| John Anthony McGuckin Humanity M. C. STEENBERG “Humanity” derives from the Latin humanitas, referring to the whole of the human race. In theological terms, it may refer both to the collective species of the human creature, or to the nature of man. Hence, in Orthodox theological writings, “humanity” describes both the created essence of man (thus being largely synonymous with “human nature”), or the race of those creatures who bear this nature. THEOLOGICAL FUNDAMENTALS Christianity is, at its heart, a story of humanity. It takes its beginning from the apostolic encounter with the Son of God met and known in his humanity, and through that encounter reveals the economy of the salvation of humanity as a whole. The starting point for an Orthodox understanding of humanity, then, is not in a narrative or scientific definition of abstract origins of species, but in the concrete humanity encountered in the incarnate Jesus Christ. It is his person that reveals to us the authentic contours of human nature, as well as its potential for restoration and perfection in union with God. Too often, attempts to articulate a Christian definition of humanity begin with wholly protological discussions (that is, those that deal with origins, with creation). However, the christological revelation of human nature demands that the initial point of reference is not the first man (Adam), but the perfected man: the New Adam, Jesus. So it is that the fundamental affirmations the church makes about humanity come from the example of the incarnate Lord. These affirmations begin with the experience of Christ’s humanity as created and material: that he was born in the flesh and so existed in his earthly sojourn. Human nature, as beheld in this human Christ, is affirmed as a material nature, made by God of the stuff of the cosmos – that very act and reality thereby affirming the sanctity of the material in the most transcendent order possible. Humanity cannot be understood as a spiritual nature residing in a secondary material shell, or as existing in some state of corporeal purgatory: to be human is fundamentally to be material, and the existence of Christ in his material human nature enshrines the Orthodox confession that this physicality is not a defect in human nature, but a holy dimension of humankind’s created state. |
| On Salvation and Christian Perfection Many people talk about salvation, many wish to be saved; but if you ask them what constitutes salvation, then they will find it very difficult to reply. There would be no harm done if replying was the only difficulty! No: the harmful consequence, that this gives rise to, is of great significance. Not knowing what constitutes salvation imparts indefiniteness and incorrectness to our actions in the practice of virtue. For it seems that we do many good works; but essentially we do very few works for salvation. Why is this? The answer is very simple: because we don’t know what constitutes our salvation. To know what our salvation is, we firstly need to know what our perdition is, because only the dead need salvation. The one who seeks salvation thereby plainly admits that he is dead: otherwise why would he need to seek salvation? Our perdition was brought about through the destruction of our communion with God and through our entering into communion with fallen, shunned spirits. Our salvation is rupturing communion with satan and restoring communion with God. The whole human race is in perdition, in the fall. We have been deprived of communion with God in our very root and source: in our forefathers, by means of their wanton transgression. They were created spotless, not liable to sin and corruption: from the very creation they were made partakers of the Holy Spirit; having received natural existence through their humanity, they also received supernatural existence from their union with God’s Nature. Having wantonly rejected their submission to God and having wantonly entered into submission to the devil, they lost their communion with God, their freedom and worth, they betrayed themselves into submission and enslavement to the fallen spirit. They wantonly rejected life and invoked death in themselves, they wantonly violated the wholeness given to them when good was created; they poisoned themselves with sin. As the beginning of the human race, they passed on and continue to pass on their infection, their perdition and their death to all humanity. Adam, who was created in the all-Holy Image and Likeness of God and who was supposed to bring about such descendants, defiled the Image and destroyed the Likeness and brought about descendants in accordance with the defiled image and the destroyed likeness. The Holy Scripture, which testified that man was created in the Image of God, indeed deprives the children of Adam of this testimony. The Scripture recounts that they were born in the image of Adam, that is to say, as Adam became through the fall. Due to the loss of the likeness, the image became defiled. The Scripture makes this sorrowful confession of every person who enters into fallen existence: |
