have you done to me?!‘ ‘What happened?‘ ‘Well. as soon as I tried to pray enclosing my mind in the words of prayer, all my visions disappeared, and I can no longer return to them.‘ During our further conversation, I did not detect the kind of impudence and self-reliance which I noticed in him during our first meeting and which are usually noticeable in persons given to self-deceptions and imagining themselves to be holy or spiritually successful. The monk expressed his wish to hear my humble advice. When I advised him not to differ from others externally, for this leads to haughtiness, he took off his chains and handed them to me. A month later he came again and told me that he no longer suffered from heat in his body, that he was now in need of warm clothes and that he slept more. He told me that many monks on Mt. Athos, renowned for their holiness, use the method of prayer which he had previously practiced and instructed others in that method as well."7
7. lbi'd.. pp. 140-142.
Chapter 7
ELDERSHIP
1. WHAT IS ELDERSHIP?
Follow after charity, and desire spiritual gifts, but rather that ye may prophesy. . . . But he that prophesieth speaketh unto men to edIfication, and exhortation, and comfort. (1 Cor. 14:1, 3)
THE APOSTLE PAUL enumerates three ministries in the Church, independent of the church hierarchy: apostles, prophets, teachers.
Immediately after the apostles stand prophets (Eph. 4:11, I Cor. 12:28). Their ministry consists primarily of “edification, exhortation, and comfort" (I Cor. 14:3). With this aim, and also for pointing out or warning, prophets also predict future events.
Through the prophet, the will of God is immediately revealed; and therefore his authority is limitless.
The prophetic ministry is a special gift of grace, a gift of the Holy Spirit (charisma). The prophet possesses a special spiritual vision – clairvoyance. For him the boundaries of space and time are, as it were, set aside; with his spiritual gaze he sees not only events that are occurring now, but also future events. He sees their spiritual meaning; he sees the soul of man, his past and future.
Such a high calling cannot but be bound up with a high moral level, with purity of heart, with personal sanctity. Sanctity of life, indeed, was required of the prophet from the first period of Christianity: “He must have the manner of the Lord. From his manner may be distinguished the false prophet and the (true) prophet,” says one of the oldest works of Christian literature, the Didache (The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles)1
1. K. Popov, The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles (Kiev, 1884). pp_ 21, 35. Professor K. Popov, who wrote a special study on this document, attributes it to the end of the 1st century. Consequently, Apostle John the Theologian was still alive then, and perhaps other Apostles as wel|.' Thanks to this document. we have found out much about the life of the Church of the first Christians. Personally. I have been searching for five years to form the concept of eldership, since in our contemporary theological literature there is no such thing. And finally I found the answer too my quest — although under a different name, not under the name of eldership – in the most ancient Christian document, The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles.
The ministries enumerated by the Apostle Paul have been preserved in the Church in all ages. The ministries of apostle, prophet, and teacher, being independent, may be combined with the rank of bishop or priest.
The prophetic ministry, bound up with personal sanctity, has flourished when spiritual life in the Church was high, and has declined in decadent periods. Most brightly of all is it manifested in monastic eldership.
The influence of eldership extended far beyond the boundaries of 2. monastery’s walls. Elders spiritually guided not only monks, but also laymen. Possessing the gift of clairvoyance, they edified, exhorted, and comforted everyone (I Cor. 14:3); they healed illnesses of soul and body, warned against dangers, indicated the path of life, revealed the will of God.
Being a direct continuation of the prophetic ministry, eldership appeared under this name and in this form only in the 4th century, together with the arising of monasticism, as its guiding principle.
2. THE MEANING OF THE COUNSELLING ACTIVITY OF ELDERS
As a ship which bas a good helmsman comes safely into the harbor with God's help, so the soul which has a good shepherd, even though it has done much evil, easily ascends to heaven. (Ladder of Divine Ascent)
The hardships of inner ascetic struggle, which aims at acquiring purity and dispassion, reveal the great significance of the counselling activity of elders. St. John of the Ladder says: “Those who rely on themselves and think that they have no need of any guide are deceiving themselves."2
2. St. John Climacus, The Ladder, Step 1:7.
“Without a guide one easily wanders from the road, however prudent one
may be; and so, he who willfully walks the monastic path easily perishes, even though he may have all wisdom.”3 The same idea is expressed by St. Mark the Ascetic (4th century): “For the man who goes his monastic way willfully and without any guidance often stumbles and falls into many pits and snares of the devil; he frequently exposes himself to many dangers, not knowing what awaits him at the end. For many have endured great ascetic labors, much hardship and toil for God's sake. but because they relied on their own judgment, lacked discernment, and failed to accept help from their neighbor, their many efforts proved useless and vain."4
3. lbid. Step 26:237.
4. “Letter to Nicholas the Solitary," in the book of St. Mark the Ascetic (Optina edition).
The erroneous ways of self-willed monks are caused, among other things, by the fact that the demons always try to present light as darkness and darkness as light, as the Apostle says: For Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light (II Cor. 11:14).
The monks Ignatius and Callistus instruct: “Most importantly, in everything you do, ask to be advised by your spiritual father in Jesus Christ; for in this manner, by the grace of Christ, the unbearable and the arduous become easy, and it will seem to you that you are rapidly moving along a gently sloping field."5 In this instruction we find five signs of a sincere spiritual attitude of spiritual children to their elder and guide: “1) complete faith in him, 2) truthfulness: being truthful before him in word and deed. 3) not following one’s own will in anything. but instead trying to cut it off (i.e., doing nothing according to one’s own wish and understanding, but always asking for the elder’s advice in everything), 4) never objecting or arguing, since arguments are caused by one’s pride and unbelief, and 5) complete and sincere confession of one’s sins and the secrets of the heart" (revelation of thoughts).6
5. The Pbilohalia (Dobrorohabie). Vol. V. p. 355.
6. Ibi'd.. p. 319.
3. THE REVELATION OF THOUGHTS
The revelation or confession of thoughts, according to Bishop Ignatius Brianchaninov, “was in all probability instituted by the Apostles themselves" (James 5:16) and was generally practiced in ancient monasticism, as is clearly evident in the writings of Sts. Cassian, John of the Ladder, Barsanuphius the Great, Abba Dorotheus, and, in a word, in all patristic writings on monasticism. However, an indispensable condition for practicing confession of thoughts is a monk who has been brought up in this practice and has attained a certain degree of spiritual perfection.
St. Cassian the Roman says: “It is beneficial to reveal one's thoughts to the fathers, not just to any father, but to spiritual elders esteemed not because of their venerable age and gray hair, but because of their discernment. Many men, carried away by the obviously old age of an elder, confessed their thoughts to him, but instead of being healed they suffered harm caused by the incompetence of their confessor,"7 “for not everyone by any means can take upon himself the ‘thoughts confessed to him" (Sts. Barsanuphius and ]ohn).8 St. Ephraim the Syrian forewarns: “If you are not yet in a great measure inflamed by the Holy Spirit, do not aspire to hear other men’s thoughts.”9 “A confessor must be burning with the fire of grace, so that this fire may scorch the wickedness of other men's thoughts and passions, and that grace and confession may not break but rather bind even more the chain of moral relations between him and the men making a confession. An elder called upon to hear confessions ‘judges in accordance with the Spirit of God abiding within him.’ "10 “Father, tell me what the grace of the All-Holy Spirit will reveal to you, and heal my soul" (Palestinian Pa- tericon)11 — these are the words with which a repentant monk addresses the ascetic. The grace of the Holy Spirit was, namely, the power which imparted to an elder his inner authority to hear the confession of thoughts and to cure them.
7. Bishop Ignatius Brianchaninov, Works, Vol. I, p. 545.
8. Smirnov, "Confession and Repentance in Ancient Monasteries of the East.“ in Theological Messenger (Bogoslovskii Vestnik) (April, 1905), pp. 755-763
9. lbid.
10. Ibid.
11.Ibid.
This practice, according to Bishop Ignatius, “is of unusual benefit for the soul: no other single ascetic effort mortifies passions with such ease and power as this one. Passions retreat from the one who mercilessly confesses them.“12
12. Bishop Ignatius Brianchaninov, Works, Vol. I, p. 545.
“Anyone concealing his thoughts is incurable” (Sts. Barsanuphius and John). “Do not hide your thoughts, confusions and suspicions. . . . It is over such a man who hides his bad or good thoughts that the demons rejoice" (St. Isaiah). "Having rejected shame, we should always reveal to our elders everything that takes place in our heart” (St. John Cassian). “A wicked thought will weaken immediately after it is confessed. And even before the penance is imposed, the abominable dragon flees. as if dragged out into the daylight from his dark underground cave by the courage of confession and now displayed in his disgrace" (St. John Cassian). “Base thought is the beginning and the root of transgressions; when it is concealed it turns into an act of darkness” (St. Theodore the Studite).13
13. Smirnov, “Confession and Repentance in Ancient Monasteries of the East." in Theological Messenger (March-April. 1905), pp. 459-470.
The revelation of thoughts is the most powerful weapon in the hands of a spiritual father and elder. The author of these lines frequently witnessed the Elder of Optina Monastery, Hieroschemamonk Anatole (Potapov) receive confessions of thoughts from the monks. This scene created a very strong impression. Filled with concentrated attention and reverence, the monks would one after another walk up to the Elder. They kneeled when receiving his blessing, and exchanged a few short phrases with him. Some passed through quickly, others lingered a few moments longer. One could feel that the Elder treated them with fatherly love and authority. Occasionally he would resort to an external mode of treatment, like gently slapping the penitent monk on the forehead, probably to fight off obtrusive thoughts. All the monks left the Elder at peace and consoled. This would take place twice a day, mornings and evenings. Truly, life in Optina was unmarred by troubles, and all the monks had a kind, even tender disposition; some were cheerful, others deeply concentrated. One has to see with one’s own eyes the result of the revelation of thoughts in order to understand its meaning fully. An ancient monk described in the following words the state of holy joy experienced by a man after he confessed his thoughts: “I was full of ineffable joy, feeling my mind purified of any sinful desires. I delighted in a purity which I cannot describe. The truth itself is the witness of this; I was fortified by firm faith in God and by great love. . . . I became dispassionate and bodiless, enveloped in God's enlightenment, having been created by His will" (Palestinian Pater- icon. II, pp. 95-96).”14
14. ibid. p. 472.
