| Craig S. Keener Conflict Over the Healing of a Blind Man. 9:1–10:21 This narrative demonstrates Jesus» claims in the previous context and chronologically follows directly on Jesus» departure from the temple on the last day of the festival (7:37; 8:59). It probably begins not far from the temple (cf. 9:7). This section opens with the healing of a blind man (9:1–7) and closes with the recognition that this miracle was not what one expected from a demon (10:21). The narrative between includes Pharisaic charges that Jesus» healing cannot be from God (9:16,22,24), a response from the formerly blind man that challenges the logic of their paradigm (9:25, 27, 31–33), and a response from Jesus, who reverses the charge and shows that it is his opponents who are not from God (9:40–10:18). 7009 Jesus» claim in this section to be the good shepherd (10:11) implicitly advances his previous claim to deity (8:58). Blindness and Sin (9:1–34) Contrary to what the elite supposed (9:34), the man was not born blind due to a sin (9:2–3), nor was his healer a sinner (9:16, 24); by contrast, the elite themselves are sinful and spiritually blind (9:39–41). The true connection between blindness and sin links together the entire section 9:1–41. But because 9:40–41 begin the response to the Pharisees which is continued in 10:1–18 and 9:35–39 begins Jesus» defense of the healed man, we have limited the first section to the material directly related to the healing and responses to it (9:1–34). The following section (9:35–10:18) traces Jesus» own response to the varied responses to his act, especially the responses of the healed man and the Jerusalem elite. Moreover, the contrast between physical and spiritual blindness (dependence on Christ and opposition to him) of 9:39–41 is already implicit at the beginning of this section. Jesus became invisible in some sense to his enemies in 8:59, so they could not see him; but here Jesus cures a man physically blind and so despised by his enemies (9:2, 34). (Indeed, worldly evaluations of the reasons for blindness form an inclusio around Jesus» healing and the man " s fidelity to him; 9:2, 34.) Epistemological terms («know») dominate the dialogue scenes and probably provide the metaphoric meaning of «sight» language also prominent in the chapter. 7010 |
| John Anthony McGuckin Holy Trinity ARISTOTLE PAPANIKOLAOU The Trinity is what Christians eventually came to refer to as the New Testament witnesses to a faith in Jesus as the Son of God, who as a result of his unique relation to the Father, reveals the Father and offers the eschatological gift of salvation by the power of the Holy Spirit. The New Testament itself does not give any definitive or creed-like statements about God as Trinity. What the earliest followers and interpreters of Jesus do is to continue to speak about Jesus and interpret his life, sayings, and deeds, together with the salvation he offers, in terms of Jesus’ relationship to the Father and the Spirit. Although there existed a variety of interpretations of Jesus in the earliest formulations of Christianity, two positions became predominant. The first consists of understanding Jesus as a divine mediator, but not generally seen as divine in the same degree as God the Father (often known as Pre-Nicene subordinationism); the second affirms Jesus as of equal divinity with the Father. It is important for the understanding of the doctrine of the Trinity to notice that these two positions share many common assumptions: (1) that Jesus is the Messiah and, as such, the one who fulfills the promise of salvation; (2) that this salvation consists in the bringing of creation into some form of renewed contact with the divine; and (3) as mediamediator of this contact between divinity and creation, Jesus is revealed as the divine Son of God. The core of the debates of the identity of Christ in the 2nd and 3rd centuries gravitated around the question of the degree and nature of divinity ascribed to Jesus by the church. These two parallel trajectories would ultimately culminate – and critically so – in the famous controversies of the 4th century between St. Athanasius of Alexandria and the Nicene theologians, and the so-called “Arians.” Athanasius would stand in continuity with Sts. Ignatius of Antioch and Irenaeus of Lyon in emphasizing salvation as humanity’s freedom from death and corruption, and that this freedom requires a conceptualizing of the God-world relation in terms of a communion between the created and the uncreated. The unequivocal declaration of the co-equal divinity of the Son with the Father occurs first in Athanasius, who argues that there is no freedom from death and corruption, and hence no eternal life, without a communion of the created with the full divinity as revealed in the person and work of Christ. |