| The Christians of Europe have a obligation to support the spiritual values that were born among them and in expressing their inner, deeper meaning. I would like to point out a few of these basic values. The enhancement of any person’s dignity as a basic human right. This principle, on which the legislation of European states is founded, was based on belief formed by the Christian faith. As Berdyaev notes, “Humanism, and therefore human dignity, may be reborn only by arising from the foundation of religion…. Human dignity presupposes the existence of God.” Human dignity is based on the belief than a human being is a holy person, a creation of God personified. Consequent to this principle is the respect for each and every human being, regardless of origin, sex, education and religious beliefs, as well as the securing of that person’s freedom. Freedom is one of the most fundamental concepts of Christianity. God, who is totally free, created man to be free and therefore responsible for his actions. Dignity, freedom and responsibility are related to each other. As has been observed by Patriarch Bartholomew, “Our freedom is not only personal but transpersonal. As human beings we cannot be genuinely free while living in seclusion, while denying our relation with our fellow human beings. We can be genuinely free when we become part of a community of other free human beings. Freedom is not being secluded or solitary, but social.” The biblical belief in marriage and family has shaped the principle of monogamy, which became the nucleus of European society and determined the relations between the two sexes. It enhanced and inspired fidelity and self-abnegation as a basic element of its endurance. When this basic structure is disrupted, society is driven into decline. We, the Christian people of Europe, have the right, but also the responsibility, to defend these truths, on which anything great and pure created by European civilization is based. Each and every devout Christian is duty-bound to be a responsible citizen of his country and of Europe in general. He has to act consistently, honestly and creatively, he has to contribute to the shaping of a society of human beings, supporting justice, equality and solidarity in an ever-extending radius, beginning with the people within his nation, then embracing all the people of Europe, and expanding his concern for the predominance of these values throughout the world. |
| Abstract Although much attention has been recently paid to different aspects of St Maximus’ anthropology, no complete and comprehensive overview of his doctrine of human nature within the hierarchical order of the world existence has been produced so far. In this article an attempt is made to trace main features of the human hierarchical nature incorporated in the creation in general. Man is considered as a binder of the material and spiritual worlds, as a hierarchical center of the created universe. Human dual nature is analyzed in terms of its original plan of God and distortion through the Fall. Christ oriented character of the anthropology of St Maximus is revealed. A very vivid antithesis of the corrupted body of Adam and the holy body of Christ is noted as a special contribution of st Maximus. Special place to the human mind, as the highest part of the soul possessing some unique functions is reviewed. It is discussed that the highest hierarchical priority is allotted by the Confessor to the concept of person or hypostasis in the man. The latter is defined as the highest integrative principle, unifying the human body and soul. The key characteristic of human likeness with God given in the anthropological heritage of rev. Maximus is claimed to be as follows: the key feature of the human conformity to God is the hypostasis-nature unity of the objective reality of a human. Such important features of st Maximus anthropology as Christo-centrism, multi-layerness, dynamics and subordination to the principles of the determined hierarchy as in the inner organization so in the involvement of the human nature in the hierarchy of the cosmic reality are underlined. On its highest level the hierarchical nature of the human includes in itself the uncreated Divine energies. Many scholars who have conducted research on the heritage of St Maximus the Confessor agree that he can be called the “father of Byzantine theology” 1 . He was the first to create principles of an integral system of understanding the world which, due to its unique systematized and integral character, came to be a significant alternative to Origenism. Christology and closely related to it Christian anthropology are the focus of St Maximus’s theological system. It is exactly this close link between Anthropology and Christology that becomes vital in St Maximus’s theology as he sees the Incarnation to be “the heart of the world existence – not only in terms of redemption but also in terms of the creation of the world” 2 . |
