| This means that doctors in Belgium are taking decisions about ending the lives of their patients into their own hands when they themselves decide that an agony has gone on long enough and also, to use the quote reported by Cohen-Almagor, when they want to “facilitate” the death of the “terminally ill, demented and inhumanly deteriorated patient.” In other words, this designates patients who are considered no longer fit to live. According to the report, doctors in Belgium are acting on the grounds of “compassion” in “futile medical situations.” But Cohen-Almagor does point out how difficult it is to define when a situation is “futile,” and to estimate how long a patient actually has to live, whereas Belgian doctors who admit having resorted to the deliberate shortening of lives through this form of “involuntary” (and illegal) euthanasia are prepared to state that on average, they have shortened their patient’s life by one week or more in 6.4 percent of cases. The report observes that “deliberately ending the lives of patients without their request is taking place in Belgium more than in all other countries that document such practices, including the Netherlands,” a fact that Cohen-Almagor judges to be “worrying.” While the practice appears to be receding, respect for life at its most fragile is certainly receding at the same time as acceptance of euthanasia has become mainstream. The Belgian Society of Intensive Care Medicine issued a statement in 2014 placing the “responsibility” of end-of-life decisions on the intensive care physician. While the doctor is expected to seek a “consensus” with the patient’s near and dear ones “the final decision is made by the care team” who should discern whether the patient has “no prospect of a ‘meaningful recovery,’” whatever that may mean. There is no question of what the patient’s desire may be. And so euthanasia, which was legalized in order to respect patient autonomy, has made physicians comfortable with the idea of hastening death and patient autonomy might very well be on its way out. |
| What’s in the Stars? A Close Look at Astrology Millions of people apparently not only consult their horoscope daily, but base their day " s activities on what the stars supposedly tell them to do. They eagerly test all the events of a day and deceive themselves into believing that things turned out just the way the horoscope said. Many claim it is only an innocent pastime, and others see nothing in it contradictory to religion. Archbishop Dmitri of Dallas and the South 29 January 2009 Source: Orthodox Research Institute (…For at it they who worshipped the stars, were taught by a star to adore Thee, the Sun of righteousness, and to know Thee the Orient from on high…”) (The Christmas Troparion) The average person today likes to think of himself as a product of the scientific age. He often flatters himself with the thought that he is superior to his ancestors, not standing in awe of the natural world, having no fear of the unknown, and being free from superstition. He is reluctant to believe anything that cannot be proven logically or scientifically and rejects what he often refers to as “myth” in religion: man’s creation from nothing, his fall, the promise and the coming of the Savior, salvation and life in the world to come. Twentieth-century man has been described as man “come of age”, too sophisticated and knowledgeable to accept these things as literally true, and he takes this description of himself very seriously. He doubts that the Supreme Being, whoever He may be, could have any interest inn or plan for man and the rest of creation. For the advocates of twentieth-centuryism, man is entirely on his own and has to work out his own destiny and the meaning of his existence. In rather glaring contradiction to all this theorizing and self-satisfaction of modern man and his exaggerated ideas about himself, stands one unquestionable fact: …man is as superstitious (today) as at any time in recent centuries. There are more “psychics” and “mediums”, more “seers of the future,” more “fortune tellers,” now than at any time in recent centuries. Hundreds of cheap publications, usually available not only in newspaper and magazine stores, but even in the super-markets, carry the “predictions” of self-styled “clairvoyants,” tales of the supernatural, accounts of communication with the dead and experiences with demonology. |