| The first Christians did not need to write any Scriptures, they accepted as inspired and as their own, the Tanak, the Jewish Scriptures. Those are the texts that the Lord Jesus and His apostles read, memorized discussed and prayed. These Scriptures as we saw in the previous blog bore witness to Jesus as Messiah and Lord (John 5:39-46; Luke 24:10-49). And from the beginning, the Christians believed Christ fulfilled all of the prophecies and promises of the Jewish Scriptures. The New Testament is filled with quotes from the Old Testament as well as countless echoes of the ideas and themes presented in them. The Christians, however, besides reading the Jewish Scriptures, were writing materials, and by the early 2nd Century, Christians are already also referring to these early writings as Scripture. As far as we know, in the Christian epistle known as 2 Clement we encounter “… the first Christian writer to apply the term ‘Scripture’ to a quotation from the Gospel: ‘And also another Scripture (graphê) says, “I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners” ’ (2 Clem. 2.4 citing Mt. 9:13; Mk 2:17), thereby assigning biblical status to the words of Jesus and granting them the same dignity and authority as the Old Testament. The same idea is implicit in the phrase: ‘The Bible and the Apostles indicate …’ (2 Clem. 14.2), where ‘Bible’ refers to the Septuagint and ‘the Apostles’ to the New Testament.” (Geza Vermes, Christian Beginnings , Kindle Loc. 2974-80) Not only were the Christians beginning to recognize as authoritative Scripture the apostolic writings, they also were interpreting the existing Jewish Scriptures increasingly from a Christian point of view. The Christians began to claim to have the correct understanding of the Jewish Scriptures – the Scriptures were written about the Christ, and properly interpreted in Christ. For the followers of Jesus the curse of Amos 8:11-12 was finally lifted, for once again the People of God were able to hear the Word of God in Christ Jesus. |
| Archpastoral Greetings with the Resurrection of Christ 2015, from Constantinople and Beyond By God’s Mercy Archbishop of Constantinople-New Rome and Ecumenical Patriarch To the Plenitude of the Church Grace, Peace and Mercy from Christ, who has Risen in Glory Brother concelebrants and beloved children in the Lord, Christ is Risen! All Orthodox Christians once again this year joyously celebrate The Resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ and chant: “We celebrate the death of death, the destruction of Hades, and the beginning of another, eternal way of living. And so we jubilantly praise the Cause.” (Troparion from the Paschal Canon). Yet, while we gladly celebrate the Lord’s Resurrection as the reality of life and hope, all around us in the world, we can hear the cries and threats of death launched in many parts of the planet by those who believe that they can resolve human conflicts by destroying their enemies, which in itself constitutes the greatest proof of their weakness. For, by causing the death of another, by taking revenge on our neighbor, on whosoever differs from us, neither is the world improved nor are our problems solved. After all, as everyone – especially the intellectual people of all periods—admits and recognizes, evil is never overcome by evil, but always by good. Problems are genuinely resolved when we acknowledge and acclaim the value of every human person and when we respect their rights. By contrast, all kinds of problems are created and exacerbated when we despise human beings and violate their rights, especially when it comes to the vulnerable, who must feel secure, while the powerful must be just in order for peace to exist. Therefore, Christ arose from the dead and demonstrated in this way as well the inability of death to prevail and bring about any stable change in the world. The various situations caused by death can be reversed because, despite how things appear, they are always temporary, having no root or vitality, whereas Christ, who has forever conquered death, is invisibly always present. |
| This Great Lent let us be thankful as we serve joyfully without complaint. Jesus’ visit to the home of Martha and Mary in Bethany teaches us a great deal about joyful service and the power of our thoughts, whether positive or negative, to shape our day. In this Gospel account, we learn that we can give glory to God in the little things we do for one another. In this encounter, Jesus invites Martha to renew her mind (Ephesians 4:23-24), taxed with negative thinking, and illuminate her thoughts with the thought of Him by rejoicing, praying, and giving thanks to God for the opportunity to serve her Lord. Martha felt alone, unheard, and unappreciated. She was distracted with much serving and was worried and troubled about many things while her sister Mary sat at Christ’s feet and heard His word. Martha cried out to the Lord for help. The Gospel tells us that Martha approached Jesus and asked Him if He didn’t care that her sister had left her alone to serve. She begged Jesus to tell Mary to get up from His feet and help her. Jesus answered, “Martha, Martha, you are worried and troubled about many things. But one thing is needed, and Mary has chosen the better part, which will not be taken away from her.” (Luke 10:41-42) What is this better part Mary chose? Was it wrong for Martha to be focused on completing her household responsibilities while Jesus was visiting? What do these two sisters and their encounter with Christ teach us? Jesus said that He came to serve and not to be served. (Matthew 20:28) Therefore, the wrong Martha committed could not have been with serving as such. Rather, as Martha was setting the table, pouring the water, mending the food, sweeping the floor, and welcoming guests- all beautiful and necessary things by the way- her mind was worried and her heart was troubled. Mary chose the better part because she was present to Christ, but Martha could have chosen the best part by being present to Christ whilst seeing her tasks as her divine calling and sacred service. |