St. Abba Dorotheus (†620), when teaching about the fear of God, told of the blessed state he attained when revealing his thoughts to his Elder: “I was free of any sorrows, of any anxieties. If some disquieting thought occurred to me, I would write it down on a tablet (because I was used to writing down my questions before attending to the Elder); and no sooner would I finish writing than I would feel benefit and relief, so great was the carefreeness and peace in me. Not understanding the power of virtue and having heard that we must through much tribulation enter into the Kingdom of God, I was worried that I had no sorrows. I revealed this thought to my Elder, and he said: ‘Do not grieve, you have nothing to worry about. Whoever is in obedience to the fathers enjoys freedom from cares, and peace.‘ ”15
15. “Instruction on Fear in Christian Reading." 1829. in the Patrology of Archbishop Philaret of Chernigov (St. Petersburg. 1882), no. 244.
Bishop Ignatius Brianchaninov says that those monks who live by the rules of St. Nilus of Sora. who submit to the guidance of the Holy Scriptures and the writings of the Holy Fathers, and are in the habit of confessing their thoughts, may be likened to men who see and live, while those who disregard such a way of life are like blind men, like corpses.”16
16. Bishop Ignatius Brianchaninov, Works, Vol. I. p. 545.
4. CHARACTERISTICS OF AN ELDER
In ascetic literature, when choosing a spiritual guide one is advised not to look for great endowments in him, for an ability to perform miracles. or a gift of prophecy. etc.. but to choose one who is experienced in spiritual activity. who has personally attained purification of passions: for even a man of passions may possess spiritual gifts. . . . St. Macarius of Egypt said: ‘‘It happens that one may have grace, although his heart is not yet pure. That is why some men could not but fall: they did not believe that smoke and sin were abiding in them along with grace.'’17
17. St. Macarius of Egypt, Homilies, Homily 26:25. p. 205.
Only a man who has successfully traversed the path of spiritual labor himself can lead others along this path.
An ascetic who has without a particular effort received the gift of grace because of the purity of his soul. which he has preserved since childhood, may not have the ability to guide others. Because he is not familiar with the ways of evil from his own experience, he does not know of the warfare against passions, and therefore he does not perceive evil in others. There were cases when such elders, being holy themselves, harmed their disciples and even “drove them into delusion.”
In order to direct others, one needs the gift of discernment: “This art is half-way to sanctity" said the Optina Elder Fr. Leonid. A true elder must have the gift of discernment.
Bishop Ignatius speaks of this gift as follows: “St. Cassian the Roman says that the Egyptian Fathers, among whom monasticism especially flourished and produced astonishing fruits, affirm that ‘it is good to give spiritual direction and to be directed by those who are really wise,’ and they state that ‘this is a very great gift and grace of the Holy Spirit.’ An indispensable condition of such submission is a spirit-bearing guide who by the will of the Spirit can mortify the fallen will of the person subject to him in the Lord, and can mortify all the passions caused by the fallen will as well. Man's fall and corrupt will imply a tendency to all passions. It is obvious that the mortification of a fallen will, which is effected so sublimely and victoriously by the will of the Spirit of God, cannot be accomplished by a director’s fallen will when the director himself is still enslaved to the passions. ‘If you wish to renounce the world and learn the evangelical life,’ said St. Simeon the New Theologian to the monks of his time, ‘do not entrust yourself to an inexperienced or passionate master, lest instead of the evangelical life you learn a diabolical life. For the teaching of good teachers is good, while the teaching of bad teachers is bad. Bad seeds invariably produce bad fruits. Every blind man who undertakes to guide others is a deceiver. and those who follow him are cast into the pit of destruction according to the word of the Lord: if a blind man leads a blind man, both will fall into a hole (Matt. 15:14). . . .' Those elders who take upon themselves the role of the ancient holy elders without having their spiritual gifts should know that their very intention, their very thoughts and ideas concerning the great monastic work of obedience, are false; let them know that their very outlook or way of thinking, their reason and their knowledge are self-delusion and diabolical prelest which cannot fail to give birth to a corresponding fruit in the person guided by them.
“If there is no good director available," continues Bishop Ignatius. “it is better for an ascetic to be without one altogether than to submit himself to an inexperienced one. . . . It is a terrible business to take upon oneself duties (of eldership) which can be carried out only by order of the Holy Spirit and by the action of the Spirit. It is a terrible thing to pretend to be a vessel of the Holy Spirit when all the while relations with Satan have not been broken, and the vessel is still being defiled by the action of Satan (i.e., dispassion has not yet been achieved)! Such hypocrisy is terrible. It is disastrous both for oneself and one's neighbor; it is criminal in God’s sight, blasphemous. . . . ‘St. Poemen the Great ordered that a penitent should immediately break with an elder if living with him proved to be harmful to the soul’ (Alphabetical Patrology). Evidently this meant that the elder in question was breaking the moral tradition of the Church. It is another matter when no harm is done to the soul, and one is only disturbed by thoughts, which are obviously diabolical. We must not yield to them. They operate just where we receive spiritual profit, which is what the demons want to snatch from us.”18
18. Bishop Ignatius Brianchaninov, Works, Vol. IV. pp. 92-96.
An elder who has gained personal experience in the school of sobriety and mental prayer of the heart, who has thus mastered spiritual-psychological laws, and who has already personally attained dispassion, becomes capable of guiding a novice in his “unseen warfare" on the way to dispassion. He must be able to penetrate the very depths of the human soul, to see the very inception of evil within it, along with the causes of this inception, to diagnose a disease and find the precise method of healing it. An elder is a skillful spiritual physician. He must clearly see the “inner make-up" of his disciple, i.e., the character of his soul and the degree of his spiritual development; he must possess the gift of discrimination and “discernment of spirits," because at all times he has to be dealing with evil which tries to transform itself into an angel of light. As a man who has attained dispassion, an elder usually has other spiritual gifts as well: those of clairvoyance, of miracle-working, of prophecy. . . .
In the highest degree of proficiency, as exemplified in St. Seraphim of Sarov, an elder attains complete and unrestricted freedom to manifest his activity, for not he, but Christ lives in him (Gal. 2:20); all his activity is in the Holy Spirit, and therefore always in harmony with the Church and its institutions.
Eldership is not a hierarchical rank within the Church; it is a special kind of sanctity, and therefore it may inhere in anyone. A monk without any clerical rank could be an elder, as, for instance, was the case with Fr. Barnabas of Gethsemane Hermitage at the beginning of his activity in spiritual guidance. A bishop. too, may be an elder: for instance, lgnatius Brianchaninov, or Anthony of Voronezh, the great contemporary of St. Seraphim. There were elders among priests as well: St. John of Kronstadt and Fr. George [the New Martyr] of Chekriak village. Finally, eldership can also be taken on by a woman, as for example the clairvoyant Blessed Parasceva lvanovna, a fool-for-Christ of the Diveyevo Convent, without whose advice nothing was ever undertaken in that monastic community. Also, abbesses and righteous laywomen can function as eldresses.]
Thus, to sum up, eldership is a special gift of grace. a charisma exercised under the direct guidance of the Holy Spirit, a special kind of sanctity. While all members of the Church are bound to submit themselves to the Church authority, no one is bound to submit to the authority of an elder. An elder never imposes himself on anyone; one always submits to him voluntarily. However, having once found a true, grace-inspired elder and having surrendered to him, the disciple should unreservedly obey him in everything and his advice must be followed, because through the elder God's will is being directly revealed to him. And such "monastic obedience" — in the form that was practiced in ancient monasticism - is called by Bishop Ignatius “a lofty spiritual mystery.”19 Also to “inquire of an elder" is not required of anyone, but once one has asked for advice, one must follow it for the above reason.
19. Ibid., Vol. I, p. 540.
__________
If a contemporary ascetic can no longer find an experienced spiritual director, through no fault of his own but by reason of a complete absence of the latter, he nevertheless should not lose heart and leave his ascetic endeavor. According to the advice of St. Nilus of Sora, a monk of today must turn to the Scriptures and the writings of the Holy Fathers; he must not be alone in this, but seek the "counsel of the more proficient brethren, though at the same time comparing their counsel with Scripture."20 To encourage ascetics in their difficult situation, Bishop Ignatius refers them to the advice of St. Isaac the Syrian: “A monk should not doubt that he will receive the gift of Divine grace, just as a son does not doubt that he will receive inheritance from his father. This inheritance is his by the law of nature." The aim of monasticism is renewal by the Holy Spirit, but St. Isaac names repentance and humility as the means towards this aim, and advises monks to acquire the ability to weep over themselves and use the prayer of the publican. He suggests that we uncover in ourselves enough of sinfulness to make our conscience remind us that we are but unworthy servants and in need of mercy. “Divine mercy,” says the Saint, “comes to us by itself and at the time when one is not thinking about it. Indeed it is so — but only if the ground is pure and undefiled.”21
20. Ibid.
21. lbI'd., p. 163 (St. Isaac the Syrian, Homilies 55 and 2).
We should repeat here that proper ascetic endeavor is impossible without the Jesus Prayer. Speaking of those who are afraid to begin practicing the Jesus Prayer, the Elder Basil Polyanomerulsky (the teacher of St. Paisius Velichkovsky) says: “Some who are unfamiliar with this prayer from their own experience think that they have the gift of discernment, and they justify themselves, or. you might say, are disinclined to learn this holy activity for three reasons or considerations. Firstly, they dismiss it as an exclusive feature of holy and dispassionate men. The second reason given is the scarcity of experienced guides and teachers, and the third reason — the danger of delusion. However, these reasons are ungrounded: the first — because the initial stage of spiritual progress for novices consists of the weakening of passions by sobriety of the mind and watchfulness of the heart, i.e., mental prayer, as it befits an active soul. The second argument is unreasonable and ungrounded because in the case of a lack of proper guides and teachers, Holy Scripture is our teacher. The third argument entails self-deception: instead of learning about delusion and the cautions against it from Holy Scripture. these cautions themselves are misinterpreted and presented as a basis for reluctance to practice mental prayer. If you fear to practice this prayer out of reverence and simplicity of heart, know that I, too, fear it for this reason —- but not because of some senseless fables, according to which ‘if you fear the wolf, don't go into the forest.’ One should fear God, but not run away from Him or renounce Him on account of this fear."22
22. lbid.. p. 128.
The contemporary position of spiritual guidance (dukhovnichestvo), as we will soon see, goes back to ancient monastic eldership (starchestvo) and is its secondary form. Because of the kinship of these two phenomena (spiritual guidance and eldership) many less experienced priests, only theoretically familiar with ascetic literature, may always be tempted to “exceed their authority," to overstep the boundaries of their position as spiritual guides, in order to assume the role of an elder, while in actual fact they do not understand what true spiritual counselling by elders is all about. This circumstance is fraught with the danger of causing irrevocable harm to the souls of their spiritual wards. It is well known that there have even been cases of suicide as a result of such harm being inflicted.
