| 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 |
| 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 |
| Amazing how a private Christian university is what classical liberal education used to look like, and the state secular university is what classical religious education used to look like. But this is where we’re at on a grand scale today. You cannot find a program where teaching is not a political act. As Helen Pluckrose put it, “Teaching is now supposed to be a political act, and only one type of politics is acceptable—identity politics, as defined by Social Justice and Theory.” To prove this wrong simply enter, say, a program in gender studies, literature, education, mental health, you name it, and attempt to debate your professor, present alternative research or come out with your own reasoned conclusions on the subject. You can’t. Well, you can but you will likely not leave with a passing grade, or an intact reputation (or, if you drive to school, an intact windshield). And its not a matter of proving anything. Scholars today openly identify themselves as activists. Pluckrose notes a relevant example: “One particular infamous 2016 paper in Generos: Multidisciplinary Journal of Gender Studies even favorably likened women’s studies to HIV and Ebola, advocating that it spread its version of feminism like an immune-suppressing virus, using students-turned-activists as carriers.” Sandra Gray, activist and scholar, argued that similar to how early universities expected their students to take their training in Lutheranism out to the countryside and educate the illiterate peasant masses, today’s university-trained students should also act as emissaries of the new cause : “While not suggesting that our students should be out in society professing Lutheran ideals, I would like to think we provide the tools of critique, debate and research to students to enable active citizenship and even inspire some to take up activist roles… there is a need for academics as part of their normal working lives to form alliances and connections, and even at times to become members of political and advocacy organizations. Rigorous research carried out ‘for a cause’ must again be accepted as legitimate knowledge generation.” |
| We must also remember that man’s life is in God’s Hands. Only He determines the moment of death and the destiny of every soul on separation from the flesh. For this reason, attempts to produce experiments in this field are in conflict with the Will of God and bring the experimenter into contact with the fallen spirits of that world. As a result, the data will be inaccurate and the conclusions will be false. In regards to this, Hieromonk Seraphim Rose writes the following: “Many present day researchers acknowledge or at least sympathize with occult teachings in the realm of the out of body condition, only because it is based on an experiment, which is also at the root of science. But, experimenting in the material world differs in essence from experiments in the realm of out of body experiences. In the material world, the objects of study and the laws of nature are morally neutral and can consequently be objectively studied and corroborated by others. On the other hand, the current objectives of study are hidden from man, not easily captured and frequently display their own will with the purpose of deceiving the pg. 127-128]. This happens because the spiritual sphere closest to us is filled with demons, consciously evil beings, who are specialists in the realm of deception. They gladly partake in any experiments and give the experiments their own spin. Because of this, we must take seriously Hieromonk Seraphim’s warning. And so, in our time a string of researchers, having started with authentic medical cases of clinic death, have moved on to personal examinations of out of body experiences. Without the guidance of Christian teachings and the many centuries of knowledge and experience of the Orthodox Church, they started studying the condition of the “astral” body and fell into the labyrinths of occultism. Unfortunately, this happened to Dr. Moody, the female psychotherapist E. Kubler-Ross, and several others. As an example, Dr. Moody, who published three valuable books full of authentic data, began to experiment in the areas of Theosophy and transcendental meditation. He recently published a book on this theme, titled “Coming Back,” in which he lays out the typical Hindu gibberish regarding reincarnation. (Please refer to the conclusion for an unraveling of this teaching). The Stories of those |
| “Six or seven out of ten young people will leave the church in college and never return.” This quote, or others like it, has been used by anxious youth workers and campus ministers for at least the past decade. For parents who want their kids to stay connected to the Church, this sounds terrifying, and it is. But there is a caveat. In a 2011 report, the Barna Group– who conducted the original research to which people are usually referring– clarified a few things. Perhaps most surprisingly was this observation: College experiences are generally not the main reason young people disengage from church life or lose their faith. David Kinnaman, the director of research for the Barna study, says that it is not the experiences of anti-Christian academic courses, Saturday night parties, or even the casual hook-up culture alone that draw students away from the Church. Rather, the bigger issue is their lack of preparedness to face such obstacles and turn to Christ and His Church when college life gets difficult. ’The problem arises from the inadequacy of preparing young Christians for life beyond youth group.’ Kinnaman pointed to research findings showing that ‘only a small minority of young Christians has been taught to think about matters of faith, calling, and culture. Fewer than one out of five have any idea how the Bible ought to inform their scholastic and professional interests. And most lack adult mentors or meaningful friendships with older Christians who can guide them through the inevitable questions that arise during the course of their studies. In other words, the university setting does not usually cause the disconnect; it exposes the shallow-faith problem of many young disciples.’ The Barna Group further points out that many young people feel “emotionally disconnected from church before their 16th birthday.” This changes the conversation about preparing our young people for college entirely. Instead of putting our primary emphasis on teaching high schoolers how to stay out of trouble or how to intellectually assent to a set of Orthodox tenets, our emphasis has to be on forming whole persons who have internalized God’s love and His commandments and who know where to turn when they face the world’s challenges. |
| 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. |
