| John Anthony McGuckin Icons THEODOR DAMIAN The theology of the image of God represents one of the principal Orthodox Christian doctrines that has enjoyed a great level of attention and development over the centuries. This theology, closely linked to the whole problem of Christology, has generated and has become a criterion, first, of the legitimization of the tradition of the icon in the early church and second, in the Orthodox tradition after the great schism, until the present day. In Orthodoxy the icon is understood as a sign of the divine presence in the world and as a reminder of our essential relationship with God. The icons were used in the worship of the early church. They expressed an incarnational focus of thinking and were considered complementary to the gospel, as both things spoke of the same saving events. In the early church not everybody was in favor of the use of icons liturgically; however, both groups lived together without serious conflict. There were some church fathers who spoke against the use of icons and several others who approved them in this early period. A special confirmation of their existence and acceptance was given at the Quinisext Council (692) held in Constantinople under Emperor Justinian II whose Canon 82 states: “The Christian images are legitimate. They are accepted by the Church and even considered useful, because by the fact of representing Christ they remind all of his salvific work.” The synod even decided to forbid the representation of Christ in symbols (such as the Lamb that had become popular in western art to “stand in for” the Savior) so as to encourage the iconography of his human face and figure. The history of the veneration of icons witnessed periods of great troubles and misunderstandings. The chief controversy over the legitimacy of images, especially as that broke out in the two periods of Byzantine Iconoclasm, was based on a literal interpretation of the second commandment of the Decalogue which forbids the creation of idolatrous images and bans their worship. The controversy also arose because of Eastern influences on Byzantine Christianity from Judaism and Islam, as well as because of the iconoclasts’ desire to “reform and purify” the content of worship. |
| “It Is Not Too Late To Stop” A Sorrowful Reply to Patriarch Bartholomew Concerning His Anti-Canonical Actions in Ukraine Source: DECR In reply to a letter of His Holiness Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople, in which he informed of the “reinstatement” of the Ukrainian schismatics in their “rank,” of the “annulment” of the document which is three hundred years old and indicates the transfer of the Kievan Metropolia to the jurisdiction of the Moscow Patriarchate, of the organization in Kiev of a “local council” of the non-canonical groups admitted to communion, and of the intention to grant “autocephaly” in the next few days to the institution established at this gathering, His Holiness Patriarch Kirill of Moscow and All Russia sent a message, in which he expressed his deep pain, astonishment and indignation over the anti-canonical actions of the Patriarchate of Constantinople. HIS HOLINESS BARTHOLOMEW PATRIARCH OF CONSTANTINOPLE Your Holiness, It was with the feeling of great pain, astonishment and indignation that I read your letter in which you informed me of the recent actions of the Church of Constantinople: of admitting to communion the uncanonical communities in Ukraine; of “revoking” the Letter of Patriarch Dionysius IV of Constantinople which had transferred the Kievan Metropolia to the jurisdiction of the Moscow Patriarchate; of organizing in Kiev a “local council” of the uncanonical communities admitted to communion by you; and of intending to give in the next few days a status of an autocephalous Orthodox Church to the institution that you had established. The reunification of the schismatics with the Church would have been a great joy both for Orthodox Christians in Ukraine and for the whole Orthodox world had it occurred in compliance with the rules of the canon law, in the spirit of peace and love of Christ. However, the current politicized process of coercive unification is far from the norms and spirit of the holy canons. A great amount of lies has been piled up, and now violence is being inflicted on the true Ukrainian Orthodox Church. This is the same Church of millions of the Ukrainian faithful that you recognized as canonical all the years of your service, until very recently. And now you pretend that it does not exist, that there are only some separate dioceses which have returned under your omophorion. |
| Introduction There is considerable discussion today within the worldwide Orthodox Church about the status of the so-called “Photian Council,” held in Constantinople in 879-880. This is an exceedingly important council in the history of the Orthodox Church, and therefore deserves to be much more widely known among the Orthodox faithful. And this Council is of special relevance for our Orthodox Church vis-a-vis the Roman Catholic Church, in that 1), it officially prohibited any addition to the Nicene Creed, thus rejecting the Filioque clause, which was in use by many churches in Western Europe at that time (though not in Rome until 1014); and 2), it implicitly rejected the principle of Papal Supremacy, or jurisdictional authority, over the Eastern Churches, in that this Council rendered null and void the pro-papal Ignatian Council held in Constantinople ten years earlier. But in one of the greatest ironies of Christian history, the Photian Council was recognized as legitimate by the papacy for nearly 200 