| Nevertheless, the effects of the brutality meted out to the Orthodox Church in Russia for over a period of seventy years cannot be eradicated overnight. St. Catherine's OCA Church shares with her sister Russian parishes not only the joys of spiritual regeneration but also the myriad tribulations that sudden freedom can bring. The communist bureaucracy has left a legacy of inertia, inefficiency and corruption that will take generations to overcome. This has entailed frustrating delays in the return of all of the church property. The shadow of the past still hangs over St. Catherine's in the form of the rectory, which is now occupied by the Federal Security Service (the former KGB). However, these considerations pale into insignificance when confronted by the mammoth cost of financing the church restoration project. The needs of the church far outweigh the sacrificial contributions that Russian parishioners make and have always made out of love for the Church. Economic reform in Russia in recent years has meant that prices for materials have soared to world levels or above, while the average monthly salary for Russians remains at the equivalent of St. Catherine's Church, while representing the interests of a Church from the most affluent country in the world, finds itself in the paradoxical situation of being one of the poorest parishes in Moscow. The needs of the church are formidable: a new iconostasis has to be constructed and new icons painted, the parish house needs major remodelling, new window frames are urgently required to replace the rotting old ones; the list can go on. Yet it is the ardent belief of those who are labouring for the growth of St. Catherine's OCA Church and her unique mission that with the grace of God these needs can be met so that she can truly be an embodiment of Universal Orthodoxy. The Byzantine double-headed eagles which adorn the surrounds of St. Catherine's gazing in the direction of both East and West are an eloquent symbol of the spiritual bridge that is being formed between Orthodox of the old and new worlds. It is our hope that this bridge will last well into the next millennium. |
| “The absolute chronology of the Babylonian first group of kings is easy to establish because, as has been mentioned, Ptolemy quotes the report of an eclipse in the time of king Mardokempados. Even more important, this absolute chronology has been independently confirmed by cuneiform texts from Babylon which contain astronomical observations. These number more than 1000 pieces of daytoday astronomical observations of positions and phases of the Moon, Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter and Saturn, beginning around 650 B.C. and continuing, in increasingly dense numbers, into the first century before the beginning of our era. Thanks to these astronomical diaries, numerous overlaps with the royal list in Theon’s Handy Tables have been established, always in agreement. In other cases, the lengths of the reigns of individual kings in Theon’s royal list can be confirmed by the careful study of the dates given in contemporaneous economic and administrative texts found in Babylonia; this is possible because for parts of the period covered by the royal list, we have so many of these texts that they average out to one every few days. In this way namely, by using Theon’s royal list, Babylonian astronomical diaries, and Babylonian dated tablets–one is able to establish with confidence the absolute chronology back to the middle of the eighth century B.C., i.e. the reign of king Nabonassar of Babylon.” (A. J. Sachs, “Absolute dating from Mesopotamian records,” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, Ser. A, Vol. 26,1971, p. 20; emphasis added) As Professor Sachs points out in this statement, the Royal Canon has been gradually replaced in recent times as the foundation of ancient chronology by the many native sources from Babylonia, in particular by the great number of astronomical cuneiform documents, which provide “numerous overlaps” with the Royal Canon, “always in agreement,” thereby replacing it at these many points. The earlier role of the Royal Canon as the foundation of ancient chronology has dwindled to a fraction of the period it covers. At some points, it is still needed as a trusted complement because of its proven reliability. Depuydt, a renowned Egyptologist and specialist on ancient chronology who has been examining the history and reliability of the Royal Canon for a long time, aptly describes the shifting foundation of the chronology of antiquity: |
