| It is only gradually that mankind enters into Communion with Him and so gives a new fulness to His work, which thereby attains its full accomplishment (Explan. Of Ep. To Ephes. M. 1893, 2. pp. 93–94. For the same point of view, cf. the late Very Rev. J. Armitage Robinson, St. Paul’s Epistle to the Ephesians, pp. 44–45, I. 403; short ed. pp. 57–60). The Church is completeness itself; it is the continuation and the fulfilment of the theanthropic union. The Church is transfigured and regenerated mankind. The meaning of this regeneration and transfiguration is that in the Church mankind becomes one unity, «in one body» ( Eph. 2:16 ). The life of the Church is unity and union. The body is «knit together» and »increaseth» (Col 2:19) in unity of Spirit, in unity of love. The realm of the Church is unity. And of course this unity is no outward one, but is inner, intimate, organic. It is the unity of the living body, the unity of the organism. The Church is a unity not only in the sense that it is one and unique; it is a unity, first of all, because its very being consists in reuniting separated and divided mankind. It is this unity which is the «sobornost» or catholicity of the Church. In the Church humanity passes over into another plane, begins a new manner of existence. A new life becomes possible, a true, whole and complete life, a catholic life, «in the unity of the Spirit, in the bond of peace ( Eph. 4:3 ). A new existence begins, a new principle of life, «Even as Thou, Father, art in Me, and I in Thee, that they also may be in Us ... that they may be one even as We are one» ( John 17:21–23 ). This is the mystery of the final reunion in the image of the Unity of the Holy Trinity. It is realized in the life and construction of the Church, it is the mystery of sobornost, the mystery of catholicity. The inner quality of catholicity The catholicity of the Church is not a quantitative or a geographical conception. It does not at all depend on the world-wide dispersion of the faithful. |
| It would be easy to fill a book with such quotes from the Fathers, but redundancy would not make the point any clearer than has St Hilary. First, judging from this paragraph, there is no reason to agree with Philo that “philosophical reason” is the “handmaiden of religion” (Preliminary Studies. 7 LC), if only because “philosophy” and “reason” are not understood in the same way by Christians as by Philo and the Greeks: say rather that a regenerated reason is a function of the new life in Christ, with the grace to discern the truth, even as the reason of the Greeks cum sui is a function of the old life in Adam, which has little power to discern it 45 . But why, in this paragraph, does St Hilary call for overcoming “faulty and impious doctrines,” the λογισμος of the philosophers, with the divine γνσις, while refusing to condemn the wisdom of the world in toto? May not “external wisdom” serve the Church? He says in another place (De Trin. V, 1 NPNF) that unregenerate or “natural” reason is “fettered by its limitations, its philosophy confined by the very weakness of natural reason.” If it has found any truth it is “the gift of God” (Ibid., I, 2), the same God Who has become incarnate for our salvation; therefore, unbelievers do not supply the Church with truths she lacks, but her “philosophers” rather recovers from them what was given to them by Providence for a purpose, a purpose which has now been fulfilled. Second, St Hilary spoke of the “warfare” (cf. Ephesians 6), the “rivalry” between the “worldly wisdom,” whose origin is man, and “the heavenly philosophy” which was revealed by God. The wisdom of God, he says, is “mighty through God for the pulling down of strong holds,” meaning her weapons are spiritual, the weapons of grace and love. The “foreign wisdom” is “carnal,” expounded by sinful men who are unable to change the heart, for they themselves are slaves to their appetites. Third, although the wisdom of God is not ultimately fought at the level of human argument, of dialectic, even the “simple Christian” must be “trained in the teaching” of the Faith, if only as a refuge from the “vain deceit” of men. The true religion is not without rational power 46 . |