years until the period of the Gregorian Reform , when the canon lawyers of Pope Gregory VII (r. 1073-1085) rejected the Photian Council and resurrected the Ignatian Council to take its place. My personal opinion is that this substitution 200 years after the fact was made easier for the Roman Church due to the circumstance that the Eastern Church had not proclaimed the Photian Council to be the Eighth Ecumenical Council. There are understandable reasons for that circumstance, which I will discuss near the end of this paper. For now, I will simply observe that this substitution has made reconciliation between the Roman Catholic and the Eastern Churches tremendously more difficult through the centuries—since the Filioque and Papal Supremacy have been the two biggest stumbling blocks hindering reconciliation to this day. The basic background to the story of these two councils St. Photios the Great (c. 815—c. 891) has been called “the most distinguished thinker, the most outstanding politician, and the most skillful diplomat ever to hold office as Patriarch of Constantinople.” |
| John Anthony McGuckin Sexual Ethics MARIA GWYN MCDOWELL Human beings are sexual; human bodies are places where love, affection, and respect are often accompanied by physical desire; places, therefore, of both great joy and struggle. Orthodoxy recognizes the tension which often exists between love, desire, and respect. Questions of sexual ethics are dependent on an understanding of the human person as participating in an ongoing transformation into the likeness of God, one that includes joy and blessing as well as sin and repentance As unique, irreducible, and dynamic spiritual realities, personhood and relationship cannot be reduced to matters of “natural” or civil law. The pertinent questions for ethical decision-making are who am I/we becoming and how does a particular relationship, sexual behavior, or action enable me/us to be more like God; that is, to better love God and neighbor. Modern Orthodox sexual ethics must honestly confront an ambiguous past history. While the written tradition has known outspoken defenders of the body and the value of sexual relations in the context of marriage, it has produced many detractors as well. Nor can we ignore the fact that while both men and women are ostensibly called to the same standards of virtue and sexual integrity, double standards existed and still exist which uncritically accepted preexisting cultural assumptions about women’s weakness and supposedly greater struggle for virtue, which over-sexualized women and meted out harsher penalties for wrongdoing. This imbalance has not gone unnoticed by the tradition, but the misogyny pervasive in Late Antique and Byzantine cultures nonetheless affected the development and application of much Orthodox canon law, theology, and pastoral care. This is especially important to bear in mind as Orthodoxy now makes its home in western cultures and encounters feminist insights regarding the shared dignity of men and women, and new opportunities for articulating gender roles and responsibilities. Reenvisioning such roles must grapple with the difficulty engendered by phrases such as the “Manly-woman of God,” something that was meant as a compliment in Late Antique discourse but which is completely lost on women today. |
| Thomas E. FitzGerald 10. HERITAGE AND VISION The visit of Ecumenical Patriarch Dimitrios of Constantinople to the United States in 1990 served as an important affirmation of the significance of Orthodox Christianity in this country. While the Orthodox jurisdictions continued to look toward greater administrative unity, many signs of a mature presence and a fruitful mission were clearly visible. The Orthodox in America numbered over 3 million, gathered into over 1,500 parishes. Through their concern for liturgical and spiritual renewal, theological studies, ecumenical dialogue, and evangelization, the American Orthodox in recent decades had strengthened their own mission and witness in this country. They had also become a major influence upon Christianity throughout the world. 319 THE VISIT OF THE ECUMENICAL PATRIARCH Ecumenical Patriarch Dimitrios I of Constantinople, together with a delegation that included five Metropolitans made an unprecedented visit to the United States 2–29 July 1990. Among the delegation was the present patriarch, Patriarch Bartholomew, who succeeded Patriarch Dimitrios in 1991. Although other Orthodox Patriarchs had visited this country in the past, this was the first visit of the Ecumenical Patriarch. His visit had a special significance because he is viewed as the first bishop of the Orthodox Church. As such, the Ecumenical Patriarch is frequently looked upon as the spiritual leader of the 300 million Orthodox Christians throughout the world. Moreover, according to Orthodox canon law and ecclesiastical practice dating from at least the fourth century, the Patriarch of Constantinople has special responsibility for overseeing the development of the Orthodox Church in lands beyond the boundaries of other autocephalous churches. 320 When he arrived in Washington, Patriarch Dimitrios spoke of his mission: In particular as Ecumenical Patriarch entering this land, I reflect upon the fact that our Church took root here and flourished for whole generations, thus contributing also to the great and historic advance of the American people, to its attainments, in sharing its problems, its progress and its dreams for a better mankind. Today, Orthodoxy is not a strange and alien factor in America. It is flesh of its flesh and bone of its bones.... I greet warmly and without exception all the faithful children of the Orthodox in this country.... As the Ecumenical Patriarch, I convey to all the Orthodox of this country my love and blessing, and assure them that the full unity of the Church, by canonical order, has never ceased and will never cease to be my principal concern. 321 |
