| Tweet Нравится Pro-life campaigns in Russia and Serbia to be held on Annunciation Moscow, April 5, 2017 Photo: Pravoslavie.ru The international “Beginning of Life” campaign in defense of unborn life will be held on April 7, the feast of the Annunciation, in many regions of Russia, neighboring countries, and in Serbia, reports Foma . With the blessing of Patriarch Irinej, the fourth annual cross procession will be held in Belgrade around the National Assembly building for the legislative protection of the unborn. “Everyone has in view artificial surgical and medical abortions, but few pay attention to the fate of children at the age of Christ (a few days from conception), millions of which are annually disposed of quietly by the abortive action of intrauterine and hormonal means of contraception, and also in the process of in vitro fertilization (IVF), when excess children conceived ‘in vitro’ are discarded, whether disposed of immediately, or once their cryopreservation has expired,” emphasizes the “ For Life ” movement. Festive events and flash mobs with the participation of Orthodox youth will be held in many churches and on the streets in April 7 throughout these countries. The aim is to show that “premarital chastity, strong families, and care for relatives, foster children and orphans are integral parts of the preservation of a nation, but the sins of contraception and artificial conception not only kill children, but are also contrary to human nature, destroying health and the familial way of life, leading to the degradation of society.” Participants will distribute thematic brochures and leaflets to passers-by, and also white flowers—a symbol of life and purity. There will also be festive concerts, charity events and round table discussions on the defense of unborn children. 5 апреля 2017 г. Квитанция Реквизиты для юридических лиц Оплата с банковской карты Visa, MasterCard и Maestro Оплата наличными через кассы и терминалы Пожертвование через Сбербанк Онл@йн Яндекс.Деньги Альфа-клик MasterPass Интернет-банк Промсвязьбанка Квитанция Реквизиты для юридических лиц Оплата с банковской карты Visa, MasterCard и Maestro Оплата наличными через кассы и терминалы Пожертвование через Сбербанк Онл@йн Яндекс.Деньги Альфа-клик MasterPass Интернет-банк Промсвязьбанка скрыть способы оплаты |
| Life-Long Learners or Good Test-Takers? An Orthodox Christian Critique By Dylan Pahman The video below of a second grade teacher in Providence, RI reading his letter of resignation has recently gone semi-viral with over 200,000 views on YouTube. What I would like to offer here is an Orthodox Christian critique of the anthropological assumptions that separate this teacher from the “edu-crats,” as he terms them, who in his district so strongly championed standardized testing-oriented education at the exclusion of all other methods and aims. In the Orthodox Christian tradition, there is an understanding, just like all other Christian traditions, that human beings are made after the image and likeness of God (cf. Genesis 1:26). For the Orthodox, however, the terms “image” and “likeness” have important technical differences. St. John of Damascus describes this distinction as follows: “the phrase ‘after His image’ clearly refers to the side of [human] nature which consists of mind and free will, whereas ‘after His likeness’ means likeness in virtue so far as that is possible.” To elaborate, the image of God refers to our human nature, that which is common in all human beings. Every human being as a human being is composed of a rational soul and body with certain faculties, such as free will, reason, intuition, emotion, capacity for virtue, and so on. The likeness of God refers to each person’s approximation to the divine likeness. It is not simply our capacity for virtue, knowledge, holiness, or any other divine attribute, but the realization of those attributes in us through communion with divine grace. Each person has unique strengths and weaknesses, and each is farther down the road in some areas than in others. A person who excels at patience, for example, may struggle with courage. A person gifted artistically may struggle to appreciate the value of math and science. This traditional, Christian anthropology (it need not be limited to the Orthodox) offers us a balanced view of human personhood that contrasts with strict collectivist or extreme individualist anthropologies. The fault of the collectivist viewpoint is to place too much emphasis on human nature, failing to consider each person’s uniqueness. The fault of the individualist orientation is to put too much emphasis on the uniqueness of each person at the exclusion of what is common. However, this traditional view of personhood requires that both be held in tension. |
| 2010 Epistle from the Ecumenical Patriarch for the (New Calendar) Nativity of Christ BARTHOLOMEW By the Mercy of God Archbishop of Constantinople-New Rome and Ecumenical Patriarch To the Plenitude of the Church Grace, Peace and Mercy from the Savior Christ Born in Bethlehem Beloved brother concelebrants and blessed children in the Lord, Within the somber atmosphere that recently prevails throughout the world with the diverse affliction of the financial, social, moral and especially spiritual crisis, which has created increasing frustration, bitterness, confusion, anxiety, disappointment and fear among many people with regard to the future, the voice of the Church sounds sweet: Come, O faithful, let us raise our minds to things divine and behold the heavenly condescension that has appeared to us from above in Bethlehem … (Hymn from the 6th Hour, Christmas) The