| And from the Church those reapers shall gather out the tares which He suffered to grow with the wheat till the harvest, as He explains in the words The harvest is the end of the world; and the reapers are the angels. As therefore the tares are gathered together and burned with fire, so shall it be in the end of the world. The Son of man shall send His angels, and they shall gather out of His kingdom all offenses. Matthew 13:39–41 Can He mean out of that kingdom in which are no offenses? Then it must be out of His present kingdom, the Church, that they are gathered. So He says, He that breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven: but he that does and teaches thus shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. Matthew 5:19 He speaks of both as being in the kingdom of heaven, both the man who does not perform the commandments which He teaches – for to break means not to keep, not to perform – and the man who does and teaches as He did; but the one He calls least, the other great. And He immediately adds, For I say unto you, that unless your righteousness exceed that of the scribes and Pharisees,– that is, the righteousness of those who break what they teach; for of the scribes and Pharisees He elsewhere says, For they say and do not; Matthew 23:3 – unless therefore, your righteousness exceed theirs that is, so that you do not break but rather do what you teach, you shall not enter the kingdom of heaven. Matthew 5:20 We must understand in one sense the kingdom of heaven in which exist together both he who breaks what he teaches and he who does it, the one being least, the other great, and in another sense the kingdom of heaven into which only he who does what he teaches shall enter. Consequently, where both classes exist, it is the Church as it now is, but where only the one shall exist, it is the Church as it is destined to be when no wicked person shall be in her. Therefore the Church even now is the kingdom of Christ, and the kingdom of heaven. |
| ZENIT: When did research begin on St. Philip’s tomb in Hierapolis? D’Andria: In 1957, thanks to professor Paolo Verzone, who taught engineering at Turin’s Polytechnic and was very passionate about archaeological research. An agreement was stipulated between the Italian and Turkish Republics, which enabled our team of archaeologists to carry out searches in Hierapolis. Professor Verzone was the first director of that mission. He began immediately, of course, to look for the Apostle Philip’s tomb. He concentrated the excavations on a monument that was already visible in part and known as the church of St. Philip, and he discovered an extraordinary octagonal church, a genuine masterpiece of Byzantine architecture of the fifth century, with wonderful arches in travertine stone. All this complex of constructions made with so much care and detail made one think that it was a great church of pilgrimage, a very important shrine, and Professor Verzone identified it as the Martyrion, namely the martyrial church of St. Philip. And therefore he thought that it was built on the saint’s tomb. Hence he had several excavations carried out in the area of the main altar, but he never found anything that made one think of a tomb. I myself thought the tomb was in the area of the church, but in 2000, when I became director of the Italian archaeological mission of Hierapolis, by concession of the Ministry of Culture of Turkey, I changed my opinion. ZENIT: Why? D’Andria: All the excavations carried out over so many years had no result. I also carried out research through geo-physical explorations, that is, special explorations of the subsoil, and not obtaining anything, I was convinced we had to look elsewhere, still in the same area but in another direction. ZENIT: And towards what did you direct your research? D’Andria: My collaborators and I studied a series of satellite photos of the area carefully, and the observations of a group of brave topographers of the CNR-IBAM, directed by Giuseppe Scardozzi, and we understood that the Martyrion, the octagonal church was the center of a large and well-developed devotional complex. We identified a great processional street that took the pilgrims of the city to the octagonal church, the Martyrion at the top of the hill, the remains of a bridge that enabled pilgrims to go across a valley through which a torrent flowed; we say that at the foot of the hill there were stairs in travertine stone, with wide ascending steps that led to the summit. |
| In related news, the government of Croatia has said that voters will be facing a December 1st referendum to decide whether to change the legal definition of marriage. The ballot will ask the question, “Do you agree that marriage is matrimony between a man and a woman?” If the vote supports natural marriage, the constitution will be amended to specifically define marriage as being between a man and a woman and prohibit same-sex “marriage.” Croatia’s liberal President Ivo Josipovic has said he will vote No on the question, adding, “Do we need this kind of a referendum?” “I think that determining marriage between a man and a woman does not belong in the constitution. A nation is judged by its attitude toward minorities,” Josipovic said. A pro-family group had collected over 730,000 signatures to bring the referendum question to the public, but had been blocked by Josipovic’s left-leaning government. Although that number represented about 20 percent of the country’s total electorate – in a nation of about 