| Since the illegal acts of Constantinople continue to happen and ideas which distort the Orthodox doctrine of the Church continue to develop, we consider it our duty to remind our lock of the fundamental principles upon which throughout the centuries Orthodox ecclesiology has been built and to witness to the fullness of the Orthodox Church our fidelity to these unchanging principles. It is precisely their violation by the Patriarch of Constantinople Bartholomew that has led to a crisis within worldwide Orthodoxy. 1. The claims by the Patriarch of Constantinople to the primacy of authority over the Universal Church. The Church was founded upon earth by the Lord Jesus Christ. She is the assembly of those who believe in Christ, and the Lord calls each of them to enter into this assembly. The Church is not a conventional human community in that the Holy Spirit is present and acts within her. The Church is a divine-human organism, the mystical Body of Christ, as Saint Paul states: “Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places... And he has put all things under his feet and has made him the head over all things for the church, which is his body, the fullness of him who fills all in all” (Ephesians 1.3, 22-23). The image of the body indicates the unity of all members of the Church under one Head the Lord Jesus Christ (cf.: Colossians, 1.18). The purpose of the Church is the salvation of people and the whole world. Salvation is to be found only within the Church of Christ. As Saint Cyprian of Carthage stated, “he who does not have God as his Father does not have the Church as his mother.” The Creed highlights four essential properties of the Church, which are: that she is one, she is holy, she is catholic and she is apostolic. The Church is one, for God is one. The Church is unitary and one, for she unites all believers through the unity of the faith, of baptism, of the gift of the Holy Spirit and of eucharistic communion with the Lord Jesus Christ. The Church is undivided: “Where Christ is, there is the Church”; “Where the Holy Spirit is, there is the Church.” |
| St Paul, also, in his epistle to the Ephesians, wrote that ‘knowledge in the mystery of Christ which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men…was now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit’ (cf. Eph. 3), and went on to tell them that to him had been given grace to ‘preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ; and to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God.’ So tremendous, so profound is the mystery that even to the ‘principalities and powers in heavenly places the manifold wisdom of God must be made known by the church according to the eternal purpose which the Father purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord: In whom we have boldness and access with confidence by the faith of him.’ In our day non-Christian mysticism attracts many who despair at the banality and emptiness of the contemporary scene. They are ignorant of the true essence of Christianity. Christianity entails suffering; but through suffering we penetrate the mysteries of Being. Suffering makes it possible to comprehend one’s own humanity and freedom. In times of distress the Christian remembers that ‘the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain’ (Rom. 8.22) and his spirit is conscious of the same life flowing through all of us. To extend the range of our consciousness makes us kin with millions of fellow-beings scattered over the face of the earth. An enhanced recognition of human suffering begets intense prayer which transfers all things into the realm of the spirit. I once read a newspaper account of an engineer testing the jet engine of a ‘plane who carelessly stepped into the air stream which caught and lifted him high off the ground. Seeing what had happened, his assistant quickly switched off the engine. The mechanic fell to the ground, dead. Something similar happens to the man of prayer: after being caught up into another sphere he returns to earth ‘dead’ to much that is of this world. A new life full of light has manifested itself in him, and now the infantile pastimes which occupy the vast majority cease to hold any interest or attraction for him. If we assess the quality of life not by the sum of agreeable psycho-physical sensations but by the extent of our awareness of the realities of the universe and, above all, of the First and Last Truth, we shall understand what lay behind Christ’s words, ‘My peace I give unto you’ — said to the disciples a few hours before His death on the cross. The essence of Christ’s peace lies in His perfect knowledge of the Father. So it is with us: if we know the Eternal Truth all the torments of this life will be confined, as it were, to the periphery of our being, while the light of life proceeding from the father will reign within us. |