unshakeable belief of Christians is that God does not simply or indifferently observe from above the journey of humanity, which He has personally created according to His image and likeness. This is why the incarnation of His only-begotten Son and Word was from the very beginning His “good will,” His original intention. His “pre-eternal will” was precisely to assume in His person, in an act of extreme love, the human nature that He created in order to render it “a participant of divine nature.” (2 Peter 1.4) Indeed, God willed this prior to the “fall” of Adam and Eve, even before their very creation! Following the “fall” of Adam and Eve, the “pre-eternal will” of the Incarnation embraced the Cross, the Sacred Passion, the Life-giving Death, the Descent into Hades, and the Resurrection after three days. In this way, the sin that infiltrated human nature thereby infecting everything and the death that surreptitiously penetrated life were completely and definitively dispelled, while humanity was able to enjoy the fullness of the Paternal and eternal heritage. However, the divine condescension of Christmas is not restricted to things related to eternity. It also includes things related to our earthly journey. Christ came into the world in order to spread the good news of the Kingdom of Heaven and to initiate us into this Kingdom. Yet, He also came in order to help and heal human weakness. He miraculously and repeatedly fed the multitudes who listened to His word; He cleansed lepers; He supported paralytics; He granted light to the blind, hearing to the deaf and speech to the dumb; He delivered the demonized of impure spirits, resurrected the dead, supported the rights of the oppressed and abandoned; He condemned illegal wealth, heartlessness to the poor, hypocrisy and “hubris” in human relations; He offered Himself as an example of voluntary self-emptying sacrifice for the sake of others! |
| 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. |
| John Anthony McGuckin Original Sin M. C. STEENBERG The term “original sin” is normally taken to indicate a specific view on the origin of sin and its effects in the world, as read through the perspective of the Genesis account of Adam and Eve in Eden ( Gen. 2 –3ff.). Specifically, it reads this text as suggesting a state of original perfection in which humanity was created and from which it “fell” through transgression. This fall affected the nature of humanity, such that it was to some degree imbued with sin, thereafter inherited by future generations. This condition of inbuilt sin (described in certain Latin authors as concupiscence, a process of being bound up in errant desire) is in moderate writers of the early Latin Church taken to indicate a general propensity or inclination toward error, while in more extreme exponents it has been developed into doctrines (particularly in post-Reformation western theology) of “total depravity” or an inheritance of the guilt of Adam’s transgression. The doctrine of original sin originates largely from St. Augustine and certain other writers of the patristic Latin West, such as Tertullian. From the outset it has been questioned by exponents of Orthodox theology. While the emphasis on the universal scope of sin is certainly consonant with Orthodox thought, notions of a perfect “pristine condition” and a fall from grace have often been seen as at variance with Orthodox anthropology – or at least as a reading of Genesis that puts excessive emphasis on a transformation of human nature that results from its first transgression. Orthodox writers have tended to emphasize the developmental nature of humanity’s creation into perfection, rather than as already perfected before declining; and have resisted strongly the conceptions of inherited guilt that are often central to western expositions of original sin. As a result, there is a preference among some Orthodox writers in the modern era to use the phrases “ancestral sin” or “primal sin” as a means of distinguishing a non-“Augustin- ian” reading of the Genesis account of transgression from the understanding of original sin now dominant in the West. A precise definition of original sin is, however, difficult to pin down historically, and presentations of “Augustinian” doctrine in this regard are often generalized and imprecise, leading at times to a popular “East versus West” rhetoric on the point that has little concrete basis in the actual writings of the early church. |
| Accept The site uses cookies to help show you the most up-to-date information. By continuing to use the site, you consent to the use of your Metadata and cookies. Cookie policy Joint communique of the 6th Russian-Iranian Commission for Islam-Orthodoxy Dialogue The Joint Commission for Orthodoxy-Islam Dialogue held its 6 th meeting on October 6-7, 2010, in Teheran, the Islamic Republic of Iran. It discussed ‘The Role of Religion in the Life of the Individual and Society’. The meeting was chaired by Bishop Feofilakt of Smolensk and Vyazma and Dr. Mahdi Mostafi, President of the Islamic Culture and Relations Organization, Iran. Dr. Mostafi opened the meeting with words of welcome. Bishop Feofilakt brought a message of greeting from His Holiness Patriarch Kirill of Moscow and All Russia. Papers were presented on the influence of religion on the spiritual health of society, the role of religion in consolidating the institution of family and family values, the relationships of religious tradition and the doctrine of human rights and freedom and the influence of religious tradition on the morality of the individual. The meeting also discussed a historical similarity between the ways