| For long periods of its history we have precious little information about what life was really like for the average monk on the Holy Mountain. Since for the most part there was nothing particularly remarkable about it, there was no reason to write it down. We only know about the stars who shine out by reason of their exceptional qualities, their enduring writings, or their adventurous exploits. ‘When exploring Athonite spirituality,’ writes Metropolitan Kallistos, ‘we are like children gathering sea shells on the margin of an uncharted ocean.’ 338 Certainly for the seventeenth century and the early part of the eighteenth there was a mood of gloom and despondency throughout much of the Greek world and Athos was no exception to this trend. Economic decline set in as a result of punitive taxes imposed by the Ottoman authorities, followed by intellectual decline which manifested itself particularly in neglect of the libraries and their contents. There is also some evidence of spiritual decline, though standards of asceticism were upheld and vows were strictly observed, despite the universal adoption of the idiorrhythmic system. We gain some idea of conditions for monks on Athos at the time from the accounts of pilgrims. The Russian traveller Vasily Barsky (1702–47), for example, visited the Mountain as a pilgrim in 1725 and again in 1744, leaving copious accounts of both journeys. When he arrived at the Russian monastery of St Panteleimon in 1725, he found just four monks, two Russians and two Bulgarians; on his second visit, in 1744, he noted that the monastery was now in Greek hands, that it was idiorrhythmic, and that its buildings were in a serious state of disrepair. 339 He observed Russian monks ‘wandering hither and thither about the hills, living by manual labour, eating scraps and being despised by all’, though he suggested that they only had themselves to blame for this sorry state of affairs: ‘for in Russia, where all labour is carried out by dedicated Christians, the monks live in great ease and comfort’. 340 Spiritual life on the Holy Mountain had clearly reached a pretty low ebb, especially for the Slavs. |
| Because the agent had to be trustworthy to carry out his mission, various teachers ruled on the character the pious should require of such agents; 2708 an agent who fails to carry out his commission is penalized. 2709 This also implies, of course, that a shaliach " s authority was entirely limited to the extent of his commission and the fidelity with which he carried it out. 2710 Granted, high-ranking ambassadors could act in the spirit of their senders, but even in such cases governing bodies could refuse or modify their agents» terms. 2711 (In this Gospel Jesus appears as the Father " s perfect agent, in continual communion with him, rendering such modification unnecessary; cf. 5:19–20; 8:28–29.) In the broader Mediterranean world as well, messengers of all sorts were required to have exceptional memories so as to communicate accurately all they were sent to say, 2712 and any suspicion that they exaggerated a report could be held against them. 2713 The LXX regularly employs ποστλλω and not πμπω with divine sending. 2714 For instance, God sent Joseph (unknown to Joseph; Gen 45:5,7,8 ) and Abigail (unknown to her; 1Sam 25:32 ); the term often applies to one sending another on a mission. 2715 But God particularly sent Moses (Exod 3:10,13–15; 4:28; 7:16; Deut 34:11 ; cf. Exod 4:13; 5:22) and the prophets, whether individually ( 2Sam 12:1; 2 Chr 25:15; cf. 2Sam 12:25 ) or collectively (2 Kgs 17:13; 2 Chr 24:19; Bar 1:21 ). Especially noteworthy here are 2 Chr 36(God sent by his γγλους, the noun cognate of ποστλλω apparently being unavailable), and the language of Jeremiah ( Jer 7:25; 24:4; 26:5; 28:9; 35:15; 44:4 ), where unsent prophets are evil ( Jer 14:14–15; 23:21, 32; 27:15 LXX]). Some later Jewish teachers thus viewed as agents Moses, 2716 Aaron, 2717 the OT prophets 2718 or, most generally, anyone who carried out God " s wil1. 2719 Jewish teachers who saw the prophets as God " s commissioned messengers were consistent with the portrait of prophets in their Scriptures. Israel " s prophetic messenger formulas echo ancient Near Eastern royal messenger formulas such as, «Thus says the great king,» often addressing Israel " s vassal kings for the suzerain king Yahweh. 2720 Old Testament perspectives on prophets inform the early Christian view of apostleship, 2721 although they do not exhaust its meaning; 2722 early Christianity clearly maintained the continuance of the prophetic office, while seeming to apply to apostles the special sort of position accorded only to certain prophets in the OT (such as prophet-judges like Deborah and Samuel, and other leaders of prophetic schools like Elijah and Elisha). 2723 |