| The fiercest of struggles attacks believers, all believers, the young and the old, and these are, first, the struggle to maintain chastity and, second, the struggle with the feeling of abandonment. Let’s take a closer look at these two areas of struggle and St. Isaac’s advice on how not to be overcome by them. “ This is the fiercest struggle, the struggle that resists a man unto blood, wherein free will is tested as to the singleness of his love for the virtues….It is here that we manifest our patience, my beloved brethren, our struggle and our zeal. For this is the time of unseen martyrdom…” What is this struggle that St. Isaac speaks of and how can it be overcome? Is it some dread mysterious experience that only the very holy or only monastics or only spiritually advanced strugglers experience? No, not at all. St. Isaac names two specific areas or perhaps better, arenas, in which this fiercest of struggles attacks believers, all believers, the young and the old, the spiritually advanced and the spiritually negligent, the married and the monastic. These two areas are, first, the struggle to maintain chastity and, second, the struggle with the feeling of abandonment. Let’s take a closer look at these two areas of struggle and St. Isaac’s advice on how not to be overcome by them. What is chastity and how do we maintain it? Chastity refers to moral purity generally, but specifically to sexual purity. It does not necessarily refer to sexual abstinence. The hymns of the Church refer to Sts. Joachim and Anna as “chaste” even though they were evidently sexual active: they are the parents of our Mother Mary, God’s Birthgiver. Rather, chastity, when it is referring specifically to sexual activity, is referring to properly ordered sexuality. The struggle with chastity is the struggle with disordered passion. Disordered sexual passion is desire that is inappropriate, untimely or perversely directed. And keep in mind that the word “perverse” doesn’t mean “bad,” but rather means “twisted,” diverted from its appropriate use and purpose. So when we speak of perverted sexual desires, we do not mean bad sexual desire, for sexual desire of itself is good as God created it. We are talking about sexual desire wrongly guided or directed, sexual desire that is uncontrolled. |
| On the second Sunday of Great Lent, there is a great feast in the blessed city of Thessalonika, Greece. It is the feast of St. Gregory Palamas. On this day, the holy relics of the saint are taken from the Church of St. Gregory in a procession throughout the city, escorted by bishops, priests, sailors, policemen, and thousands of faithful. One wonders why his earthly remains are still held in such great veneration. How could his bones remain incorruptible more than six hundred years after his death? Indeed, St. Gregory’s life clearly explains these wondrous facts. It illustrates the inspired words of the apostles that our bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit (see 1 Corinthians 6:19) and that we are " partakers of the divine nature” (2 Peter 1:4). A Childhood Passion for the Eternal St. Gregory Palamas was born in the year 1296. He grew up in Constantinople (now Istanbul, Turkey) in a critical time of political and religious unrest. Constantinople was slowly recovering from the devastating invasion of the Crusades. It was a city under attack from all sides. From the west, it was infiltrated by Western philosophies of rationalism and scholasticism and by many attempts at Latinization. From the east, it was threatened by Muslim Turkish military invaders. The peace and faith of its citizens were at stake. Gregory’s family was wealthy. His father was a member of the senate. Upon his father’s sudden death, Byzantine Emperor Andronikos II Paleologos (1282–1328), who was a close friend of the family, gave it his full financial support. He especially admired Gregory for his fine abilities and talents, hoping that the brilliant young man would one day become a fine assistant. However, instead of accepting a high office in the secular world, Gregory sought “that good part, which will not be taken away” from him (Luke 10:42). Upon finishing his studies in Greek philosophy, rhetoric, poetry, and grammar, Gregory, at only twenty or twenty-two years of age, followed a burning passion in his heart. Like a lover who strives to stay alone forever with his loved one, Gregory was thirsty for this living water (see Revelation 22:17). Therefore, no created thing could separate him from the love of God (see Romans 8:39). He simply withdrew to Mount Athos, an already established community of monasticism. He first stayed at the Vatopedi Monastery, and then moved to the Great Lavra. |