4.3 million persons – the government had attempted to stall, claiming that not enough signatures had been gathered. The Referendum Act requires that petitioners secure the signatures only of 10 percent of the electorate. Nevertheless, Vesna Pusi Minister of Foreign Affairs attempted to block the vote by claiming that instead of the 3,760,000 citizens eligible to vote in the last European Union elections, there were 4,560,000. In a press release, the citizen imitative that had petitioned for the referendum called this “a number which almost certainly includes the deceased, ghosts, and double votes.” Pusi also attempted to claim that, despite the wording of the law, that a referendum result would not be binding on the government. The group, a grassroots coalition called, “In the Name of the Family,” says its task is to promote “universal human values, as well as religious associations, communities and movements – all those who hold the view that marriage is a union between a man and a woman only.” |
| Tweet Нравится Saints Piran and Constantine of Cornwall Dmitry Lapa St. Piran " s Church in Perranarworthal, Cornwall (source - Geograph.org.uk) Cornwall is an English county and an ancient Celtic region in the extreme southwest of England. It is washed by the Celtic Sea (part of the Atlantic Ocean between the southern coast of Ireland and western Brittany) to the north and west, by the English Channel to the south. Cornwall borders the county of Devon in the east over the River Tamar. It is unknown exactly when Orthodoxy was first brought to Cornwall. According to unreliable medieval legends, St. Joseph of Arimathea may have visited Cornwall together with the Infant Christ. There is no evidence at all to confirm this, but Joseph was a trader and Cornwall has been famous for its tin since time immemorial, so it is not completely impossible. However, in the fourth century Orthodoxy of the “Roman-British” variety was legalized throughout Britain, as elsewhere in the Roman Empire. In the fifth century the first monks arrived in Cornwall and the whole region gradually became Christian. There were many missionaries from Ireland and Wales, as well. St. Piran " s cross at Perranzabuloe, Cornwall Although a small region, Cornwall over its Orthodox period produced roughly between fifty and sixty individual saints who can be identified, but their number may be greater, given the existence of many obscure saints. Cornwall remained in the Celtic tradition of Orthodoxy and independent from the rest of England more or less until the tenth century. After the Norman Conquest it became Roman Catholic, as all other parts of Britain. The Bible was not translated into the Cornish language until quite recently, and that is why the language has died out, although attempts have been made to revive it. In the nineteenth century, Cornwall was under the strong influence of Methodism, but a liturgical revival began approximately 100 years ago. Today nearly every town and village of Cornwall has its own patron saint, and there are over 100 holy wells in Cornwall (on average, each English county has three or four local saint, and the number of wells is considerably lower also). Lives of many Cornish early saints were well researched by the Anglican hagiographer Gilbert Hunter Doble (1880-1945) and by our contemporary Prof. Nicholas Orme from University of Exeter. Let us now talk about two saints of Cornwall, one of whom was Irish but moved to evangelize Cornwall, and the other one who was Cornish but left his native land to preach in faraway Scotland. They are Sts. Piran (feast: March 5/18) and Constantine (feast: March 9/22). |
| In 1977, at the 5th All-American Council of the Orthodox Church in America in Montreal, Bishop Dmitri received a majority of popular votes in the election for a new Metropolitan. For the sake of continuity – at that time, a life-long Orthodox Christian occupying the Office of Primate See was seen as more in keeping with the challenges of a young territorial Church – the Holy Synod chose instead His Grace, Bishop Theodosius [Lazor] of Pittsburgh and Western Pennsylania, who became an advocate and supporter of missionary work in the southern United States. In 1978, the Synod of Bishops took the important step of creating the Diocese of Dallas and the South. Bishop Dmitri became its first ruling hierarch, taking Saint Seraphim Church as his Episcopal See. Christ the Saviour Church, Miami, FL, a prominent community in the South, became the second cathedral of the newly formed Diocese. Archpriest George Gladky, a veteran missionary and rector of Christ the Saviour, was named Chancellor. He and Bishop Dmitri worked admirably with others to establish churches and teach the faith in a region of America in which Orthodox Christianity was relatively unknown. The first Diocesan Assembly of the South was held in Miami August 25-26, 1978. In 1993, the Holy Synod elevated Bishop Dmitri to the rank of Archbishop. He also chaired various departments of the Orthodox Church in America. Early on, he was instrumental in speaking with representatives of the Evangelical Orthodox Church [EOC] who were seeking entrance into canonical Orthodoxy. His understanding of Christ as central to the Faith helped guide these discussions. As an example, an episode occurred in which members of the EOC wanted to focus on particulars of worship during initial dialogues. It is said that the Archbishop offered words of caution: “Let’s first discuss our approach to Jesus Christ, since everything that we have in Orthodoxy proceeds from that core set of teachings.” On September 4, 2008, following the retirement of His Beatitude, Metropolitan Herman, the Holy Synod named Archbishop Dmitri Locum Tenens of the Orthodox Church in America. His Eminence, Archbishop Seraphim [Storheim] assisted him as Administrator. In November 2008, Archbishop Dmitri’s role as Locum Tenens ended with the election of His Grace, Bishop Jonah [Paffhausen] of Fort Worth as Metropolitan. |