| The Christians in Rome who witness his execution gather his bodily remains, which they then take away for his flock in Antioch. The relics of Ignatius are treasured because of “the grace which was in the martyr,” and miracles are attributed to his fervent intercessions soon after. Again, this took place at the end of the first (or beginning of the second) century. Ever since, the Church has venerated St. Ignatius on the 20th of December, the day of his martyrdom. Another early saint of note is Polycarp, also a disciple of John (ca. A.D. 69–155). The beloved apostle appoints Polycarp as bishop of Smyrna, and he too would die a martyr. For the sake of our present discussion, it is on his life—and not his death—that I wish to focus. In the Life of Polycarp (ch. 20), the martyrdom of another Christian is mentioned: So having taken the body of the blessed [martyr] Bucolus to Smyrna to the cemetery in front of the Ephesian Royal gate—placing it where recently a myrtle tree had sprung up after the burial of the body of Thraseas the Martyr—when all was over, they offered bread [the Eucharist] for Bucolus and the rest. Note the miraculous myrtle tree, growing immediately from the place where another martyr Thraseas had been buried. In his edition of this hagiography (p. 150), Alistair Stewart-Sykes notes that the body of Thraseas was actually taken from the place of his initial burial to the cemetery in Smyrna—the first recorded example of the “translation” of a saint’s relics. The translation of relics is an important event in the life of a Saint still commemorated by the Church. The most recent example of note would be the Vatican’s return of the relics of Ss. John Chrysostom and Gregory the Theologian back to the Ecumenical Patriarchate in 2004. These relics were stolen during the Fourth Crusade. Here also is an early example of the celebration of the Eucharist upon the tomb of a martyr. A related practice was the depositio ad sanctos , or the burying of a reposed Christian adjacent to the relics of a martyred saint, showing reverence for the holiness of even the dirt surrounding their bones ( The Cult of the Saints , p. 11). Shrines were built for the relics of martyrs, and liturgies were offered in their presence on at least an annual basis; typically, on the anniversary of their martyrdom. This was being done by as early as the second century (e.g. Tertullian, On Exhortation to Chastity 11; cf. St. Augustine, Confessions 6.2.2). |
| The new reality The Greek name ekklesia adopted by the primitive Christians to denote the New Reality, in which they were aware they shared, presumed and suggested a very definite conception of what the Church really was. Adopted under an obvious influence of the Septuagint use, this word stressed first of all the organic continuity of the two Covenants. The Christian existence was conceived in the sacred perspective of the Messianic preparation and fulfilment (Heb. 1:1–2). A very definite theology of history was thereby implied. The Church was the true Israel, the new Chosen People of God, «A chosen generation, a holy nation, a peculiar people» ( 1Pet. 2:9 ). Or rather, it was the faithful Remnant, selected out of the unresponsive People of old (Luke 12:32 «little flock» seems to mean precisely the «remnant,» reconstituted and redeemed, and reconsecrated). And all nations of the earth, Greeks and Barbarians, were to be coopted and grafted into this new People of God by the call of God (this was the main theme of St. Paul in Romans and Galatians, cf. Ephesians ch. 2). Already in the Old Testament the word ekklisía (a rendering in Greek of the Hebrew Qahal) did imply a special emphasis on the ultimate unity of the Chosen People, conceived as a sacred whole, and this unity was rooted more in the mystery of the divine election than in any «natural» features. This emphasis could only be confirmed by the supplementary influence of the Hellenistic use of the word ekklesía meaning usually an assembly of the sovereign people in a city, a general congregation of all regular citizens. Applied to the new Christian existence, the word kept its traditional connotation. The Church was both the People and the City. A special stress has been put on the organic unity of Christians. Christianity from the very beginning existed as a corporate reality, as a community. To be Christian meant just to belong to the community. Nobody could be Christian by himself, as an isolated individual, but only together with «the brethren,» in a «togetherness» with them. |