| Азбука веры Православная библиотека блаженный Аврелий Августин The City of God Пожертвовать Вход блаженный Аврелий Августин The City of God Источник The City of God (Book XI) The City of God (Book XIII) Скачать epub pdf The City of God (Book XII) Augustine first institutes two inquiries regarding the angels; namely, whence is there in some a good, and in others an evil will? And, what is the reason of the blessedness of the good, and the misery of the evil? Afterwards he treats of the creation of man, and teaches that he is not from eternity, but was created, and by none other than God. Chapter 1.– That the Nature of the Angels, Both Good and Bad, is One and the Same. It has already, in the preceding book, been shown how the two cities originated among the angels. Before I speak of the creation of man, and show how the cities took their rise so far as regards the race of rational mortals I see that I must first, so far as I can, adduce what may demonstrate that it is not incongruous and unsuitable to speak of a society composed of angels and men together; so that there are not four cities or societies – two, namely, of angels, and as many of men – but rather two in all, one composed of the good, the other of the wicked, angels or men indifferently. That the contrary propensities in good and bad angels have arisen, not from a difference in their nature and origin, since God, the good Author and Creator of all essences, created them both, but from a difference in their wills and desires, it is impossible to doubt. While some steadfastly continued in that which was the common good of all, namely, in God Himself, and in His eternity, truth, and love; others, being enamored rather of their own power, as if they could be their own good, lapsed to this private good of their own, from that higher and beatific good which was common to all, and, bartering the lofty dignity of eternity for the inflation of pride, the most assured verity for the slyness of vanity, uniting love for factious partisanship, they became proud, deceived, envious. |
| Gregory the Theologian placed the synthetic —body and soul—quality of human existence in the larger context of the whole created order, within which he distinguished three stages. The first stage, he said, was the creation of the angels, described as a created projection of the “first light,” which is God Himself (Orationes 40.5). These creatures are the most like God, Gregory declared, noetic spirits described in Holy Scripture as an immaterial form of fire. Indeed, so great was Gregory’s awe of the angelic nature, he confessed, that he would have thought angels incapable of falling, except that they did, in fact, fall! Rebelling against the eternal light, they became powers of darkness and evil—in truth, “our tempters” (38.9). Creation’s second stage, according to Gregory, was that of the material universe, a compound of such physical elements as earth, water, and sky. Although lower than the order of angels, this physical universe was blessed with beauty, harmony, and order. Until God created human beings, however, there was nothing in the material world capable of thinking; purely material creatures are the least like—and the furthest removed from—God (38.10). The third stage of the created order began on the sixth day of Creation, when God formed the human being in His own image and likeness. Man, the being created in this third stage, combines in his own existence the diverse qualities of the other two stages, the spiritual and the material. Man is the only sub-angelic creature endowed with the faculties requisite for free, conscious, and sequential thought. Unlike other physical creatures, which are governed entirely by environment and instinct, human beings are able to make choices. Their deliberate decisions transcend the influences brought to bear upon them. This is what distinguishes man from the other creatures with whom he shares the earth. Thus, unique among God’s creatures, man is distinguished by a capacity for historical experience. Indeed, the very notion of “history”—as something distinct from “nature”—is meaningless without man’s ability to choose a direction for his existence. When God created man, He created him, the Fathers declared, avtexsousios, “possessing self-determination.” This distinctly human quality, freedom of will, pertained to man’s very being from the beginning. It is presupposed in the very fact that God gave Adam and Eve a command—and, therefore, a choice whether or not to obey it—in the original Garden of his existence. |