In pseudo-eldership, the will of one person is enslaved by the will of another, contrary to the point made by the Apostle Paul: Ye are bought with a price, be not ye the servants of men (I Cor. 7:23). and this situation entails a feeling of oppression, despondency or an unhealthy partial attitude to the “elder." A true grace-filled attitude to an elder, although based on unconditional obedience, does not deprive a person of the feeling of joy and freedom in God, because he is not in submission to the will of man, but through it to the will of God. He knows from his experience that the elder shows him the best way out of any given external difficulty, or offers him the best cure of his spiritual illness.
While the grace-filled elder is the bearer of God's will. the pseudo-elder overshadows God.
One should not confuse the counselling activity of elders with monastic discipline and the authority of superiors, or with the special kind of ascetic endeavor in which a monk submits to complete external obedience to a frequently severe and passionate “elder," thus consciously embracing martyrdom, as it were. Not every monk is strong enough to go through this kind of mortification of his will, and it may cause great anguish and indifference in the spiritual life. It is not an example to be imitated, but rather an exception worthy of astonishment.
Bishop Ignatius tells novices to obey the superior and other monastic authorities, as well as to obey “all fathers and brethren in matters that do not conflict with the Law of God, or with the rule and order of the monastery, or with the directives of the monastic authorities. But on no account obey what is evil. . . . Seek the advice of virtuous and sensible fathers and brethren. but accept their advice with extreme caution and discretion. . . do not be carried away by advice which impresses you greatly at the start," for it may appeal to you because of your inexperience or because it gratifies some hidden passion within you.23
23. Ibid., Vol. IV. pp. 98-104
The relationship of an adviser to a learner entirely differs from that of an elder to a novice, a slave in the Lord, for whom the elder assumes complete responsibility. An adviser is not responsible for his advice if he has given it with the fear of God and with humility, not of his own accord but because he was asked and required to give it. And compliance with the advice received is not compulsory: it may be carried out or not carried out. "Let us not hide the word of God. but let us make it known,” says St. Nilus of Sora. “The Divine Scriptures and the words of the Holy Fathers are as numerous as the sands of the sea. Diligently searching them out, we teach them to those who come to us and who are in need of them (who require them, ask for them). More correctly. it is not we who teach, because we are unworthy to do so, but it is the blessed and holy Fathers who teach from Divine Scripture.” “There you have a superb model for our guidance today!” concludes Bishop Ignatius.
A certain experienced priest, speaking of spiritual guidance and pointing to the difference between the counselling activity of elders and that of spiritual guides, expressed himself as follows: “A spiritual guide directs one to the path of salvation, while an elder leads one along this path.”
5. ELDERSHIP AND SPIRITUAL GUIDANCE IN HISTORY
The elements of eldership (starchestvo) can be found already in the charismatic phenomena of early Christianity. These charismatic phenomena, says Professor Smirnov, reappeared in ancient monasticism, and the elders were the bearers of the charisma – the special gift of the Holy Spirit, received by man directly from God for his personal achievement. The right to bind and to absolve, or the “power of the keys," was interpreted then as the highest and most perfect gift.24
24. In ancient times, sacramental confession was not regarded as the only, exclusive and
inevitable means for remission of sins committed after baptism. Confession and repentance were regarded as only one of many methods of purifying the soul from sins. St. John Chrysostom, for example. points out five such methods: 1) public confession, 2) weeping over sins. 3) humility. 4) charity — the queen of virtues, and 5) prayer.
Let us examine: What is this monastic practice? A spiritual father (πνευματικος πατηρ)25 does not mean a priest who follows a bishop‘s instructions; he is an "ordinary monastic elder, an indispensable guide of monks, independently appointed at a monastery and freely chosen by the pupil. For the most part, he does not have a clerical rank." “He would take his pupils’ souls upon his own soul and. step by step, he would guide their spiritual lives, and, therefore, upon receiving their confession of thoughts and deeds, he would encourage and punish them.”
25. This term appeared already in the 4th century and existed until the first half of the 9th century.
The customary and moral relations between the elder and his pupil — spiritual father and spiritual son — both outwardly and inwardly, soon formed a solid and harmonious system which established itself as a monastic custom. The elder (as, subsequently, the spiritual father) would hear the confession and repentance, usually going over all sins, starting with a fleeting sinful thought slightly disturbing the monastic conscience, and ending with a mortal sin. “This confession and repentance before the elder used to replace the Church confession and repentance."
The influence of the elders amongst the laity began spreading very early, probably during the first years of monasticism. Laymen would seek out the elders, bypassing their pastors.
This discipline of monastic repentance in Church must have spread for reasons of its comparative ease, its superior quality and vitality, its “strictly pastoral character due to the presence of a superior and popular eldership, unavailable in the Church confessions."
For certain canonical sins, the ancient Church would first excommunicate the guilty person and then subject him to a public confession. The elder, however, upon hearing the brother's confession, would immediately reconcile him to his conscience and impose upon him a much lighter form of penance than the church would — thus he “bound and loosed."
Gradually, in the East, the monastic discipline of confession supplanted the church confession performed by the white (non-monastic) clergy, and the elders turned into father-confessors.
How did this happen? How did the monastic discipline become transformed into a general church discipline, while confession before an elder approached sacramental confession?
This phenomenon can be traced back to the Byzantine Church at the time of Leo the Armenian (1820) during the iconoclastic controversy, when the monastic elders were officially recognized by the Patriarch of Constantinople, Nicephorus the Confessor, along with his bishops and priests. This measure was caused by the needs of the time: Orthodoxy was in danger, and it relied on the cooperation of the most zealous defenders of the veneration of icons — mostly Studite monks. As a local measure, this paved the way towards supplanting the white clergy in the practice of confession throughout the Orthodox East and for a long time to come — and this was realized after the age of the Ecumenical Councils. In the course of the 10th to the 12th centuries, secret confession became predominant, having replaced public confession and canonical penances.
Thus, the “institution" of a spiritual father first appeared in the form of monastic eldership. The term “spiritual father" had for a long time denoted a monastic elder. Later this church custom, almost in its entirety, reappeared in the practice of spiritual father-confessors.
The monastic form turned into a customary form of the Church in general, and thus existed in the East almost unchanged throughout several centuries.26
26. Smirnov. "Ancient Spiritual Guidance and Its Origin." in Theological Messenger (Bogoslomkii Vestnik), 1906. Vol. II. pp. 369-382.
When Christianity was adopted in Russia, the Greek and Bulgarian clergy brought their already-established discipline of repentance and the institution of spiritual father-confessors along with their customary features which had developed during the period of the Ecumenical Councils. This discipline existed in Russia almost untouched until the 18th century, since the ancient Russian Church authorities, being faithful to old traditions, showed hardly any innovation in this sphere.
The discipline of penance in the Slavic Churches differed somewhat from that of the Greek Church. Apparently, southern Slavs allowed the white clergy to be spiritual father-confessors, which was inadmissible in the Greek Church of that time.
It is possible that the remnants of the ancient Christian public discipline were not equally preserved everywhere.
Although Russia obtained the discipline of penance from Greece and Bulgaria, it deviated from their practice because of the great territorial expanse. A separate class of spiritual father-confessors soon ceased to exist, and every white (non-monastic) priest, upon ordination, acquired the right to hear confessions.
Another peculiarity of the Russian Church was that consequently the spiritual father-confessor became also a bearer of the priestly rank.
Now let us examine: what was this discipline? As was the custom of that time, everyone was free to choose his spiritual father-confessor, but once one had chosen him, one had no right to abandon him.
One was bound to obey him unconditionally, implicitly, and be loyal to him until the end of one’s life. The spiritual father-confessor, on his part, assumed all the responsibility for the sins of his spiritual son and took his sins upon his own soul. Let us give an example of such taking on of sins: Having heard the confession and read the prayer over his bent-over repentant son, the spiritual father lifts him up from the earth and places his right hand on his own neck, saying, “Upon my neck are your sins, O child. and may Christ our God not punish you for them when He will come in His glory for His terrible judgment.”
A spiritual father is not only the witness of his spiritual son's repentance before God, but is responsible, as it were, for his sins. The sin of a repentant son imparted to his spiritual father during confession became their common sin; they were accomplices in crime, as it were.
Being the surety of his flock the ancient Russian spiritual father-confessor (dukhovnik) thus became a man’s guide towards the New Jerusalem, who would open the Kingdom of God for him and lead him to God's throne, saying: “Here am I and the children which Thou hast given to me."
A spiritual father's power in guiding his spiritual children was to be unconditional and unlimited, like that of an abbot or the elder in a monastery, and the penance (epitimia) imposed by him had to be carried out as “the commandment of God"; and whatever he bound, he alone could absolve.“27
27. Smirnov, Ancient Russian Spiritual Father Confessors
__________________________
Acquisition of Holy Spirit, Kontsevich
out-of-print book
download 21.1 MB
Is there an Invisible Church?
Fr. Michael Pomazansky
The following brief extract from Fr. Michael's articles shows one of the predominant concerns of his writings. In it [which is only the introduction to a much larger article], he speaks of the "Heavenly Church", whose reality in the lives of Orthodox Christians sharply distinguishes them from Protestants, who have no contact with it in prayer and can only speculate about it. At the same time, however, he corrects the mistake of some theologians who, in combatting the false Protestant idea of an "invisible church" which transcends confessional boundaries, have over-emphasized the earthly side of the Church and thereby failed to take advantage of a truth which could even convert some Protestants to the truth: that, yes, there is an invisible , heavenly Church, known in the daily experience of prayer of Orthodox Christians – but it has nothing to do with the empty abstractions of the ecumenical movement. In the rest of this article Fr. Michael criticizes the polemical overemphasis on the earthly Church in two recent Russians theologians, and then sets forth the Orthodox teaching of the Heavenly Church in Holy Scripture and the Holy Fathers. –Fr. Seraphim Rose 1981
Is There an Invisible Church?
Western Protestantism, broken into a hundred sects and denominations, naturally had to approach the question: Where is the true Church in the midst of all these confessional divisions? And it has found no other way out than to invent a teaching of an "invisible church" that mysteriously exists in the midst of all the differences and mistakes and sins of men — a church that is holy, whose membership is known only to God, and that consists only of those who are worthy of being in it.
However, it is for a reason that our Divine Savior has left us parables: the parable of the net that brings to shore not only good fish, but also bad; the parable of the field in which the owner leaves the tares to grow together with the good wheat until the harvest. The Apostles founded the Church through the visible Mystery of Baptism of all who declared to them their faith in Christ. And the Church was, as it remains, a net or field "for those who wish to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth", for those who seek eternal life, although now living "in hope," not yet having entered into heavenly repose.
The Apostles founded outwardly "visible" communities, with a definite membership, one in soul even though outwardly separated, and all these communities were the single Church of Christ. Such will the Church remain forever. Its aim is to call and prepare men for eternal life in Christ.