| Church Reading: A Vital Ministry Liturgical Life Last Updated: Feb 8th, 2011 - 05:50:02 Church Reading: A Vital Ministry By Dn. Sergius Halvorsen Jan 16, 2010, 10:00 Discuss this article Printer friendly page Source: PSALM: Pan-Orthodox Society for the Advancement of Liturgical Music Orthodox Christian liturgy is an encounter with the incarnate Word of God, made possible through intelligible worship that touches us through every human sense: sight, smell, hearing, touch, and taste. Yet, when we consider all the elements that comprise Orthodox liturgy—including processions, icons, incensations, making the sign of the cross, prostrations—the balance of worship is conducted through language. It is through the God-given gift of human language that we hear the Good News, the Gospel of Jesus Christ; that we sing the liturgical texts, the psalms, the troparia, and the Creed; and that we pray and encounter Jesus Christ, the Incarnate Word of God. At the epiclesis (the calling down of the Holy Spirit upon God " s people and the gifts of bread and wine) in the anaphora of the Divine Liturgy, we pray along with the priest, " Again we offer unto Thee this reasonable and bloodless worship. " The Greek word here translated as " reasonable " or " rational " is logikein, which comes from the root logos, the same word used by the evangelist in referring to Jesus Christ as the Word of God (John 1:10). Logikein refers to the human ability to think, know, and understand—the rational ability that sets human beings, made in God " s image and likeness, apart from irrational creatures. In short, one of the most characteristic facets of humanity is our ability to think, understand, and communicate through language. Thus, the Liturgy is not magic; when we gather for worship, we are not casting a spell. Rather we offer our thanksgiving, our eucharistia, to God through intelligible words. The primary task of the church reader is to proclaim the Word of God, and thus help facilitate the celebration of the Good News of Jesus Christ. |
| Church Reading: A Vital Ministry Sometimes people say, " I am just a reader, " as though this were a petty or insignificant ministry. However, when the reader (whether tonsured or not) begins chanting the selection from the Acts or the Epistles, he or she is performing an evangelical ministry that is absolutely essential to the celebration of the Divine Liturgy, and as such it demands the same care and preparation as any other liturgical ministry. Orthodox Christian liturgy is an encounter with the incarnate Word of God, made possible through intelligible worship that touches us through every human sense: sight, smell, hearing, touch, and taste. Yet, when we consider all the elements that comprise Orthodox liturgy—including processions, icons, incensations, making the sign of the cross, prostrations—the balance of worship is conducted through language. It is through the God-given gift of human language that we hear the Good News, the Gospel of Jesus Christ; that we sing the liturgical texts, the psalms, the troparia, and the Creed; and that we pray and encounter Jesus Christ, the Incarnate Word of God. At the epiclesis (the calling down of the Holy Spirit upon God’s people and the gifts of bread and wine) in the anaphora of the Divine Liturgy, we pray along with the priest, “Again we offer unto Thee this reasonable and bloodless worship.” The Greek word here translated as “reasonable” or “rational” is logikein, which comes from the root logos, the same word used by the evangelist in referring to Jesus Christ as the Word of God (John 1:10). Logikein refers to the human ability to think, know, and understand—the rational ability that sets human beings, made in God’s image and likeness, apart from irrational creatures. In short, one of the most characteristic facets of humanity is our ability to think, understand, and communicate through language. Thus, the Liturgy is not magic; when we gather for worship, we are not casting a spell. Rather we offer our thanksgiving, our eucharistia, to God through intelligible words. The primary task of the church reader is to proclaim the Word of God, and thus help facilitate the celebration of the Good News of Jesus Christ. |
| John Anthony McGuckin Chrismation SERGEY TROSTYANSKIY Chrismation is the second sacrament of the Orthodox Church, part of the initiation (baptismal) mysteries. Through Chrismation one is anointed with specially consecrated oil of myrrh ( Ex. 30.25 ) in order to receive the gift of the “Seal of the Holy Spirit.” In Orthodoxy Chrismation normally takes place immediately after the baptism of water. It is an organic part of the baptismal mystery and is performed as its fulfillment. Chrismation conforms the initiate to Christ, “the anointed one” and opens the door to deification, in Christ, by the transfiguring grace of the Holy Spirit, who is the Illuminator and Sanctifier. St. Cyril of Jerusalem, in his baptismal catecheses of the 4th century, noted that by becoming partakers of Christ we are called “Christs,” since we receive the anti-type of the gift of the Holy Spirit. Thus, after being baptized with the sanctified waters, one receives this anti-type in the form of Chrismation, the same Holy Spirit with which the Savior was anointed in his earthly ministry by the Father. The sealing of the believer with Holy Chrism renders them into prophets, priests, and kings. The ancients widely practiced two types of anointing: social anointing and symbolic anointing. The Scriptures present the first type of anointing as being performed primarily as a sign of