| WASHINGTON (CNS) -- During the week following the pan-Orthodox council, which wrapped June 26 in Crete, Greece, Orthodox clergy in the U.S. reflected on what the council would mean for Orthodox Christians here. Going into the council, the most pressing issue for American Orthodox Christians was the question of the diaspora: how the church’s hierarchy should work in lands that are not traditionally Orthodox, but where different groups of Orthodox Christians now live, like in America and Australia. In these places, various Orthodox churches like the Greek, Russian and Ukrainian coexist, meaning that a city like New York can have 10 bishops from five different Orthodox churches. This current organization conflicts with the Orthodox canon, or law, that there should be only one church authority in each region. The final message and encyclical from the Holy and Great Council made no changes to the current structure but affirmed the importance of the governing episcopal assemblies, which bring together the different bishops in these regions. “The council decided to encourage their (the episcopal assemblies’) continuation until the situation in the various regions matured for future development,” said American Greek Orthodox Father John Chryssavgis, who attended the council. The American assembly, called the Assembly of Canonical Orthodox Bishops of the United States of America, is the largest in the world, with almost 60 bishops. Greek Orthodox Father Patrick Viscuso, a member of the North American Orthodox-Catholic Theological Consultation, said the affirmation of episcopal assemblies is “actually a wonderful thing.” “Episcopal assemblies are a first step for sorting out the canonical structure of the Church and bringing about canonical normalcy,” Father Viscuso told Catholic News Service in a phone interview from New Jersey. He said the assemblies are helpful in terms of pooling the Orthodox churches’ resources, and that while they won’t eliminate the priority of ethnic identities in the Orthodox Church, they are a step closer to ensuring the church is one, holy, catholic and apostolic. |
| The feasts of the Jewish liturgical calendar are biblical commemorations, either being commanded by God in the Bible to be observed or otherwise commemorating a biblical event. Why then do Christians not celebrate them? This question always comes to my mind around Hanukkah, which is a beautiful story surrounding a miracle that occurred at the reconsecration of the Second Temple after the Maccabean revolt and recapture of the Temple Mount. The story is found in the books of 1 and 2 Maccabees, which are included in the canon of the Old Testament for the Orthodox and Catholic churches. The festivals of Sukkot (Tabernacles) and Passover are likewise biblical commemorations. The simple answer to this question is two-fold: (1) Christian feasts are fulfillments of the various Jewish feasts, and (2) because of this, they have a distinctively Christ-centered focus. The Jewish feasts, for Christians, were “shadows and types” of what was to come, which have now been fulfilled by Christ. Therefore, by celebrating the distinctive Christian feasts, we celebrate also what the Jewish feasts foreshadowed. For this reason, the Christian feasts include many references and allusions to the Jewish feasts within the liturgical texts. Lets take a look at a few of these Jewish feasts: Jewish Feasts Fulfilled in Christ The Feast of Sukkot (Tabernacles): This feast is a harvest festival, occurring just after the Fall New Year (which was moved from an earlier Spring New Year at the beginning of the month of Nisan). The custom of constructing and living in a booth or hut commemorates the Israelites’ conditions as slaves in Egypt and their wandering in the wilderness before entering the Land of Canaan. It was to be a reminder to them that God had brought them from being slaves and nomads to being a great nation. This feast does not have a Christian analogue, nor is it “fulfilled” in any one particular Christian feast. However, we have the monastic tradition, which has seen many people living has hermits in caves and hand-made dwellings. Saints such as St. John the Hut Dweller encapsulate a living embodiment of this feast, and through them we are reminded that we are pilgrims in this world, awaiting a New City, the Kingdom of God (Hebrews 11:13-16). |
| John Anthony McGuckin Repentance ANDREI PSAREV In Orthodox thought repentance is the blessed mourning of a person and longing for God (penthos) following after a sense of having moved away from him. It is a conversion to God and, as a result, is what scripture describes as radical change of mind or heart (metanoia, see Mk. 1.15 ). Christ came to save sinners having called them to repentance and belief in his gospel ( Mt. 9.13 ). The parable of the prodigal son ( Lk. 15.11 ) outlines the stages of how Orthodox understand the process of repentance: contrition, aversion from sin, repudiation of evil, confession, reconciliation with God and one’s neighbor. The words from the apostle about the impossibility of repentance for those who, by sinning, crucify Christ again (Heb. 6.4–6) reflect a dilemma of the early church; for in the 3rd and 4th centuries the Novatianists and Donatists permanently excluded from Eucharistic communion those who were guilty of serious