in which the Russian and Iranian civilizations developed. In their discussion, participants proceeded from the conviction that religious tradition is of essential importance for the life of the modern society. The crisis of the modern society is linked to a great extent with the denial of religious tradition. During the dialogue, participants repeatedly pointed to the danger of aggressive secularism which views religion as a source of violence and conflict and insists on its exclusion from public life. Secularism often uses the institution of human rights and freedoms for struggle with religion. Participants spoke unanimously against aggressive secularization and its imposition on the world. Human rights and freedom cannot be set against religious tradition. The meeting stressed the danger of subjecting religious views to legal norms which have been developed exclusively on the basis of non-religious ideas. On the contrary, the religious worldview should make its own contribution to the development of norms of national and international law so that they may acquire a really universal nature. It was deemed as necessary to unite the efforts of the Russian Orthodox Church and the Muslim community in Iran in developing a notion of ‘traditional values’ and to seek its recognition in international law and observance in the work of international organizations. Traditional values include the important role of religion in private and public life, the human desire of moral perfection, the preservation of family life as union of man and woman, respect for the elderly, diligence, aid to the poor and the protection of the weak. |
| Greek Justice Minister Declares He Will Never Back Gay Marriage; Says It’s Dangerous to Society, Traditions Source: The Christian Post Greek Justice Minister Haralambos Athanasiou has said that he will never back legalizing same-sex marriage in the country, arguing that it harms society and poses a danger to traditions. PHOTO: REUTERS/ALKIS KONSTANTINIDIS) “I won’t discuss it, I can’t conceive of it,” the conservative politician told Greece’s Mega TV. “Besides, the convention of human rights forbids it. When it speaks about marriage it speaks [of marriage] between a man and woman. We are a country that respects traditions, respects human nature, and it’s not possible at least with this government and this ministry, to permit marriage.” While Greece has faced sanctions by the European court of human rights for not extending rights to gay couples, in July, the court refused to judicially impose same-sex marriage on countries, stating that gay marriage is not a human right. Athanasiou has argued that allowing gay couples to enter civil unions could further challenge the traditional family structure. “It’s a little dangerous to simply speak of civil unions. The matter is not easy. The problem is what are the consequences going to be … are we going to go as far as talking about adoption [by same-sex couples] next?” the Justice Minister said. Last week, Finland became the 12th European nation to vote in favor of legalizing same-sex marriage. While Denmark was the first country in the world to legalize same-sex civil partnerships in 1989, Netherlands became the first to approve of gay marriage in 2001. Since then, the European nations of Belgium, Spain, Norway, Sweden, Portugal, Iceland, Denmark, France, the U.K. and Luxembourg have all followed suit. Athanasiou said, however, that other EU members that have embraced same-sex marriage will not influence Greece. “Our country has structures. We have to look at it from the religious point of view, the political point of view, the social point of view. The ministry of justice will not, under the pressure of anyone, examine such an issue without calmness and composure,” he added. |
| John Anthony McGuckin Bulgakov, Sergius (Sergei) (1871–1944) PAUL GAVRILYUK Bulgakov combines many aspects in his life: Orthodox priest, theologian, religious philosopher, and economist. As a thinker he was interested in all major questions of human existence, offering a comprehensive religious vision of the world, particularly in light of the concept of Sophia, or “Godmanhood.” Born into the family of a provincial priest at Livny in Russia, Bulgakov began his education at church-run schools. Having experienced a crisis of faith and being attracted to Marxism, he went on to study law and economics at the University of Moscow (1890–4). On the completion of his studies, he taught economics at Moscow (1895–1901) and Kiev (1901–6). During these years he became disillusioned with Marxist theory and gradually embraced a form of religious idealism, an intellectual evolution which he traced in a collection of essays entitled From Marxism to Idealism (1896–1903). Upon his return to Moscow in 1906, Bulgakov rose to prominence as a public intellectual, participating in the Russian religious and cultural renaissance known as the “Silver Age» In 1909 Bulgakov cooperated with Nikolai Berdiaev, Semen L. Frank, and others in a collection of programmatic essays entitled Landmarks, which warned the Russian intelligentsia against the devastating consequences of the socialist revolution. Bulgakov construed revolutionary socialism as a form of surrogate religion, mimicking various features of apocalyptic Judaism and Orthodox Christianity. In his doctoral thesis, Philosophy of Economy (1912), Bulgakov offered an economic theory that moved further away from Marxism and was informed by philosophical idealism. The Unfading Light (1918), written during 1911–16, provides a first sketch of Bulgakov’s sophiological system, focusing on such issues as the nature of