Therefore, the Orthodox Apostolic Church, replies: Such an invisible Church which, in the midst of many confessional divisions or above them, would single out the worthy people from among them and would unite them all — does not exist.
But nevertheless, this does not in the least mean that we Orthodox Christians do not believe in an Invisible Church. If we did not, we would not pronounce in the Creed daily, and even several times a day, both in Divine services and in prayer at home, the words "I believe" with regard to the Church. Faith, in the definition of the Apostle, is "the evidence of things not seen" (Heb. 11:1). To the three following and final subjects of the Creed we apply the words "I confess" and "I look for"... This means that in our teaching on the Church we acknowledge also its invisible sphere. Where and what is it?
When we talk about the Church, and in our written discussions of it, we often, as it were, forget about this sphere, and by this very fact we lessen the spiritual power, we lose the grace-giving seed which is contained in the Orthodox understanding of the being and essence of the Church. And therefore our talk about the Church, the earthly Church, in the present period which is so difficult for faith, often brings sorrow rather than consolation. Restricting our ideas about faith to the earthly sphere alone, we impoverish ourselves. This can be felt, especially now. On the one hand, the Orthodox Local Churches are becoming isolated (from each other) in their earthly relations, and possibly deeper divisions lie ahead. On the other hand, attempts are being made to form "one church" on earth on principles totally foreign to the Orthodox consciousness. It is not a cold, abstract recognition of the invisible Heavenly Church that we need. Rather, with all our soul we must think and feel ourselves to be members of the "Church of the called" in living and active communion with the "Church of the chosen". For in this also is to be found in part our chosenness — not our personal, individual chosenness, but the chosenness of Orthodoxy among the Christian confessions.
In the last century, the Protestant spirit began to penetrate into Russian society, and in some places also into the simple people. Our church writers had set before them the aim of opposing the above mentioned alien view of the Church the Orthodox, teaching that in the midst of all the divisions in Christianity the Church on earth is one and unique. They explained that the essential, logically clear, and natural attributes of the Church had to be, and were, the uninterruptedness of the hierarchy, coming from the Holy Apostles, and the teaching of faith, confessed and kept without change. Such are the outward signs that are understandable for everyone; such is the Orthodox Eastern Church. Thus the question was limited and answered by the teaching about the Church on earth.
The question of the Church has become a real one in our days also, but now it has a broader scope. Although the "ecumenical movement" of recent times is occupied not with the question of the unity of faith, but with the aim of participating in the proposed plan of an epochal reconstruction of human society — still, sooner or later, the question of the foundations and scope of Christian Faith in this attempt at union will have to arise. It is our obligation to show why this movement cannot be justified. But we ourselves will not be completely justified if we descend from the breadth of the Orthodox world-view, with all its fullness, to a narrow platform of conceptions and, most importantly, to Western conceptions of the Church.
At one time it was permissible and harmless for the representatives of our church history and theology, when entering into dialogue with Protestantism, to descend to its narrow platform; but in present circumstances this is no longer justified.
Even if we were not forced to reply to a movement that is passing us by, that is off to the side of us — still, it is always more consoling for us to acknowledge that we are under the protection of a great heavenly choir of saints, than it is to forget about this...
"Today shalt thou be with Me in paradise" (Luke 23:43) — the holy words pronounced on Golgotha. Paradise! Is this not a forgotten word? After the third chapter of Genesis it is not heard in the Old Testament Scripture. A cherubim with a bared sword was placed to guard the entrance into Paradise. But on the day of Golgotha its gates were opened: "The Cherubim steps away from the tree of life, and the flaming weapon turns to flight." The Old Testament righteous ones, the departed first Christian martyrs entered into the Kingdom of Christ in the heavens.
With the course of decades and centuries the granary of the Lord began to be filled, after the Apostles, with the ranks of martyrs and confessors, hierarchs, ascetics and righteous ones. The Church of the saints lives a life of blessedness in God, with prayers of praise and thanksgiving; and since "love never faileth" (1 Cor. 13:8), these are joined by prayers for the brethren on earth. And we also ask their prayers for us and for our close ones who are departed. These prayers, as an expression of' spiritual closeness, are intertwined in all directions, drawing heaven near to earth. Indeed, how can we not feel the closeness of heavenly and earthly things, when we so desire the blessed life for our close departed ones and entreat the Savior in prayer for them?
Furthermore, the Orthodox Christian, if he has a living bond with his Church, constantly sees and hears in church and at home reminders of the Invisible Church of the saints, and his soul is in constant contact with thoughts about it. He received in infancy, at his baptism, a Christian name, the name of a saint, and he feels himself especially close to this saint and in his personal prayer entreats the saint to pray to God for him. He looks into his usual calendar, and before his eyes is a monthly list, filled with the names of the saints of all periods of Christianity. He enters the church, and before his eyes there appears another world, the heavenly world fixed in images in the icons, on the iconostasis, on the walls, often in the very peak of the dome.
The Vespers service, beginning with the glorification of' the Most Holy Trinity, immediately directs his thoughts to the Kingdom of' Christ, by the call to come together and worship its Head, "Christ Himself our King and our God." Therefore, the whole service is penetrated with the remembrance of the saints, and especially of the Most Holy Theotokos. In the shortest litany, "Again and again" — which is said nearly ten times in a feast-day Vigil — we are reminded to "call to remembrance the Most Holy, Most Pure, Most Blessed, glorious Theotokos and Ever-virgin Mary, with all the saints", and in such an awareness to commit ourselves and one another to Christ God.
When giving a prosphora for commemoration in the Altar at the Proskomedia before the Liturgy, the Christian who has ever heard an explanation of the Liturgy knows that the particles taken out of the prosphora will be placed on the sacred paten amidst the particles "for the living and the dead" below the set of' particles which symbolically represent the whole Church of Christ: in the center the Lamb of God, and on the sides one particle in honor of the Theotokos, and other particles in memory of all the saints in their nine ranks. So close to us is the Heavenly Church that we confide to it all our sorrows, weaknesses, falls, griefs, and joys; we express love for it; we ask its prayers and its help for us.
Such is the spiritual world which is accessible to us even if we live in the usual church parish. Multiply this possibility for those who live in a monastery, and especially for priests or deacons who frequently serve in the Altar, or for those who are assigned to the cliros. It turns out that in the Orthodox Church communion with the saints, with the Invisible Church, can be more intimate than with the world that surrounds us outside the church building; for many it is indeed such.
But is a real earthly communion with the whole earthly Church, dispersed in various nations and states, possible for us? Indeed, within one and the same church parish, does any religious, spiritual communion occur outside the church building? In vain do people lull themselves, dreaming of a "fullness" of communion and unity of the whole Christian world on earth.
In our Orthodox Church, however, communion of soul and mind, all our striving, everything is directed to the Heavenly Church, so that it, being invisible, becomes almost visible, and from the distance of the heavenly heights becomes the closest thing to us.
Earth and heaven are a single Church of Christ. This is a Church more complete than any other one that might be organized, even though one might call together and bind with a single name all the varieties of present-day societies and churches which belong to the historical Christianity outside the Church, outside of Orthodoxy.
But isn't our communion with the Heavenly Church one-sided? Does it give benefit to the soul? The saints hear us in the same way one soul hears another. And more than this: on earth the contact between people through the bodily organs of sense somewhat impedes and hinders the immediate communion of souls, but in the heavenly-earthly sphere this communion is free. In this sphere our voice, our words, reading and singing in the work of prayer are necessary for ourselves, for our sake, so as to unite two or three of us or a whole church into a single common soul, "that with a single heart we may hymn" God and His saints.
It is said of earthly relationships: "Tell me who your friends are, and I'll tell you who you are." "A man learns from the company he keeps" — whether for good or ill. Is it not so also in the purely spiritual sphere? The Apostle John the Theologian instructs in his catholic epistle, which is for all Christians, including ourselves: "I write (the Gospel, the Epistles, the Apocalypse) that ye also may have fellowship with us, and truly our fellowship is with the Father, and with His Son Jesus Christ" (1 John 1:3). He writes this, being in great old age, giving us his testament that men live in common love. The chief of the Apostles writes: "I consider it right, as long as I am in this earthly dwelling, to stir you up by way of reminder, knowing that the laying aside of my earthly dwelling is imminent, as also our Lord Jesus Christ has made clear to me. And I will also be diligent that at any time after my departure you may be able to call these things to mind" (II Peter 1:13-15).
However, in speaking of a single heavenly-earthly Church, do we not confuse two distinct spheres?
We do not confuse them, but only confess their union: "Having accomplished for us Thy mission and united things on earth with things in heaven, Thou didst ascend into glory, O Christ our God, being nowhere separated from those who love Thee, but remaining ever-present with us and calling: I am with you and no one is against you" (Kontakion of the Ascension). The Canonical Epistle of the Eastern Patriarchs in the 17th century expresses the truth of the unity of the Church in the words: "Two flocks of a single Pastor." And so do we believe.
But why did the Fathers of the Church at the Councils not raise the question of the Heavenly Church, but by the word "Church" always had in mind its existence on earth And why in their works does one have to "search out" the passages where they ascend to thoughts of the heavenly sphere, giving it the name of "Church"?
This is because they were entrusted with shepherding the earthly flock of Christ: all their thoughts, all their effort and care, concern the ordering and service of what had been entrusted to them — the preservation of the faith and the ordering of the earthly sphere of the Church. But their service was illuminated and received power by the constant awareness of being in the single ecumenical heavenly-earthly Kingdom or Body of Christ.
Meaning of the word: Orthodox
Update 2025. This was originally posted in 2013, before I learned how to take shadows out of photos. These are 2 pages from Orthodox Word magazine, issue #18, Jan-Feb 1968. Fr. Seraphim included English translations of many of St. John's mini-sermons in his OW magazines. Back in 2013 I lived under the threat of Platina suing me for copyright violations, and they still to have the legal copyrights to Fr. Seraphim's magazines. BUT NOT THE MORAL RIGHTS. If you do not have a digital set, then email me. Fr. Seraphim (now Saint Seraphim) intended to have his magazines shared freely with everyone. joannahigginbotham@runbox.com
Christians You Must Know Christ!
Readings Selected by Fr. Seraphim Rose
[This famous letter raises the question of can the heterodox be saved. But the point of this sermon is that we are supposed to see the Orthodox Church as the only Ark of Salvation. If the reader listens, he will hear Vladyka Ignaty's loving correction and call to humility. As to the question about the heterodox, their lot is in God's hands. We are supposed to see the heterodox as potential Orthodox, adjust our hearts accordingly, and remember God wants all to come to the knowledge of Truth. -jh]
Christians You Must Know Christ!