| Notably, the bride and groom do not say a single word throughout the entire Orthodox rite of matrimony. That which is the very core of Western marriage—a contract or a set of promises or vows—is completely absent from an Orthodox ceremony. See 1 Cor. 3:9: “synergoi”—“working together”; 2 Cor. 6:1: “synergountes de”—“ as we work together with him.” 1 Cor. 15:33 All three of these Greek words—erotas, filia, agapi—can be translated into English as “love.” Eph. 5:25 p. 11 Luke 18:8 If we choose a different measure for human progress—human language, for example—then one may argue for clear signs of devolution, not evolution. According to one source, “between a fifth and a quarter of the U. S. population is functionally illiterate,” and the working vocabulary of average 14-year-olds in the U.S. shrunk in half in the last fifty years—Spretnak, Charlene. The Resurgence of the Real. New York: Routledge, 1999, p. 114. Saint Ephrem of Syria, Commentary on Ephesians 5:23 Saint Gregory of Nyssa, On Virginity 6 Ibid., 12 Ibid., 14 Saint John Chrysostom, On Virginity 84 Homily 7 on the Hebrews The council of Nicaea, 325 A.D. The Council of Gangra, 340 A.D. Qtd. in Bugge, John. Virginitas: An Essay in the History of a Medieval Ideal. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1975, p. 19 Zion, William, Basil, Eros and Transformation. Sexuality and Marriage: An Orthodox Perspective. Lanham: University Press of America, 1992, p. 73. Ibid. 75 It appears that for some Fathers no sex was ever fully legitimate. John 15:13: “No one has greater love than this, to lay down one’s life for one’s friends.” Gal. 5:22-3 God Believes in Love, 73 On Virginity 19:1 For a more detailed study of the Church’s attitudes toward sex, see Sveshnikov, Sergei “There is no Sex in Church!” American Theological Inquiry. Vol. 4, No. 1, January 15, 2011, pp. 61-87 Of course, this is the Orthodox Church we are talking about—there are always exceptions to everything! Source: Fr Sergei Sveshnikov’s blog Code for blog Since you are here… |
| In February, a coalition of seven faith leaders in New York came together to put out a documentary making the case against fracking. While stemming from different religions, the religious leaders highlighted their common concerns, molding the political and environmental issue into one that also encompasses religion. “Emotions are running high, there’s a lot of money at stake, it seems to be all about politics and quiet voices of spirituality and religious thought are being drowned out,” Doug Wood, the film’s producer and association director of Grassroots Environmental Education, told EcoWatch. “We thought it was really important to give our faith leaders an opportunity to be heard on the issue before any final decision is made by the governor.” An issue uniting faiths Methodist Rev. Craig Schwalenberg has taken on an approach that focuses on the moral obligation to look out for future generations. “We can’t say for sure what will happen with hydrofracking, but there’s enough incidences out there for us to be terribly concerned. And it’s one of those situations where if we’re wrong about it being bad, we don’t lose as much, but if we’re right about it being bad, we lose our water, we lose the earth,” he says in the documentary. arin Friedemann, writing for The Muslim Observer, makes the same case, claiming that the fracking boom needs oversight to protect future generations from the long-term consequences of the industry. “If steps are not taken to regulate this growing industry more effectively, the results of fracking could end up being far more costly in the long run than any short term economic benefits,” she writes. The incidents Schwalenberg speaks of are numerous. As of June 11, Colorado had seen more than 160 fracking oil spills in 2013 alone, stemming from 50,000 oil and gas wells throughout the state, according to the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission’s oil and gas database published in the Coloradoan. In Pennsylvania, oil spills have also led to evacuations and concerns among residents. This year, Carrizo Oil and Gas dumped more than 22,000 gallons of fracking fluid onto farmland and residential areas. |