religion, apophatic theology, metaphysical problems of the relationship between God and creation, and human nature. Bulgakov played a leading role at the All-Russian Council of the Russian Orthodox Church of 1917–18. He was ordained an Orthodox priest in June 1918. With the Bolsheviks in power, Bulgakov was forced to resign from his post as a professor of economics at the University of Moscow and moved to Crimea (1919–22). Expelled from the Soviet Union in early 1923, Bulgakov eventually settled in Paris, where he became the first dean of the newly established St. Sergius Theological Institute. Outside Russia Bulgakov wrote the so-called “minor trilogy” consisting of The Burning Bush (1927), which develops Orthodox teaching regarding Theotokos and offers a critique of the Roman Catholic dogma of the Immaculate Conception; The Friend of the Bridegroom (1928), which discusses the role of John the Baptist in the history of salvation; and |
| Michael Prokurat, Alexander Golitzin, Michael D. Peterson Скачать epub pdf AUGUSTINE OF HIPPO AUGUSTINE OF HIPPO, bishop, theologian, St. (354–430). Greatest of the Latin Church Fathers (q.v.), Bishop of Hippo Regius in North Africa near Carthage from 395–430, his influence has been enormous on subsequent Western Christian thought, determining the main lines of its theological development from his immediate successors to the leaders of the Reformation. Augustine was for centuries after him the Church Father par excellence. It was a reputation justly won through the production of a vast library of theological works, virtually any one of which would have sufficed to secure the reputation of a lesser thinker. In one field of theological inquiry after another, especially in responding to three threatening heresies (q.v.), Augustine set the standard for Latin Christian thought. His great work On the Trinity established Western triadology along lines it has never abandoned, nor seriously criticized. Prominent within it is a portrayal of the central Christian mystery on the psychological model, i.e., the human soul as the created analogue of the Trinity (q.v.). His City of God provided a theology of history that is still powerfully influential and, moreover, had no equivalent in the Christian East. The many treatises on the Donatist Schism established fundamental guidelines for later thought on the nature of the Church and the sacraments (qq.v.). Augustine’s spiritual autobiography, the Confessions, pioneered a new approach to the mysteries of the interior life, which would afterward have imitators to the present day. No ancient writer before or after him had ever revealed himself in such detail or sought to expose the workings of divine grace (q.v.) with such personal insight or such moving prose. His commentaries on the Scriptures (q.v.) fill yet more volumes, the fruit of his daily preaching in the cathedral of Hippo in the exercise of his pastorate. Yet, of all these, he is perhaps best known for the writings of his old age against Pelagius, the British monk who claimed (so Augustine said, in turn) that the believer could achieve salvation by self-efforts. For one so acutely conscious of the insidious and subtle corrosion of sin as this writer, Pelagius’s position was utter anathema. In responding to this threat to the sovereignty of divine grace, as Augustine saw it, he elaborated a strikingly pessimistic view of human nature that viewed humanity after the Fall as thoroughly corrupted and, in addition, as laboring under the condemnation of God originally pronounced upon Adam. |
| Patriarch Kirill Greets Participants in the 11th Meeting of Joint Russian-Iranian Commission for Dialogue ‘Orthodoxy-Islam’ Source: DECR The 11 th meeting of the Joint Russian-Iranian Commission for Dialogue ‘Orthodoxy-Islam’ took place on May 5-6, 2018, in Teheran. His Holiness Patriarch Kirill of Moscow and All Russia sent a message of greeting to the participants in the meeting. The message states: Esteemed participants in the meeting, I cordially greet you as you have gathered for the 11 th meeting of the Joint Commission for Dialogue between the Russian Orthodox Church and the Islamic community in Iran. In the course of your meeting, you will discuss the protection of the environment. The importance of this topic is difficult to overestimate. In 2015, the Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church established a day of special prayer for God’s creation, which is held on the first Sunday in September. It is clear that environmental problems stem from the manifestation of human egoism. Seeking to live as comfortably as possible, to consume as much as possible, people exhaust natural resources without thinking about consequences. In pursuit of momentary profit, human beings make their planet ever less suitable for life and trample upon God’s creation – nature, thus distorting the design of the Heavenly Creator for the world and ever more strongly enslaving their spirit to flesh. Such a rapacious attitude to nature today dooms the generations to come to deprivations. Therefore, the principal cause of the ecological crisis is precisely the crisis of people’s moral responsibility. As the Bibles tell us, God took the man, and put him into the Garden of Eden to dress it and to keep it (Gen. 2:15). We are called to cherish the environment in the awareness of our responsibility for it before the Creator. Let the voices of our communities help us in this endeavor and may the present work of the Joint Commission serve the cause of the common witness of Christians and Muslims to the importance of preserving our home, the Earth, safe and intact. |
|
|