By Bishop Ignaty Brianchaninov
from The Orthodox Word, issue no. 2 March 1965
One of the great Church fathers of the 19th century, Bishop Ignaty played the very important role of spokesman for uncompromising Orthodox Christianity to the Russian Intelligensia, who had departed so far from Christian truth as to be incapable of distinguishing it from error and heresy. The following letter* offers a refreshing antidote to some of the confusions of the apologists for a diluted Christianity -- in our own day as well as in his.
*[No. 28 of the "Letters to Laymen" in Vol. 4 of the complete Works of Bp. Ignaty, 2nd ed., St. Petersburg 1886; the title here was added by the translators.]
Here is a spectacle worthy of bitter lamentation: Christians who do not know in what Christianity consists! Yet one encounters this spectacle almost everywhere one looks today; rarely, in the great multitude of those who call themselves Christians, can one find anyone who is a Christian both in name and in deed.
I will answer the question you have raised point by point, in as few words as possible. "Why," you write, "cannot pagans, Moslems, and so-called heretics be saved? There are excellent people among them. To condemn these good people would be contrary to the Divine mercy! ...Indeed, it is even contrary to sound human reason. --Heretics, after all, are Christians just the same. To consider oneself saved and the members of other faiths damned, is both foolish and extremely proud!"
Christians! You reason about salvation, yet you do not know what salvation is, why men are in need of it, and finally, you do not know Christ, the only means of our salvation. Here is the true teaching on this subject, the teaching of the Holy Ecumenical Church.
Salvation consists in the recovery of communion with God. This communion was lost by the whole human race when our ancestors fell into sin. The whole human race belongs too category of doomed creatures. Damnation is the lot of all people, whether virtuous or evil-doers. We are conceived in iniquity and born in sin. “I will go down to my son mourning to hell” (Gen. 37:35), said the holy patriarch Jacob of himself and his holy son Joseph the chaste and fair. It is not only sinners who descended into hell at the end of their earthly pilgrimage, but the righteous men of the Old Testament as well. Such is the power of the good works of men; such is the worth of the virtues of our fallen nature!
In order to restore man’s communion with God, in other words, for salvation, redemption was necessary. The redemption of the human race was accomplished not be an angel, not by an archangel, not by some other of the higher but still limited and created beings, --it was accomplished by the infinite God Himself. Execution was the lot of the human race, commuted by His execution; the insufficiency of human merit was compensated by His endless worth. All feeble works of men, which lead to hell, are compensated by a single powerful good work: faith in our Lord Jesus Christ. The Jews asked the Lord: “What must we do, that we may work the works of God?” And the Lord answered them: “This is the work of God, that ye believe on Him Whom He hath sent” (St. John 6:29). One good work is necessary to us for salvation: faith; but faith is work!, By faith, and by faith alone, may we enter into communion with God, with the aid of the sacraments which He has granted us.
You are quite wrong, then, if you think and say that good people among pagans and Moslems are saved, that is enter into communion with God! You are quite wrong if you look upon the opposite view as some kind of novelty, as some kind of error that has crept in! No! Such has been the constant teaching of the true Church of the 0ld Testament as well as of the New. The Church has always acknowledged but one means to salvation: the Redeemer. She acknowledges that the greatest virtues of fallen nature lead to hell. If the righteous men of the true Church, the lamps from which the Holy Spirit has shown, prophets and wonder-workers who believed in the coming Redeemer but died before His coming, --if they descended to hell, how can you think that pagans and Moslems who have neither acknowledged nor believed in the Redeemer, but just because they seem good to you, have attained the salvation that is attainable by one means and one means alone, faith in the Redeemer?
Christians! You must know Christ! You must realize that you do not know Him, that you deny Him if you acknowledge salvation possible without Him for any kind of good works. He who acknowledges salvation to be possible without Christ denies Christ and, perhaps without knowing it, falls into the grave sin of blasphemy. "We reckon therefore that a man is justified by faith apart from the works of the law," says the holy Apostle Paul (Rom. 3:28). "The righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ unto all them that believe; for there is no distinction. For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God; being justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus" (Rom. 3:22-24). You reply: "The holy Apostle James without any question asks for good works; he teaches that faith without works is dead." But consider just what it is that the holy Apostle James asks for.
You will see that he, like all the Divinely-inspired writers of the Holy Scriptures, asks for works of faith, and not the good works of our fallen nature. He asks for living faith, confirmed by the works of the new man, and not the good works of fallen nature, which are repulsive to faith. He cites the conduct of the patriarch Abraham--a work in which the faith of that righteous man was revealed. This work consisted in offering as a sacrifice to God his only-begotten son. To slay one's son for sacrifice is not by any means a good work according to human nature; it is, rather, a good work insofar as it fulfills a Divine command--it is a work of faith. Look into the New Testament and into the Holy Scriptures in general, and you find that they ask for the fulfillment of God's commands, that this fulfillment is called works, that from this fulfillment of God's commands, faith in God becomes living, being active; without it, faith is dead, being deprived of any activity. And on the contrary you will find that the good works of fallen nature, whether from feelings, from blood, from impulse, or from a tender sentiment of heart--are forbidden and rejected ! and these are the same good works that please you in pagans and Moslems: for these, even if they involve the denial of Christ, you want to give them salvation!
Your conception of sound reason is a strange one. How, by what right, do you find and recognize this in yourself? If you are a Christian, you should have a Christian understanding of this subject, and not some other arbitrary opinion taken from nowhere. The Gospel teaches us that by the fall we acquired a falsifying reason; that the reason of our fallen nature, no matter what its innate worth, no matter how well sharpened by worldly learning, retains the worth transmitted to it by the fall and remains a falsifying reason. We must reject it and commit ourselves to the guidance of faith; under such guidance, in due time, through much effort in piety, God will give to His true slave a reason of truth, or spiritual reason. This reason we can and must acknowledge as a sound reason; it is an informed faith, as the Apostle Paul excellently described it in the 11th chapter of his epistle to the Hebrews. The foundation of spiritual reasoning is God. Being founded on this hard rock, it does not waver nor fall. What you call sound reason, we Christians take to be a reason so infirm, so darkened and so far gone astray, that there can be no healing for it except by cutting it off, with the sword of faith, and renouncing all the learning that has gone into its formation. If we take it for a sound reason, basing ourselves on a foundation that is uncertain, tottering, indefinite, constantly changing--then it, being sound, will renounce Christ, too. This is proved by experience.
And what, may I ask, does your sound reason say to you? --That the condemnation of good people who do not believe in Christ is repulsive to it! And not only that; such a condemnation of virtuous people is contrary to the mercy of such an all-good Being as God.
To be sure, you had a revelation from above on this subject, concerning what is contrary and what is not contrary to Divine mercy? --No, it was sound reason that pointed it out. Ah, your sound reason! Still, where in your sound reason dud you find out that it is possible to understand, with your own limited human mind, what is contrary and what is not contrary to the Divine mercy? Permit us to speak our mind.
The Gospel -- that is, the teaching of Christ, that is, the Holy Scriptures, that is, the Holy Ecumenical Church – has revealed to us all that man may know of the Divine mercy, which surpasses every kind of reasoning and all human apprehension, and is inaccessible to these. Vain is the trifling of the human mind when it seeks to define the indefinable God, when it seeks to explain the inexplicable, to submit to its own calculations.., whom?... God! Such an undertaking is a satanic one.
Oh, these people who call themselves Christians and do not know the teaching of Christ! If from this blessed, heavenly teaching you people have not learned the incomprehensibility of God, -- then go to school and listen to what the children are taught! The teachers of mathematics explain,in the theory of the infinite, that it is an indefinite quantity, is not subject to the laws to which definite quantities, numbers are subject, that when you calculate with it you may get a result completely at variance with that arrived at through calculating with numbers. And you wish to define the laws by which the Divine mercy acts; you say, this is in accord with it, that is against it! It is in accord or not in accord with your sound reason, with your understanding and feelings!
Does it follow from this that God is obliged to understand and feel as you understand and feel? Yet this is what you are demanding of God! What a foolish and prideful undertaking. Do not accuse the Church's judgement of a lack of common sense and humility--it is your own lack. She, the holy Church, merely follows unswervingly the Divine teaching on the acts of God, revealed by God Himself. Her true children follow her obediently, scorning the puffed-reason that rises up against God, We believe that we can know about God only what God deigns to reveal to us. If there had been a different path to the knowledge of God, a path which our mind could have cleared for itself with its own powers, revelation would not have been given us. It was given because it was necessary for us. Vain and deceitful, then, are the personal opinions and wanderings of the human mind.
You say, "heretics are Christians just the same." Where did you take that from? Perhaps someone or other, calling himself a Christian while knowing nothing of Christ, may in his extreme ignorance decide to acknowledge himself as the same kind of Christian as heretics, and fail to distinguish the holy Christian faith from those offspring of the cursed, blasphemous heresies. Quite otherwise, however do true Christians reason about this. A whole multitude of saints has received a martyr's crown, has preferred the most cruel and prolonged tortures, prison, exile, rather than agree to take part with heretics in their blasphemous teaching.
The Ecumenical Church has always recognized heresy as a mortal sin; she has always recognized that the man infected with the terrible malady of heresy is spiritually dead, a stranger to grace and salvation, in communion with the devil and the devil's damnation. Heresy is a sin of the mind; it is more a diabolic than a human sin. It is the devil's offspring, his invention; it is an impiety that is near to idol-worship.
Every heresy contains in itself blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, whether against the dogma of against the action of the Holy Spirit. The essence of every heresy is blasphemy. St. Flavian, Patriarch of Constantinople, who sealed with blood his confession of the true faith, pronounced the decision of a local council held in Constantipole on the heresiarch Eutyches in the following words:
Eutyches, until now priest and archimandrite, is entirely convinced, both by his past actions and by his present statements on the errors of Valentine and Apollinarius, whose blasphemy he obstinately follows, all the more so as he did not even listen to our advice and instructions directed to his reception of sound teaching. And therefore, weeping and sighing over his complete damnation, we proclaim before the face of our Lord Jesus Christ that he has fallen into blasphemy, that he is deprived of every priestly rank, of communion with us, and of the direction of his monastery, and we give it to be known to all that from henceforth whoever shall converse with him shall himself incur excommunication.
This decree is a sample of the common mind of the Ecumenical Church concerning heretics;this decree was acknowledged by the whole Church, being ratified by the Ecumenical Council of Chalcedon. The heresy of Eutyches consisted in his failure to confess in Christ in His Incarnation two natures, as the Church confesses, he admitted only one Divine nature.
You will say: is that all! One may see a mentality similar to your own in the reply of a certain person invested with worldly power to St. Alexander, Patriarch of Alexandria, concerning tha Arian heresy; it is a reply ludicrous in its way of true knowledge and woeful in its nature and consequences. This person advised the Patriarch to preserve peace and not to start any quarrels, which are so contrary to the Christian spirit, just because of a few words; he wrote that he found nothing reprehensible in the teaching of Arius, -- a certain difference in the turns of phrases, -- that is all!