| Another strand in the theological tradition Maximus is heir to is less explicit than that represented by the Cappadocian Fathers, but much more fundamental, and that is the Alexandrian Christological tradition of Athanasius and Cyril. He is heir to this principally because this was the dominant tradition in Byzantine theology from the sixth century onwards. It is important to realize how much he took for granted the Cyrilline Chalcedonianism he inherited: his opposition to Monothelitism is worked out within this tradition, not as a criticism of that tradition. He is wholly committed to the Alexandrian understanding of the Incarnation as the Son of God’s assuming a human nature and living a human life, with its corollary in the validity of theopaschite language. This comes out in two of the ‘later’ Difficulties (though several years earlier than Maximus’ involvement in the Monothelite controversy). These are Amb. 2 and 4 (neither of them translated here), which also bring out the difficulty Maximus had with Gregory’s Christological language. Amb. 2 is concerned with a passage from Gregory’s Third Theological Oration in which he counters the Arian argument that one who is God cannot be said to hunger, sleep or fear, all of which are attributed to Christ, by saying: ‘And, in a word, what is exalted is to be ascribed to the Godhead, to that nature which is superior to sufferings and the body, what is lowly is to be ascribed to the composite that for your sake emptied himself and took flesh and–it is no worse to say–became a man.’ The reason why this poses a difficulty for Maximus is the way in which it seems to keep suffering away from the Godhead and thus possibly compromise the unity of Christ’s person (though Gregory’s language here is in fact very careful). Maximus’ response is a paraphrase of Gregory that emphasizes the unity of subject in Christ and, in particular, expressly justifies theopaschite language by using, and repeating, an expression from Gregory’s Fourth Theological Oration–‘God passible’. The same concern is found in Amb. 4 where he says, ‘therefore he was also truly a suffering God, and the very same was truly a wonder-working man, because also there was a true hypostasis of true natures according to an ineffable union’ (1045A). Maximus’ defence of two wills in the Incarnate Christ is not intended to suggest that there are two subjects in Christ, but to safeguard the full humanity in which the Second Person of the Godhead lives out a human life. A TRADITION OF COSMIC THEOLOGY: DENYS THE AREOPAGITE |
| Ibid., pp. 1,8. John O’Mahony, “A People Skating on Thin Ice”, Guardian, February 3,2001, p. 1. Ibid. Robert Cortell, islands of Contention”, Financial Times, August 27,2001, p. 10. “The Population Vacuum: Though Humanity Is Imploding, Demographers Refuse to Urge Women to Have MoreBabies”,p. 43. Sarah Karush, “Government Seeking Ways to Overcome Roots of Low Birth Rate”, Associated Press, May 6, 2001. Ibid. Patrick J. Buchanan, “America Loses an Opportunity, and Russia as Ally”, Augusta Chronicle, February 19, 1998, p. 4. Thomas Babington Macaulay; Lays of Ancient Rome, Horatius, xxvii. American Humanist Association, Humanist Manifesto II, 1973. Nat Hentoff, “Expandingthe Culture ofDeath”, San Diego Union-Tribune, January 1,2001, p. 6. Rita Marker, “Dutch Parliament Votes to Legalize Euthanasia”, International Anti-Euthanasia Task Force Update, Fall 2000, p. 2. Ibid., p. 3. Ibid. “Netherlands Parliament Legalizes Euthanasia”, www.euthanasia.com, November 2000. Marker, p. 3. Licia Corbella, “Euthanasia Law an Open Door to ‘Evil’ ”, London Free Press, April 24, 2001, p. A8. Philip Pullella, “Pope Christmas Speech Laments ‘Culture of Death’ ”, Reuters, December 25, 2000. Ibid. Hentoff.p.G. Marker, p. 7. Marker, p. 8. John Jacobs, “Richard Lamm’s Hard Choices”, Sacramento Bee, July 11, 1996, p. 6. Paula Span, “Philosophy of Death; Bioethicist Peter Singer’s Views on Euthanasia Foment Debate”, Washington Post, December 9, 1999, p. Cl. Jacqueline R. Kasun, “Population Control Today – and Tomorrow?” The World and I, No. 6, Vol. 16, June 1, 2001,p.50. Wesley J. Smith, “Peter Singer Gets a Chair”, FrontPa.geMag.com, October 22, 1998, p. 4. P. J. King, “Lessons from History: Euthanasia in Nazi Germany”, Pregnantpause.org, September 9, 2000. Ibid. Ibid. Walker Percy, The Thanatos Syndrome (New York: Farrar, Straus Giroux, 1987), p. 360. Terence Kealey, “Don’t Blame Eugenics, Blame Politics”. Spectator, March 17, 2001, p. 10. Dorothy Thompson, “Review of Mein Kampf”, from Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf (New York: Reynal & Hitchcock, 1939), Introduction. |
|
|