| Should pastors grease the Kardashian celebrity machine by mentioning Bruce Jenner from the pulpit? There are good arguments for ignoring the whole thing, but I think that’s a pastoral mistake. So much of our cultural trajectory converges on Bruce: our rampant Gnosticism, our confidence in technology, our moral libertarianism and determined flight from biblical standards, our cult of fame, our sexual self-contradictions. Bruce Jenner will be forgotten soon enough, but what he represents isn’t going away, because transgressiveness is one of the few cultural imperatives that we are not permitted to transgress. If we preach about Bruce, what should we say? When I asked the Jewish theologian David Novak how a synagogue would respond, his answer was stunning in its simplicity: First, “Jews would not recognize Jenner as a woman”; then, “Torah forbids castration.” Castration doesn’t turn a man into a woman. It only leaves him a damaged man. Novak was referring to Deuteronomy 23:1: “No one who is emasculated, or has his male organ cut off, shall enter the assembly of the Lord.” As long as we’re looking for proof texts, we might add Deuteronomy 22:5: “A woman shall not wear a man’s clothing, nor shall a man put on a woman’s clothing; for whoever does these things is an abomination to the Lord your God.” It doesn’t matter that the cross-dressing is surgical rather than sartorial. If men are forbidden to wear bras, we are presumably also forbidden to wear breasts. Many Christians don’t think Jesus said anything relevant to questions like this, but he did: “He who created them at the beginning made them male and female” (Matthew 19:4). Jesus was answering a question about divorce, but, as John Paul II showed, Jesus appeals to the “beginning” as a revelation about the created pattern of sexuality. Jesus didn’t mean, God made everything, therefore he must have made both male and female. He meant, God made a male and then made a female. God created each individually, and he created the distinction between them. The creation account makes this clear, distinguishing the origin of Adam (from the ground) from the origin of Eve (from Adam). |
| Michael Prokurat, Alexander Golitzin, Michael D. Peterson Скачать epub pdf THEOLOGY THEOLOGY. Theology in the Orthodox tradition has a considerably broader meaning than philosophical discourse about divinity. The latter applies, to be sure, when Christian thinkers were obliged to express and defend the faith in language borrowed from the Greek philosophical tradition of Plato and Neoplatonism (qq.v.). Nor, it must be added, did they feel the latter to be entirely at variance with the revelation in Christ. The history of Orthodox theology (as of Roman Catholic [qq.v.] and Protestant theology) is in great part the struggle against and in alliance with the inheritance of the great pagan Greeks. Borrowing a phrase from Fr. Georges Florovsky (q.v.), it is a wrestling with concepts in order to discover the words “most adequate” to the mystery of God (q.v.) become man (theoprepeis logoi). In this struggle one may discern two basic approaches in Orthodox Church Fathers, as the former were categorized by Dionysius the Areopagite (qq.v.). There is first and primarily apophatic theology. This phrase goes beyond the mere negation of concepts. It denotes the fact that the transcendent God (q.v.) is, indeed, transcendent, other, and thus “known,” in Dionysius’s famous phrase, only “by unknowing.” Classically apophatic theology insists on a particular content to this “unknowing,” i.e., the possibility of a genuine experience of the unknowable God revealed in the Incarnate Word and communicated to the believer in the action (energeia) of the Holy Spirit (q.v.). This is therefore the real mystical theology, the union beyond word and concept. The experience of the divine leads to the other approach of classical Eastern theology, affirmative or cataphatic theology. The Unknowable is revealed in his creation, in the words of the Scriptures (q.v.), and finally in the Word made flesh, Jesus Christ. These givens constitute the realm of the oikonomia, God’s self-extension into the universe for humanity’s creation and salvation. On the one hand, words and concepts must be assigned and accorded their full seriousness, though always with the proviso that they carry within themselves and point toward a presence that finally transcends both them and every artifice of the created intellect. On the other hand, certain concepts, or “names,” do carry a particular weight because they are revealed images, “notional icons” one might say, beyond which the believer cannot go. This applies with particular force to the names accorded the persons of the Trinity (q.v.). In the Trinity, and in the formulations of the Ecumenical Councils concerning Christology (qq.v.), apophatic and cataphatic can be seen to meet and fuse: not a man and a god, but the God-man, not One and not Three, but both, and beyond the categories of one and many. |
|
|