These turns of phrases, as the historian Flerius notes, in which there is nothing reprehensible, reject the Divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ -- that is all! They overthrow, that is to say, the whole Christian faith -- that is all! It is remarkable that all the ancient heresies, behind various changing masks, strove toward a single aim: they rejected the Divinity of the Word and mutilated the dogma of the Incarnation. The more modern heresies above all strive to reject the action of the Holy Spirit: with terrible blasphemies they have rejected the Divine Liturgy, all the sacraments. everything, everything in which the Ecumenical Church has always acknowledged the action of the Holy Spirit. They call this human ordinances -- even bolder: superstition, error! To be sure in heresy you see neither robbery nor theft; perhaps it is only because of this that you do not consider it a sin? Here they reject the Son of God, there they reject and blaspheme the Holy Spirit -- that is all! A man who has received and upholds a blasphemous teaching and utters blasphemy, but does not thieve, does not steal, and even does the good works of fallen nature -- he is an excellent man! How can God refuse him salvation!... The whole reason for this final perplexity of yours, as well as for all the rest, is a profound ignorance of Christianity!
Do not think that such ignorance is a defect of small importance· It is not! Its consequences can be fatal, especially now when any number of books with a satanic teaching are circulating under a Christian title. In ignorance of true Christian teaching, just like that you can take a false, blasphemous idea for a true one, appropriate it to yourself, and together with it appropriate eternal damnation as well. The blasphemer will not be saved! And the perplexities you have expressed in your letter are already terrible omens regarding your salvation; their essence is rejection of Christ! Do not play with your salvation! Do not play with it, or you will weep forever.
Occupy yourself with the reading of the New Testament and the Holy Fathers of the Orthodox Church (but by no means Theresas, nor Francis and the other madmen* of the West whom their heretical Church passes off for saints!); study in the Holy Fathers of the Orthodox Church how to understand Scripture aright, study there what kind of living, what kind of thoughts and feelings are fitting for a Christian. From Scripture and living faith study Christ and Christianity. Before the terrible hour comes in which you will have to appear before God in judgement, acquire the justification given by God freely to
all men through Christianity.
*This term is by no means carelessly employed by Bishop Ignaty. In his essay on prelest or spiritual deception, he points out how the loss of spiritual discrimination in the Church of Rome has led in many cases to the confusion of psychic fantasies with genuine spiritual attainment. This essay will be presented in due time in The Orthodox Word (trans. note)
∞∞∞
[http://www.roca.org/OA/3/3b.htm]:
Bishop Ignatius Brainchaninov, April 30, 1867†
One of the great Church Fathers of the19th century, Bishop Ignaty played the very important role of spokesman for uncompromising Orthodox Christianity to the Russian intelligentsia, who had departed so far from Christian truth as to be incapable of distinguishing it from error.
Born in 1807, Bishop Ignatias attended military school but quite early felt drawn to the monastic life. Following a serious illness at the age of 20, he became a novice and established contact with a Spirit-filled elder, Leonid, of the great Optina Hermitage.
In 1831 he became a monk and was shortly thereafter ordained to the priesthood. At the unusually young age of 26 he was appointed superior of a monastery near St. Petersburg, where he labored until 1857, when he was consecrated bishop. After only four years he retired to complete seclusion at a monastery, spending the last six years of his life corresponding with his many spiritual children and preparing for death, which came in 1867.
∞∞∞
From The Lives Of The Holy Apostles, Holy Apostles Convent, Buena Vista CO, page 131. Excerpt from the Life of St. John the Theologian showing God's love for those who are unaware that their leaders are heretics:
[In the marketplace in a town named Phlogeon] many had gathered to hear John's teachings. The apostle knew that on that day the idolators were to celebrate a major feast in honor of the god Dionysus [Bacchus], so he went and stood near their temple, instructing and admonishing the people to turn to God, to repent, and have faith in our Lord Jesus Christ. He also said:
"O men, since God made man in His image and honored him with reason, ye must not appear more irrational than the dumb beasts, by the sordid life ye lead and the disgraceful conduct wherewith ye dishonor yourselves, rushing forth to sully human nature."
This, and many other things, did John utter. Then the priests of Dionysus came and said to him:
"Depart from here and do not stir up tumult! Thou art hindering our feast of the divine Dionysus."
John paid them no heed, but, on the contrary, further instructed the crowd to stay far away from satanic intercourse and worship at this lewd festival. In this temple, after they had celebrated the feast with food and drink, men and women made merry and, becoming inebriated, performed great iniquities in honor of the vile diety. The perverse priests, however, watched John and, allowing him to continue while the people stood about and listened, they mingled with the crowd and with both flattery and entreaty lured the crowd away from him. They bound John and took him to a far place, where they administered to him many blows. They left him bound and half-dead, and returned to their festival of shameful acts. According to their custom, they alone would first enter the temple to celebrate the demonic mysteries and to partake of the defiled food offered to the idols.
Meanwhile, John, left lying on the ground, prayed to God saying: "O God and Father of our hope, Jesus Christ: as it was Thy good pleasure to do through Samson, bringing down the pillars of the great temple of the Philistines, so now grant the destruction of this temple of prodigality!" And as John prayed, behold, the temple toppled down to its foundation, crushing therein only those twelve priests, while the layfolk suffered no harm. The people, horrified, freed the apostle from his bonds and besought him not to slay them.
Pre-Apocalyptic Epoch
excerpt from an essay by Steven Kovacevich
As far as I can tell, the author is in the Serbian Church. Platina's jurisdiction. Not in communion with us (not in communion with the Sister Churches). ~jh
http://www.holytrinitymission.org/books/english/apostolic_christianity_s_kovasevich.htm
1. What is meant by the expression the Church has come a full circle?
The full circle concept in the question refers to the complete cycle that the Orthodox Church has gone through over the course of two thousand years. True to Christ's words that His followers would be hated by the world (cf. Jn 15:18-20, Mk 13:13, Mt 5:11, Lk 6:22-23, Mt 24:9-13), virtually all major persecutions for the Christian faith have fallen upon ancient Orthodox Christianity.
Many in Israel chose not to follow Christ, and as a result, the torch of faithfulness to Christ largely passed to the Gentiles, former pagans, as the Prophet Isaiah had foretold some seven hundred years earlier (Is 2:2, 60:3,5). Christianity then began to spread with miraculous speed from Jerusalem, through the Levant and the Roman Empire and beyond, and it continued to make inroads among the pagans.
As the prince of this world, Satan, reigned in paganism, which was a kingdom of sin, he inevitably sensed a destructive force for him in Christianity. Having at his disposal the full political force of the pagan world, his immediate reaction was to promote a bloody and total annihilation of the Church. For three centuries, Christian blood was spilt throughout the lands of the entire Roman Empire, although the remarkable steadfastness and self-sacrifice of the Christian martyrs proved to be the best witness of their faith. The pagans were awestruck by this witness, and they themselves converted and began to fill the ranks of the martyrs of the persecuted faith. Thus, the blood of the Christian martyrs became the seeds or Christianity, and persecution could not halt its spread.
Although [some say] that the Roman Emperor Constantine's conversion to Christianity brought an end to the age of martyrs, this assertion is not in fact so ... Constantine’s conversion did end the initial age of the catacombs and produced the Christian Roman Empire (or Byzantine Empire, as Western historians named it), during which time the Orthodox Church produced the Liturgy, the Creed, the Bible, monasticism, and the whole Christian lifestyle with its elevated ideals and holiness that are totally alien to the corrupt world.
Even so, the age of martyrs continued. As Archpriest Alexey Young notes in this regard, Orthodox Christianity has lived for two thousand years on the edge of eternity. It has been faced time and again with virtual extermination by different conquerors, persecutors and heretical movements, nourished even in our times by the blood of countless martyrs. Orthodoxy has always passed through the ages persecuted, wounded and bloody, like its Divine Founder. The same writer continues, noting that true to Christ's promise, however, the gates of hell never prevailed against His Church (Mt 16:18). Despite all possible persecution by the mighty of this world, Orthodoxy has not been vanquished, but it has always survived victorious. To this day it still survives intact and gloriously pure, its gaze steadily focused on the end of the ages and the Second Coming of Christ.
Beginning in the seventh century, the rise of Islam came about with astonishing speed, taking Syria, Palestine, Egypt and northern Africa, and Spain. Later, starting in the fourteenth century, the Ottoman Turkish Sultanate began to conquer the Balkans, anterior Asia and northern Africa, beginning a domination that would continue until the early part of the twentieth century.
A Greek hierarch explains that in essence, Islam is a Christian heresy, having its historical roots in the very areas inhabited and sanctified by the ancient Desert Fathers. He mentions that it took from Christianity not only the dress of its clergy, but the model for the minaret (the towers on top of which the stylites lived and practiced their ascesis), the practice of making full prostrations during prayer, and other things as well. (Even the practice of removing their shoes in prayer when entering a mosque is of Christian origin. In early times, this practice was observed in Christianity, just as priests removed their shoes when entering the altar). It is also a well-known fact that Mohammed was educated by a Jewish relative Varakh, who taught him the Old Testament and instilled in him a hatred of Christianity — a hatred that was transmitted straight into the Koran.
It is the duty of Islam and of each individual Moslem to convert every person to the Islamic religion, and by whatever means necessary, including swordpoint. This policy is fundamental for Islam's teaching (and it was likewise adopted by Roman Catholicism after its apostasy and schism in 1054, in complete contradiction to the teaching of the Gospel). Moreover, in the event attempts at conversion fail, the ultimate aim of Islam is the extermination of every "infidel" from the face of the earth.
Under the Moslems, Christians were once again forced to enter the catacombs, as it were, to live in constant expectation of violence, horrendous torture and death (things the West is only beginning to understand in light of the recent growth of Islamic fundamentalism and the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the United States). For 400 years in Greece and 500 years in Serbia and other parts of the Balkans, entire villages of Christians — men, women and children — were impaled on thousands of stakes planted along the sides of roads. This situation of living in a sea of violence continues unabated even to this day among those Christians witnessing a recrudescence of warlike fanaticism on the part of the Moslems.
Likewise, the Roman Catholic Church, ever since its departure from the ancient Apostolic Church in 1054, has acted with all possible malice in its attempts to destroy Christ's Church. Writing of the Latin Church's numerous inquisitions and mass murders of the Orthodox (something that continues to these times), St. John of Kronstadt (+1908), a contemporary of the last Russian Tsar, stated:
The Roman Church is not only the mother of countless offenses perpetrated against God and His Holy Scriptures, and against Tradition, but of gruesome and bloody atrocities against Orthodox Christians on the part of Rome's pope, its bishops and its clergy.