| The purpose of fasting is to gain mastery over oneself and to conquer the passions of the flesh. It is to liberate oneself from dependence on the things of this world in order to concentrate on the things of the Kingdom of God. It is to give power to the soul so that it would not yield to temptation and sin. According to Saint Seraphim of Sarov, fasting is an indispensable means of gaining the fruit of the Holy Spirit in one‘s life, and Jesus Himself taught that some forms of evil cannot be conquered without it (St. Matthew 17:21; St. Mark 9:20). Man does not fast because it pleases God if His servants do not eat, for, as the Lenten hymns of the Church remind us, the devil also never eats. Neither do men fast in order to afflict themselves with suffering and pain for God has no pleasure in the discomfort of His people. Neither do men fast with the idea that their hunger and thirst can somehow serve as a reparation for their sins. Such an understanding is never given in the Holy Scripture or the holy writings of the Fathers of the Church which claim that there is no reparation for man‘s sin but the crucifixion of Christ. Salvation is a free gift of God which no works of man can accomplish of merit (cf. Romans 5:15-17; Ephesians 2:8-9). Tweet Donate Share Code for blog External Observance Or Internal Realities Protopresbyter George D. Konstantopoulos Fasting, vigil, and prayer, and all other Christian practices, however good they maybe in themselves, do not constitute the aim of our Christian life, although they serve as the indispensable means of reaching this end. The aim, or end, we are seeking is our salvation; the means to salvation is a ... Since you are here… …we do have a small request. More and more people visit Orthodoxy and the World website. However, resources for editorial are scarce. In comparison to some mass media, we do not make paid subscription. It is our deepest belief that preaching Christ for money is wrong. Having said that, Pravmir provides daily articles from an autonomous news service, weekly wall newspaper for churches, lectorium, photos, videos, hosting and servers. Editors and translators work together towards one goal: to make our four websites possible - Pravmir.ru, Neinvalid.ru, Matrony.ru and Pravmir.com. Therefore our request for help is understandable. |
| Оп the Sanctity of Marriage Let us join in prayer that the people of faith across the states of New York and New Jersey will continue to stand fast in the divinely revealed truth of what marriage means. And let us by our example witness to the life of chastity to which every human person, made in the image and likeness of God, is called. June 24, 2011 Feast of the Nativity of Saint John the Baptist Beloved Fathers and Mothers, Brothers and Sisters in the Lord: Christ is in our midst! – He is and ever shall be! On this very day, we have witnessed the successful efforts of public officials in the State of New York to legally re-define the meaning of marriage to include unions between two persons of the same gender. It is important for us, as Christians of the Orthodox Church, preserving the Tradition of teaching the truth handed down by the Lord Himself, “the faith which was once for all delivered to the Saints” (Jude 3), to re-affirm the meaning of marriage given to us in His Sacred Scripture. In the document, Affirmations on Marriage, Family, Sexuality, and the Sanctify of Life, written and adopted by the Holy Synod of Bishops of the Orthodox Church in America in 1992, we read (in part) the following summary of the teaching of our Faith on this matter: 1) God wills that men and women marry, becoming husbands and wives. He commands them to increase and multiply in the procreation of children, being joined into “one flesh” by His divine grace and love. He wills that human beings live within families (Genesis 1:27; 2:21-24; Orthodox Marriage Service). 2) The Lord went even further to declare that people who look at others to lust after them in their hearts have “committed adultery” (cf. Matthew 5:27-30). 3) Christ’s apostles repeat the teachings of their Master, likening the unique marriage between one man and one woman to the union between Christ and His Church which they experience as the Lord’s very body and His bride (Ephesians 5:21-33; 2 Corinthians 11:2). 4) Marriage and family life are to be defended and protected against every open and subtle attack and ridicule. |