| Rightly or wrongly, most ancient readers would have drawn moral connotations from the number of her marriages. Even though grounds were not mandatory for divorce, usually husbands divorced their wives because they found fault with them (e.g., Sir 7:26; 25:26 ); thus even Gentile texts in the Diaspora could praise a woman who had never given her husband grounds to divorce her as a «one-man woman.» 5453 Even if we implausibly assume that she was widowed five times without the narrative specifying that circumstance, many of her peers would have assumed (rightly or wrongly) foul play: when several husbands of a wife died in succession, it was assumed that something was wrong with the wife (perhaps the attachment of a demon, as in Tob 3:8). 5454 Roman satirists complained about authoritarian wives who changed husbands frequently, «wearing out her bridal veil»; 5455 one satirizes for serial polygamy a wife who will marry eight husbands in five years. 5456 Even if the complaint involved the less controversial notion of a husband changing wives, it could often be used to create moral suspicion if malice generated it. 5457 This woman may have lost some husbands through death, but her coming to the well alone (4:7), her possible designs on Jesus (4:17), and her current nonmarital sexual union (4:18) together would probably suggest to most ancient readers that she had somehow morally warranted at least part of her situation. There is little doubt that most ancient Mediterranean men would have assumed a large number of divorces to reflect badly on the woman herself, and to judge the situation in moral terms. One cannot guess her age from the text, but after five husbands she is undoubtedly older than the average bride; given the preference for young virgins, 5458 she probably appears a less valuable commodity. 5459 The public perception of her failure in the socially expected wifely role and perhaps by now even in her ability to bear children and attract men makes abundant psychological sense in the story world of her openness to a man s affirmation and probable misinterpretation of it. |
| Nineteen bishops from Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, Brazil, Mexico, Australia and Europe will meet in Balamand Monastery to elect the new patriarch. Each will nominate three bishops to succeed Hazim. In a second round of voting, the patriarch will be elected from among the three bishops who receive the highest number of votes from the first round. The contest is mainly between two groups of candidates: Esper and Mount Lebanon’s George Khodr on one side and Damaskinos Mansour of Brazil and Boulos Yazigi of Aleppo on the other. However, a compromise could be reached through a fifth name, according to one official. Bishop Phillip Saliba of North America, who will not take part in the election for health reasons, and Mexico’s Chedraoui could be elected as a compromise measure. Meanwhile in Beirut, a group of Greek Orthodox Lebanese issued an open letter to the next patriarch, calling on him to tackle the serious dangers facing the community in the country. The Orthodox Gathering called on the church’s next patriarch to develop a framework that would allow the sect’s religious and lay figures to share decision-making. “There are clear imbalances in the relation between religious and lay persons … Fixing these imbalances requires active participation from both sides to make us one body under one church,” the Orthodox Gathering said in a statement. The statement added that the sect was experiencing a dangerous phase that could affect the future of many Lebanese of the Greek Orthodox faith. “Patriarch Hazim succeeded in bringing peace into the church after all the disputes and disagreements … He united everyone in one person,” Chedraoui said. The bishop added that the church would continue its productive mission despite Hazim’s passing. “He will certainly be missed, we are all affected, but the church is not dependent on one person; all bishops are from one family,” he added. “History has shown that a patriarch’s death does not mean the end of the church’s continuity.” Asked about the fate of Syrian Christians after the collapse of the embattled Syrian regime, Chedraoui said that Christian presence is in decline in the entire region and not in any particular country. |