hospitality. In addition it was performed for healing purposes and also for the preparation of the dead for burial. In the two evangelical stories of the anointing of Jesus, the first concerning Jesus in the house of Simon the Pharisee ( Lk. 7.38–50 ) and the other relating the sign Mary of Bethany gave ( Jn. 12.3 ), we can see several of these strands coming together (also with allusions to the other type of anointing symbol). The sinful woman anoints Jesus when his host has neglected that honor, and he accepts it as a symbol of the redemption God brings through love. The anointing Mary offers (which carries overtones ofmessianic status) is rebuffed as a messianic symbol and accepted as a symbol of burial precisely because the evangelist knows that no human can ever anoint Jesus as the Messiah, rather it is a gift of the Father. For this reason, when the myrrh-bearing women come to anoint the Lord, they are unable to achieve their goal: in his resurrection the mysteries of glorification have already taken place. |
| Epistle of Patriarch Kirill and the Holy Synod on the Occasion of the 1,030th Anniversary of the Baptism of Rus’ Source: Official Website of the Moscow Patriarchate Epistle of His Holiness Patriarch Kirill and the Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church to the archpastors, clergy, monastics, and laity on the occasion of the 1,030th anniversary of the Baptism of Rus’ This document was adopted at the July 14, 2018 session of the Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church. Baptism of Rus’ Blessed is the Lord Jesus Christ Who came to love new people, the Russian land and enlightened it with holy baptism (Tale of Bygone Years) Beloved in the Lord eminent archpastors, all-honourable presbyters and deacons, God-loving monks and nuns, dear brothers and sisters: Today the plenitude of our Church is commemorating the Holy Grand Prince Vladimir, Equal-to-the-Apostles, and recalling with gratitude how 1030 years ago, thanks to this chosen man, mighty in spirit, a watershed event in the history of the Slavic peoples took place. By the action of the Omnibenevolent Holy Spirit, the Prince freed himself from pagan delusions, embraced in faith the Only-Begotten Son of God Jesus Christ and, having received the holy Baptism with his brothers-in-arms, brought the salvific light of the Gospel to Rus’. Why do we call the Baptism of Russia the watershed in the history of our peoples? We do so because it changed forever the entire Slavic civilization and predestined the further course of its development. It was indeed the decisive turn from darkness to light, from wandering in the dark of false ideas to finding the divinely revealed truth and salvation. The Generous Lord the Lover of mankind granted us the unrivalled mercy and great happiness – the possibility to belong to the Orthodox Church, to make up One Body of Christ and to partake of the inexhaustible “spring of water welling up to eternal life” (Jn 4:14). Thus, we “are no longer strangers and sojourners, but… are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus Himself being the cornerstone” (Eph 2:19-20). |
| John Anthony McGuckin Nestorianism TENNY THOMAS The doctrine that emerged from the christo- logical controversies of the 5th century, ascribed to Nestorius of Constantinople, that there were two separate persons in Christ, one human and one divine: the man Jesus and the divine Logos. Nestorianism grew out of the Christology developed at the school of Antioch by Diodore of Tarsus (d. before 394) and Theodore of Mopsuestia (ca. 350–428). Nestorius himself, arguably, did not actually teach a two separate person Christology as much as he was “heard” to teach one by the Alexandrian theologians. He himself was under the impression that he was representing the traditional Christol- ogy of Syria as exemplified in Diodore’s and Theodore’s Christologies, which stressed the need to preserve the distinct integrity of the two natures (divine and human) in Christ. One of the critical issues of the era was the lack of a distinct terminology for “Person,” which was to be worked out in this dispute for the benefit of the wider church, introducing technical terms into the Christian theological vocabulary such as persona, prosopon, hypostasis, and physis. Diodore and Theodore followed a tradition of historical exegesis very different from the allegorical tradition of the School of Alexandria. Diodore presented Christ as subsisting in two natures, human and divine. The images of temple and priest were central to this school’s Christology. In the womb of Mary, the Logos had fashioned a temple for himself, in which he dwelt. This temple, the man Jesus, was the subject reference of Christ’s human experiences of suffering. The full divinity of the Logos, he thought, was thus protected from any hint of dimin- ishment. This idea was first developed by the Syrians against the heresies of Arius and Apollinaris. In refuting the christological monism that was Apollinarism, Diodore leaned heavily towards an opposing emphasis that at the time of the incarnation and after it, the divine and human natures of Jesus Christ were distinctly separate to such an extent that there was never an admixture or a union possible. This was meant to stress that the natures, created and uncreated, could not be confused, but it tended to underplay the sense in which the two natures dynamically interacted in the Lord’s incarnation, and left unsaid in what medium they interacted. |
|
|