| We must also remember that man’s life is in God " s Hands. Only He determines the moment of death and the destiny of every soul on separation from the flesh. For this reason, attempts to produce experiments in this field are in conflict with the Will of God and bring the experimenter into contact with the fallen spirits of that world. As a result, the data will be inaccurate and the conclusions will be false. In regards to this, Hieromonk Seraphim Rose writes the following: «Many present day researchers acknowledge or at least sympathize with occult teachings in the realm of the out of body condition, only because it is based on an experiment, which is also at the root of science. But, experimenting in the material world differs in essence from experiments in the realm of out of body experiences. In the material world, the objects of study and the laws of nature are morally neutral and can consequently be objectively studied and corroborated by others. On the other hand, the current objectives of study are hidden from man, not easily captured and frequently display their own will with the purpose of deceiving the observer. " pg. 127–128]. This happens because the spiritual sphere closest to us is filled with demons, consciously evil beings, who are specialists in the realm of deception. They gladly partake in any experiments and give the experiments their own spin. Because of this, we must take seriously Hieromonk Seraphim " s warning. And so, in our time a string of researchers, having started with authentic medical cases of clinic death, have moved on to personal examinations of out of body experiences. Without the guidance of Christian teachings and the many centuries of knowledge and experience of the Orthodox Church, they started studying the condition of the «astral» body and fell into the labyrinths of occultism. Unfortunately, this happened to Dr. Moody, the female psychotherapist E. Kubler-Ross, and several others. As an example, Dr. Moody, who published three valuable books full of authentic data, began to experiment in the areas of Theosophy and transcendental meditation. He recently published a book on this theme, titled «Coming Back,» in which he lays out the typical Hindu gibberish regarding reincarnation. (Please refer to the conclusion for an unraveling of this teaching). The Stories of those who committed Suicide |
| Then as for the words, And now you know what withholds, i.e., you know what hindrance or cause of delay there is, that he might be revealed in his own time; they show that he was unwilling to make an explicit statement, because he said that they knew. And thus we who have not their knowledge wish and are not able even with pains to understand what the apostle referred to, especially as his meaning is made still more obscure by what he adds. For what does he mean by For the mystery of iniquity does already work: only he who now holds, let him hold until he be taken out of the way: and then shall the wicked be revealed? I frankly confess I do not know what he means. I will nevertheless mention such conjectures as I have heard or read. Some think that the Apostle Paul referred to the Roman empire, and that he was unwilling to use language more explicit, lest he should incur the calumnious charge of wishing ill to the empire which it was hoped would be eternal; so that in saying, For the mystery of iniquity does already work, he alluded to Nero, whose deeds already seemed to be as the deeds of Antichrist. And hence some suppose that he shall rise again and be Antichrist. Others, again, suppose that he is not even dead, but that he was concealed that he might be supposed to have been killed, and that he now lives in concealment in the vigor of that same age which he had reached when he was believed to have perished, and will live until he is revealed in his own time and restored to his kingdom. But I wonder that men can be so audacious in their conjectures. However, it is not absurd to believe that these words of the apostle, Only he who now holds, let him hold until he be taken out of the way, refer to the Roman empire, as if it were said, Only he who now reigns, let him reign until he be taken out of the way. And then shall the wicked be revealed: no one doubts that this means Antichrist. But others think that the words, You know what withholds, and The mystery of iniquity works, refer only to the wicked and the hypocrites who are in the Church, until they reach a number so great as to furnish Antichrist with a great people, and that this is the mystery of iniquity, because it seems hidden; also that the apostle is exhorting the faithful tenaciously to hold the faith they hold when he says, Only he who now holds, let him hold until he be taken out of the way, that is, until the mystery of iniquity which now is hidden departs from the Church. |
| This call to prayer is also counseled by St. Mark the Ascetic who so veraciously described forgetfulness as noted above: With the help of God…descend into the depths of the heart, and search out these three powerful giants of the devil–forgetfulness, laziness and ignorance…. Take up the weapons of righteousness what are directly opposed them: mindfulness of God, for this is the cause of all blessings…and drives out of itself the darkness of ignorance. Modeling In previous articles I have pointed out how important it is for parents and child caretakers to “practice what they preach.” This advice is based on the copious research on child development indicating the crucial role of modeling in influencing child behavior (Bandura, 1986; Morelli, 2005a,b, 2006). In another article I point out the efficacy of the various models children are exposed to which significantly influence their behavior: If a parent capitulates to the culture, then the culture will assume the teaching authority of the parent. Several decades ago research psychologists demonstrated that there was no real difference between real life and mediated models (cartoons, movies, books) in terms of their effect on a child’s perceptions about sexuality and other important moral issue. (Morelli, 2007) This same behavioral research demonstrates that modeling has an important effect in shaping values. Values can be produced or altered vicariously by the child observing favorable or unfavorable experiences of significant valued others (models). (Barnwell, 1966) The importance of values in influencing behavior cannot be over-stressed. Bandura concludes: “The degree of change in evaluative reactions predicts the amount of behavior change.” This means the role of parents, child caretakers and other authority figures is of crucial importance in determining the values of children. Two factors have to be considered: their roles as models in terms of the behavior they themselves are displaying, and the role of other models to which they allow their children to be exposed. |
|
|