| The communiqué of the extraordinary Council of Hierarchs informed of the decision taken following the discussion of this report. However, it remains unclear who exactly took this decision and in what form. A whole number of authoritative hierarchs drew the Council’s attention to the critical state of the world Orthodoxy, to the need for extreme caution and thorough examination of the problem – without any haste and external pressure. Several metropolitans, including those not present at the Council, asked the Council in writing to postpone a decision. Decisions of the Council of Hierarchs in the Greek Church are taken by a vote of all participants. However, either on the issue of recognition of the Ukrainian uncanonical communities, or on the issue of approval of the decisions of the Permanent Holy Synod of the Greek Orthodox Church on Ukraine, the voting of the episcopate did not take place. For instance, Metropolitan Seraphim of Kythira made the following statement: “As it is known, decisions in our Church are taken by a vote: either by raising a hand, or by an open or secret vote, or by questioning all the participants in the assembly. Perhaps, enough votes would be cast in favour of autocephaly, but there would also be many of those taking the opposite point of view, as well as those who by their silence would join the latter.” No official document signed by the Greek archpastors which can be regarded as an expression of the common conciliar decision of the Local Church is publicly available. Moreover, spread rather quickly was the news alleging that the Greek Orthodox Church had recognized the Ukrainian autocephaly, which does not conform either to the text of the communiqué or to the position of many participants in the Council. Serious concerns arise that the conciliar method of decision-making, sanctified by the words of the holy apostles – “good to the Holy Spirit and to us” (Act 15:28) – and by the thousand-year history of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church, in this case has been violated. |
| Secondly, the law significantly narrowed the area of the permitted presence of the UOC in society. Thirdly, it created prerequisites for the abolishment of the UOC communities or for putting an administrative pressure on them. Communities received a re-registration deadline of 26 th April 2019. The very possibility of such successful re-registration depended on governmental bodies interested in dismantling the UOC. If the communities had not re-registered on time, their bank accounts would have been closed with all the ensuing consequences. Procedural violations committed during the adoption of this law prompted the Kiev District Administrative Court to temporarily suspend it. However, Chairman of the Supreme Rada Andrey Parubiy does not recognize the court’s decision and calls it “absurd.” The second discriminatory law changed the registration procedure for religious organizations. It prescribes that the decision to “change the subordination” of a community has to be made with votes of two thirds of community members, but the law does not contain any clear legal criteria for belonging to a community, which makes it possible to legalize the seizure of churches according to the following scheme: 1) Under the guise of voting by a religious community, a fictitious vote of a territorial community takes place. Such voting is often held in the absence of the majority of local residents, with the participation of persons of other faiths and strangers, or by collecting signatures, the authenticity of which is not verified. 2) The results of the “vote” are fictitiously recorded as a decision of a religious community. At the same time, the decisions of the true parish assembly of a valid religious community to establish a fixed membership and to voice their unwillingness to join schismatics are ignored; the changes that such community makes to its charter would not be registered. 3) By the decree of a regional administration, a new community of the so-called “Orthodox church of Ukraine” is created. It receives its registration with all the details of a legal entity. The religious community of the canonical Church is thereby abolished. |
| Concerning the same, pre-revolutionary period one must mention the held by Archbishop Anthony revision of the Kiev Spiritual Academy, which stopped the decomposition of our spiritual educational institutions, that started under the influence of the revolution of 1905. Archbishop Anthony was the brightest representative of the people, faithful to the elements of Orthodox Russia. It is not strange that the new government hurried to get rid of such people in any administration. One of the first decrees of the new authority was the dismissal of the number of Archpriests, starting with three Metropolitans. Simultaneously Archbishop Anthony was deprived of his leading post at the chair. He did not start the struggle for preserving it, but without complaints went to the Monastery of Valaam, which attracted him with its monastic life. But if the dismissal of other bishops happened unimpeded, like other revolutionary changes, then the plans to dismiss Archbishop Anthony did not come true. Having accepted the new law about elections of eparchial bishops by people, the Kharkov eparchy elected Archbishop Anthony as their new Archpriest by the majority of votes. The revolutionary authorities could do nothing to stop his return to the ruling position in the eparchy. Meanwhile, he came to the Russian council, not as the eparchial archpriest, but as a representative of scientific monasticism. His return to Kharkov was triumphant and there were so many people that the government had to tolerate the fact that archbishop Anthony naturally became the most authoritative member of the Council, so to say, its leader, first of all guiding it in the restoration of the Patriarchate. As it is known, Metropolitan Anthony got many voices at the election of the Patriarch, but less that 2/3, and so he could not be considered to be elected without casting the lot, and after that the Moscow Metropolitan Tikhon received the lot of the Patriarch. Soon after that the Council members went for vacations. |
|
|