Prior to the year 1054, the Roman Church was united to the Eastern Orthodox Church; both were a part of the ancient Apostolic Church of Christ. Orthodox Christianity is indigenous to all the West, as well as the East, having come to Italy, Gaul, Scandinavia, Ireland and the entire West long before the East-West schism of 1054. There was only one Christendom (something which has survived down to our own days in the form of the Orthodox Church, which is the only true continuation of the early undivided Church). For one thousand years, the Christian Church — both East and West — lived together in harmony and essential oneness, and its bishops governed the Church as equals. In addition, the bishop of Rome held a position as patriarch of the West, whose authority consisted of jurisdiction over all the bishops in his metropolitan see, just as the patriarchs of Jerusalem, Constantinople, and elsewhere, oversaw the bishops of their respective sees. (A see is the territory of a bishop's jurisdiction). All bishops in Christendom were regarded as equal, and none was seen as an episcopus episcoporum, a "bishop of bishops." This same understanding has been maintained to this day in Orthodoxy. Certain of its bishops — patriarchs, metropolitans, archbishops — enjoy special status among other bishops, but they are not above them.
Beginning in the ninth century, East and West began to drift apart when the bishop of Rome, or pope, began to introduce new and foreign ideas into the faith. (The words pope and patriarch were commonly used in the early Church to refer to the bishops of important historical sees. Pope was not a designation reserved only for Rome's bishop... ). One of the false ideas was that of the supremacy of the bishop of Rome over the bishops of Jerusalem, Constantinople, Alexandria and Antioch, and over all other bishops, of whom there were hundreds by that time. ... The idea of unlimited supremacy in one person over the whole world became an ecclesiastical idea in the West, and it came to be transferred from the emperor to the Roman pope. Even the title Pontifex Maximus that the Roman emperors bore was taken over by the popes. ... "The division between the Eastern and Western Churches was not the result of Orthodoxy's stubborn refusal to recognize papal authority, but of Roman Catholicism's unjustifiable claims." [Orthodoxy and Catholicism: What are the Differences? pp. 8-9].
...
The notion of papal primacy is ludicrous to Eastern Christians, for Christian primacy rests squarely on the Divinity of Christ. As Protopresbyter Michael Pomazansky explains:
The Orthodox Church of Christ refuses to recognize yet another head of the Church in the form of a Vicar of Christ on Earth, a title given in the Roman Catholic Church to the bishop of Rome. Such a title does not correspond either to the word of God or to the universal Church consciousness and tradition; it tears away the Church on earth from immediate unity with the heavenly Church. A vicar is assigned during the absence of the one replaced; but Christ is invisibly present in His Church always.
St. Cyprian of Carthage (+258), himself a bishop and one of the most authoritative of the early Church Fathers — and also regarded as a saint by the Roman Catholic Church — spoke about the authority of bishops in the following way:
Let each one give his opinion without judging anyone and without separating from the communion of those who are not of his opinion; for none of us sets himself up as a bishop of bishops, nor compels his brethren to obey him by means of tyrannical terror, every bishop having full liberty and complete power; as he cannot be judged by another, neither can he judge another. Let us all wait the judgment of our Lord Jesus Christ, Who alone has the power to appoint us to the government of His Church and to judge our conduct [Quoted in Abbé Guetée, The Papacy: Its Historic Origins and Primitive Relations with the Eastern Churches, 1866].
Knowing that Rome's novel teaching of a supreme ruler with primacy of jurisdiction would divide and corrupt the Church, the Eastern patriarchs pleaded with the Roman patriarch not to introduce this false teaching. ... In 1054, the Roman Church officially severed itself from the ancient sees of the Christian Church, ... the Great Schism of 1054...
...
After its separation from Orthodoxy, the Latin Church promoted countless murderous inquisitions in Eastern Europe. As a Greek monk notes, Rome conducted these genocides through the same Unia, the papacy's most effective siege engine, which operates as the janissaries of the papacy, with all the fanaticism of the janissaries, against Orthodoxy. Among the many inquisitions in the twentieth century, one took place in World War II Poland, where the Latins murdered 800,000 Orthodox. At the same time and at the direction of the same black hand, in Croatia, Catholic killer clergy (most notably the Franciscans) and killer police massacred 750,000 Orthodox for their refusal to renounce Orthodoxy and embrace Roman Catholicism, although not before submitting them to infinitely gruesome tortures, no doubt the worst recorded in the annals of history. One of the members of the evil coven of sadistic clergy assassins openly boasted that he alone had killed 40,000 of the Orthodox. As Alexei Khomiakov perceptibly noted, the ancestors of Roman Catholics who long ago committed moral fratricide by unilaterally changing the Church's Creed invariably would resort to physical fratricide. Such they did, and well did St. Nikolai Velimirovich (+1956) call the Latin Church a semi-military organization that has used all means to gain world domination.
– – – ∞ – – –
By far the most virulent and deadly form of anti-Christianity the world has so far witnessed is the end-times phenomenon of Communism, an outburst of primordial satanism that was created and financed in the West, and that was unleashed upon Russia by Western capitalism as an experiment for the one-world government of the antichrist. Because of that great cataclysm, far more Christians have lost their lives for their Orthodox faith in the tragic, pre-apocalyptic twentieth century than in the three hundred years following Christ's Crucifixion.
Communism is part of the "mystery of iniquity" (2 Thes 2:7, Apoc 17:5), that is, Satan's plan of battle with Christ's Church. Archpriest Boris Molchanoff explains that this process has been in motion for ages and that it will reach its culmination at the appearance of the antichrist (2 Thes 2:8).
Writing of a "force that withholdeth" the mystery of iniquity (2 Thes 2:6), the Apostle Paul states that this force will be "taken out of the way" (2 Thes 2:7). As the meaning of the withholding power in this passage is not obvious, Fr. Paul Volmensky provides the following explanation:
In seeing the everlasting battle of Satan for supremacy over the entire world, God gave a restraining power which does not let the devil deploy his various means. Limiting the power of the devil so that he could not destroy us, God does not deprive us of the freedom to choose to serve Him. Digression from God denotes an increase of iniquity. When almost all of mankind of its own will shall be immersed in evil, not seeking communion with God and eternal life, then the restraining power of God will withdraw, antichrist will appear, and the end shall come to all....
The appearance of the antichrist shall not take place until divine providence determines the time at which moment the "withholder" will be taken away. According to the Holy Fathers, what withholdeth is the Holy Spirit and Roman authority ["In Memory of Tsar-Martyr Nicholas II," Orthodox Life, vol. 43, no. 4, 1993, pp. 2-4; emphasis added].
Concerning these two parts of the withholding force — the role of the Holy Spirit and that of Roman authority, comment is needed on both. The same Fr. Paul explains the Holy Spirit's role by noting:
Some Fathers explain that antichrist shall not come while the Holy Spirit abides in people, while people possess an intimate, grace-filled union with the Lord through the fulfillment of God's commandments. When evil shall be multiplied among people and no longer shall there be men seeking eternal life, then the Holy Spirit will withdraw from the world. If there is no one on earth being saved, then there is no further need for its existence. People darkened by sin, in whom the Holy Spirit is absent, will accelerate the end of the world. They themselves shall rise up against lawful government authority and deprive themselves of that restraining power which would have hindered the appearance and activities of the antichrist [Ibid., p. 4].
Archimandrite Panteleimon (+1984), a co-founder of the Holy Trinity Monastery in Jordanville, New York, provides a well developed and detailed analysis of the other factor that withholds — that is, the Roman authority. He writes:
What are the means for restraining the antichrist so that the elect may be brought to salvation? Our Fathers considered the withholding power of the antichrist to be the Roman Empire. In their time the Roman Empire still existed and it was possible to support this interpretation based on the prophecy of the Prophet Daniel. In our times, the only significance we can give to such an idea is within the context of understanding the Roman Empire to mean imperial (monarchical) power in general. Concerning such power, we should understand it to be a monarchy which has the ability to control social movement, and at the same time adhere to Christian principles. It does not allow the people to stray from these principles; it contains the people. Since the antichrist will have as his main task the goal of attracting the people away from Christ, he therefore will not arrive if monarchy is still in control. This power will not allow him to appear; it impedes his negating spiritual activity. This is the withholding power. When the monarchy fails, and everywhere nations institute self-government (republics, democracies), then the antichrist will be able to act freely. It will not be difficult for Satan to prepare voters to renounce Christ, as experience taught us during the French Revolution. There will be no one to veto the movement. A humble declaration of faith will not be heard. Thus, when such a social order is instituted everywhere, making it easy for anti-Christian movements to appear, then the antichrist will come forth. St. John Chrysostom's words lead us to this thought when in his time monarchy was understood to mean the Roman Empire. "When it is said that the Roman government has ceased to be, then the antichrist will appear. Until that time the government [monarchy] will be feared. No one will easily follow the antichrist. After this time, when such control will be liquidated, anarchy will triumph, and the antichrist will try to capture all human and divine power." [A Ray of Light: Instructions in Piety and the State of the World at the End of Time, p. 38; emphasis added].
Analyzing further the term what withholdeth, Fr. Paul adds that:
The Russian Fathers of the Church ascribed particular significance to the Russian Orthodox sovereign, the only protector of Orthodoxy in the whole world. For example, this is what the holy righteous John of Kronstadt taught about royal authority: "By means of sovereigns the Lord watches over the good of earthly kingdoms, especially the good of the peace of His Church. Through them He does not allow godless teaching, heresies and schisms to overwhelm her. And the greatest villain of the world, the antichrist, cannot appear in our midst, because of autocratic authority (that is, the benevolent Orthodox sovereignty), deterring the lawless reeling and absurd teaching of the ungodly. The Apostle says that antichrist shall not appear on earth as long as autocratic authority shall exist" [Op. cit., p. 4].
In these pre-apocalyptic times, the significance of the removal of the withholding power cannot be overemphasized. It is therefore important to examine this matter even further, and Fr. Michael Azkoul does so with careful and elaborate detail. In his booklet Sacred Monarchy and the Modern Secular State, Fr. Michael explains that Communism put an end to the four great empires that were to rule upon earth, as foretold by the Prophet Daniel. According to this prophecy, these four empires were the Egyptian, the Persian, the Greek and the Roman, after which would come the end times.