sins. The greater church would not accept this rigorist approach, having prescribed in its canons various terms of abstinence from the Eucharist on account of grave sins; but no transgressor was ever to be deprived of the Eucharist at the time of their death (Nicea 1. Canon 13). There are no sins that may prevent a person from entering into the dedicated life of repentance which is monasticism (Quinisext Council. Canon 43). Repentance has been called in Orthodoxy the “second baptism.” Canon 12 of St. Gregory the Wonderworker (3rd century) defines how the church classifed penitents. In early times certain classes of sinners were debarred from full Eucharistic membership and had to stand apart from the community, in the narthex or outside the church building, sometimes for many years. St. Basil the Great (4th century) was not just occupied with the impact of sin on an individual, but also with the spiritual health of the entire congregation (St. Basil. Canon 88). In the same way as sin injures the body of the whole ecclesiastical community, through the healing of each member the entire church body acquires reconciliation with God ( 1Cor. 12.26 ). |
| Greatmartyr Theodore the Tyro (“the Recruit”) Commemorated on February 17/March 2 The Holy Great Martyr Theodore the Recruit (Tyro) was a soldier in the city of Alasium of the Pontine district (northeast province of Asia Minor, stretching along the coast of the Euxine, i.e. the Black Sea), under the command of a certain Brincus. They commanded him to offer sacrifice to idols. Saint Theodore firmly confessed his faith in Christ the Savior in a loud voice. The commander gave him several days to think it over, during which time Saint Theodore prayed. They charged him with setting a pagan temple on fire, and threw him into prison to be starved to death. The Lord Jesus Christ appeared to him there, comforting and encouraging him. Brought to the governor, Saint Theodore boldly and fearlessly confessed his faith, for which he was subjected to new torments and condemned to burning. The martyr Theodore climbed onto the fire without hesitation, and with prayer and gave up his holy soul to God. This occurred in about the year 306 under the Roman emperor Galerius (305-311). Unharmed by the fire, the body of Saint Theodore was buried in the city of Euchaita, not far from Amasium. His relics were afterwards transferred to Constantinople, to a church dedicated to him. His head is in Italy, in the city of Gaeto. Later on, fifty years after the death of Saint Theodore, the emperor Julian the Apostate (361-363), wanting to commit an outrage upon the Christians, commanded the city-commander of Constantinople during the first week of Great Lent to sprinkle all the food provisions in the marketplaces with the blood offered to idols. Saint Theodore appeared in a dream to Archbishop Eudoxius, ordering him to inform all the Christians that no one should buy anything at the marketplaces, but rather to eat cooked wheat with honey (kolyva). In memory of this occurrence, the Orthodox Church annually celebrates the holy Great Martyr Theodore the Recruit on the first Saturday of Great Lent. On Friday evening, at the Divine Liturgy of the Presanctified Gifts following the prayer at the ambo, the Canon to the holy Great Martyr Theodore, composed by Saint John of Damascus, is sung. After this, kolyva is blessed and distributed to the faithful. The celebration of the Great Martyr Theodore on the first Saturday of Great Lent was set by the Patriarch Nectarius of Constantinople (381-397). |
| Serbian Patriarch Porfirije Gives Interview to Serbian National Television Photo: YouTube screenshot In his interview to the Serbian national television RTS, His Holiness Patriarch Porfirije of Serbia spoke about many issues, including the situation in the Serbian Orthodox Church, the dialogue with the Catholic church, the relationships between Moscow and Constantinople, and the Ukrainian issue. Concerning the Ukrainian issue, His Holiness Patriarch Porfirije said that the Serbian Orthodox Church is an Autocephalous church that has its internal order and follows the Canon at this moment. “The actions of Constantinople in Ukraine are not in accordance with the tradition of the Church. We are on the side of order and canon,” said Patriarch Porfirije. He also added that “Many are going to say that we (the Serbian Orthodox Church) are on the Russian side. But we are on the side of order and canon.” Answering the question about Pope’s possible visit to Serbia, he said that it depends on many factors. “I will not think alone. Everything is a product of assembly thinking… As far as I know, there has never been any initiative by the Vatican… and Patriarch Irinej said that it would be good and useful for the relationship between the two churches, but whether [it will happen] and when… [only] God knows.” Commenting on problems in the Serbian Orthodox Church, he said that, although he is not a prophet, “similar actions, like the ones in Ukraine, will not happen again, because it caused great upheavals in the relations between the Local Churches. And that will be a lesson for everyone.” In his interview, Patriarch Porfirije said the Church should only engage in politics in the original sense, in the sense of caring for the common good. When he was asked about same-sex marriage, Patriarch Porfirije said that for the Church marriage is defined in the Old Testament between the first man and woman. He added that the Church needs to communicate with everybody, to try to solve problems, and, primarily, to bear witness to the faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. |
|
|