The same writer goes on to note that the Roman Empire was both pagan (inaugurated by Augustus Caesar) and Christian (inaugurated by Constantine the Great). The Christian Roman Empire had two phases as well: the Byzantine Greek and the Russian. As Schema-Archimandrite Damian of the Ascension Monastery in Resaca, Georgia adds, from Constantine to the fall of Constantinople in 1453, the mantle of "Protector of the Church" fell upon the shoulders of the Roman authority, then resident in Constantinople, the Second Rome. With the fall of Constantinople, this mantle fell to the lineage of the Russian Tsars to protect and preserve the well-being of the Church. Thus, Tsar Nicholas II and his predecessors, having received autocratic authority from Byzantium, were successors to Constantine and those Greek (or Byzantine) emperors who followed him. Such was God's providential means of establishing the Orthodox Christian Church in the world.
Continuing, Fr. Michael explains that the Russian Empire, the last phase of the Roman Imperium, successor to Byzantium or Christian Rome, was the last Christian society, and Tsar Nicholas II was the last Christian emperor, as true kingship depends upon the true faith. Thus, none of the heretical societies of the post-Orthodox West can be spoken of as a societas Christiana. Fr. Michael also states that there has never been a monarch in the post-schism West "by the grace of God." (One can observe a striking example of this principle in the so-called Holy Roman Empire. Historians note that this empire was not holy but was very secular. As an Orthodox historian notes in this regard, the Holy Roman Empire was conceived in heresy, born in schism, and maintained in existence in order to bolster the power of the heretical popes against the Orthodox Church). Unlike the monarchies and kingdoms of apostate Western Europe, the Russian monarchy maintained the true faith as given by the Holy Apostles and kept in the Eastern Orthodox Church.
The Russian Tsar played a decisive role in restraining the approach of the satanic powers. Western Europe was well aware of the might of its Orthodox Christian neighbor in maintaining peace, and the title the Peacemaker was ascribed to Tsar Alexander III not by the Russians, but by the West. Likewise, after the destruction of Russia by Communism, one authoritative Western historian, Professor G. Ferrero of the Roman National University, wrote that:
Europe urgently needs peace. Innumerable misfortunes are threatening us from all sides. Why? Because Imperial Russia is no more. And without her, there is no more peace, which she alone brought to the world. After the victory over Napoleon, Russia completely gave herself over to the cult of peace. Russia's amazing aspiration to maintain and protect peace at any cost and simultaneously with absolute selflessness, must be acknowledged as a deep mystery. Balance in the world shall not ensure and we shall not avoid crises until Russia will arise in all of her glory [Quoted in Fr. Paul Volmensky, op. cit., pp. 4-5].
As the devil recognized that the Russian monarchy interfered with his attempts to possess the whole world, it was necessary to destroy that authority. Archbishop Averky (+1976) of Jordanville explains that the murder of the Royal House of Russia was not a political act, but rather purely spiritual, one closely bound up with the battle against God and faith. He states:
This murder was thought out and organized by none other than the servants of the approaching antichrist. Those people, who having sold their souls to Satan, are executing the most intense preparation for the hasty reign of the enemy of Christ, antichrist, over the whole world. They understood perfectly well that the main obstacle standing in their way was Orthodox Imperial Russia.... And for the quickest and surest annihilation of Russia, it was necessary to annihilate the one who was its living symbol, the Orthodox Tsar.
It is for the foregoing reasons that the Russian Fathers of the Church view the Russian monarchy as the withholding power. Moreover, as Fr. Michael explains, the murder of the last Tsar brought about the extinction of the Age of Constantine and the end to God's plans concerning world empires. With the disappearance of Christian Rome, that which restrained world revolution, world atheism, anarchy and apostasy is no more, and Satan works unbridled and performs his dark schemes on a world scale. No longer is there any earthly authority to hinder him. 1918, the year Russia's royal family was killed, is a watershed year in human history, for it ushered in the pre-apocalyptic epoch through which we are currently living.
...
... Hieromonk Sava Yanjíc expends further on this end-times heresy, stating that the worldwide ecumenical apostasy is spreading on all levels. Everything possible is being done, he states, in order to establish an anti-church, a "reborn Christianity." Dogmas are being revised, Church history is being rewritten, and there is an intense secularization and modernization of spiritual life. Fr. Sava goes on to liken today's ecumenism to a Pandora's box from which hundreds of ancient heresies are breaking loose. Archbishop Averky adds:
Ecumenism is the heresy of heresies. Until now, every separate heresy in the history of the Church has striven itself to stand in the place of the true Church, while the ecumenical movement, having united all heresies, invites them all together to honor themselves as the one true Church. Here ancient Arianism, Monophysitism, Monothelitism, Iconoclasm, Pelagianism, and simply every possible superstition of the contemporary sects under completely different names, have united to charge and attack the Church. This phenomenon is undoubtedly of an apocalyptic character.
As the panheresy of ecumenism gains more and more momentum and increased support from world governments, and as it comes to regard itself as an ecumenical "super-church," its infinite hatred of Christ and Orthodox Christianity is becoming increasingly apparent. Once the ecumenical movement's man-made religion (or, more precisely, its devil-made religion) is installed as the official state religion under the antichrist, most established Church institutions will be drawn into this worldwide "church." Orthodox Christianity will then become a religio illicita, even as it was in the days of the pagan Roman Empire. As the same Fr. Sava notes concerning the times that are approaching, Orthodox Christians will once again be persecuted, just as in Roman and Soviet times. He further notes that:
The adherents of the false "Christianity" and other united religions will accuse [the Orthodox] of being intolerant and hateful people, opponents of the new world order and, by extension, of the welfare and happiness of mankind. Many will be imprisoned in special camps for "reeducation, " where they will be severely tortured in an effort to force them to deny the Living God and His Church, and to bow down before the rulers of this world. And thus the Church, like a pure and undefiled virgin, washed in the blood of martyrs... just as in the early years of Christianity, will wait to greet her Bridegroom ["Ecumenism in an Age of Apostasy," Orthodox America, vol. 18, nos. 7-8, 2000, p. 16]. http://www.roca.org/OA/163-164/163h.htm
As Archpriest Boris Molchanoff also notes concerning the final times:
When the day shall come when antichrist, the false messiah, shall enter into Jerusalem, the fate of humanity contemporary to him shall also be decided, irrevocably and forever. Blessed are those who, at that final day given by God for the decisive self-determination of the people, will be able to see the servant of Satan and perceive the inescapable destruction with him of all humanity that acknowledges him [Antichrist, p. 4].
To reiterate and summarize, the full circle concept refers to the historical development that began with Christ's Church being poor and persecuted, after which it became the religion of the Christian Roman Empire, only to end up once again in its final state in a catacomb existence. It bears repeating that the idea is not entirely accurate inasmuch as there have been constant and dreadful persecutions against the Church throughout the centuries. However, given the apocalyptic nature of Communism and its satanic hatred of Orthodox Christianity, the full circle idea is still significant. Whereas Communism impinged only upon the periphery of the Roman Catholic and Protestant worlds, eighty-five percent of Orthodox Christians came to be enslaved in Communist totalitarian police states that sought the complete destruction of Christ's Church and all Orthodox Christians. Indeed, it was for that very reason Communism was invented and forced upon the Eastern Orthodox Christian world by the totally secularized and apostate West. The West's support of the Soviet revolution is now a well-known fact.
This essay was written in 2003. Up to this point it is very instructive. But the next paragraph harbors a grave error. First is the original paragraph. Second is the same paragraph with my comments interjected.
In the present calm before the storm of the one-world government, even though the atheistic Soviet regime of the past no longer exists, recycled Communist leaders continue to meddle in Church affairs by appointing sycophantic hierarchs (often secret police in cassocks) who traffic in the evil ecumenical movement and who see to the persecution of those Christians who do not go along with their apostasy. It is the intent of these bishops to bring the various local Orthodox Churches over which they preside into the embrace of the one-world "church" of the antichrist. Thus, ecumenism is upheld and is emanating from many of "those who appear to be the protectors and leaders of the Church." With this development, that portion of the Church that has not capitulated to the ecumenist heresy has largely returned to the catacombs, thus presaging the end-times events that are foretold in the Apocalypse, that is, the Revelation of the Holy Apostle and Evangelist John the Theologian, whose book concludes the New Testament. As the textbook for this course states, "Christians today stand far closer to the early Church than their grandparents did." It also notes that "Christianity began as a religion of a small minority existing in a predominantly non-Christian society, and such it is becoming once more." In this sense, the Church has indeed come a full circle.
In the present calm before the storm of the one-world government, even though the atheistic Soviet regime of the past no longer exists, Actually the Soviet regime had only retreated and it was pretended that it did not exist. recycled Communist leaders continue to meddle in Church affairs by appointing sycophantic hierarchs (often secret police KGB agents in cassocks) who traffic in the evil ecumenical movement and towards that aim their assignment was to bring about the Rocor/MP union of 2007 and who see to the persecution of those Christians who do not go along with their apostasy. partly by labeling anti-unionites as fanatic schismatics. It is the intent of these bishops to bring the various local Orthodox Churches over which they preside into the embrace of the one-world "church" of the antichrist. This is the eventual goal. Thus, ecumenism is upheld and is emanating from many of "those who appear to be the protectors and leaders of the Church." With this development, that portion of the Church that has not capitulated to the ecumenist heresy has largely returned to the catacombs, thus presaging the end-times events that are foretold in the Apocalypse, that is, the Revelation of the Holy Apostle and Evangelist John the Theologian, whose book concludes the New Testament. There were still catacomb Churches in Russia at that time, who identified with the Rocor, [we thought], and maybe that's what he is referring to here. I'm not sure. As the textbook we can't trust any textbook from Jordanville seminary anymore, since Met. Laurus of sorry memory has rewritten them all for this course states, "Christians today stand far closer to the early Church than their grandparents did." This is debatable: our grandparents were tortured in prison camps and executed. It also notes that "Christianity began as a religion of a small minority existing in a predominantly non-Christian society, and such it is becoming once more." In this sense, the Church has indeed come a full circle. Truly many of us, who did not succumb to the Rocor/MP union of 2007, do find ourselves gathering in homes for Church services as did the early Christians.
This final paragraph is sound:
In spite of all the persecution of Christianity (including that which is to come), true to Christ's promise, the gates of hell will never prevail against the Church (Mt 16:18), for "the foundation of God standeth sure" (2 Tim 2:19). As the New-Martyr Tikhon (+1925), Patriarch of All Russia, wrote in this regard, Christ's Church is "a kingdom not of this world, a kingdom that has no worldly means at its disposal, no earthly enticements; a kingdom that is despised, persecuted, powerless." He added that the Church "has not only not perished in this world, but has grown and conquered the world." And he concluded, "In spite of all manner of coercion, attacks and opposition, the Orthodox Church has preserved the faith of Christ as a priceless treasure, in its original purity and entirety, unharmed, so that our faith is the faith of the Apostles, the faith of the Fathers, the Orthodox faith."
related post:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)