| Павел в Ефесе. Во время третьего миссионерского путешествия Павел прибыл в великий город Ефес, где основал общину народа Божьего ( Деян.19:1-7 ). Описание Лукой трехгодичной деятельности (ср. 20:31) апостола в этом месте оказалось точным во многих деталях. Например, Ефес был известен как центр суеверий и магических искусств (ср. 19:19). Ф.Ф. Брюс отмечал, что в произведениях древности выражение Ephesia grammata («ефесские письмена») обычно употреблялось в отношении документов, содержавших чары и магические заклинания, наподобие длинным магическим папирусам, которые можно найти в собраниях в Лондоне, Париже и Лейдене. В Ефесе был храм богине Артемиде (Диане), и мы вспоминаем, что Димитрий, серебряных дел мастер, очень расстроился по поводу проповеди Павла, говоря: «Этот Павел своими убеждениями совратил немалое число людей, говоря, что делаемые руками человеческими не суть боги; А это нам угрожает тем, что не только ремесло наше придет в презрение, но и храм великой богини Артемиды ничего не будет значить, и испровергнется величие той, которую почитает вся Асия и вселенная» ( Деян.19:26,27 ). Серебряные монеты, обнаруженные в различных местах, показывают истинность утверждения о том, что богиня Ефеса почиталась во всем древнем мире. На них содержится надпись Diana Ephesia(cp. 19:34). Вследствие этих обвинений город был охвачен волнениями, и огромная толпа устремилась в театр (ст. 29). Этот огромный театр, где происходили волнения, был расположен на пологом склоне горы Пион. В диаметре он составлял 150 метров. Места в нем были разделены на три части по двадцать два ряда в каждой, так что он вмещал около 25 000 зрителей. Развалины, которые можно увидеть сегодня, представляют собой реконструкцию, которую провели во времена после Павла, но план этого сооружения сохранился практически без изменений еще со времен апостола. Кроме того, согласно повествованию Луки в девятнадцатой главе Книги Деяний, «городской писарь» (см. СПБТ), или «грамма-тевс», секретарь (см. ПК), успокоил беснующуюся толпу. Надписи, обнаруженные археологами, показали, что grammateus «был главным официальным лицом в городе, непосредственно ответственный перед Римом за такие нарушения спокойствия, как незаконное собрание». |
| 746 Краткий обзор мнений современных ученых по проблеме авторства Послания к Евреям см. в: Ткаченко A.A., иером. Николай (Сахаров). Евреям послание. С.231–233. Мнение об анонимном характере послания высказывается, в частности, в кн.: Buchanan G.W. To the Hebrews. P.XIX-XXX; Thompson J.W. Hebrews. P. 4–6; Phillips R.D. Hebrews. P.6–7, 621–622. 749 См., в частности: Roon A., van. The Authenticity of Ephesians. P.215 (признает гипотезу «секретаря»); Scott E.F. The Epistles of PauI to the Colossians, to Philemon and to the Ephesians. P.121 ff.; Bruce F.F. The Epistle to the Ephesians. P.229–246; Barth M. Ephesians 1–3. P.37–50; Hoehner H.W. Ephesians. P.60–61; Arnold C.E. Ephesians. P.46–50; Merkte B.I. Ephesians. P.3–7; в пользу аутентичности в: Reicke B. Chronologie der Pastoralbriete; Towner Ph.H. The Letters to Timothy and Titus. P.88. Cm. также: Snodgrass K. Ephesians. P.28 (перечисляет проблемы. возникающие в результате мнения о псевдоэпиграфичности Послания к Ефесянам); Witherington В. The Letters to Philemon, the Collosians, and the Ephesians. P.215–223 (считает, что Послание к Ефесянам было не посланием, а проповедью, указывает на отличия от стиля других посланий Павла, но склоняется к мнению об авторстве Павла); Williamson P.S. Ephesians, Р.13–15 (считает. что вопрос об авторстве не имеет решающего значения, коль скоро признается внутреннее единство Священного Писания). 750 См.: Schmid J. Der Epheserbrief; Pokorn P. Der Epheserbrief: Gnilka ,/. Der Epheserbrief: Dibelius M., Greeven H., eds. An die Kolosser, Epheser: Pervo R.I. The Making of Paul. P.71–77: Lincoln A.T. Ephesians. P.LIX-LXXIII. Аргументы против авторства Павла развиваются в работах: Merz A. Die fiktive Selbstauslegung des Paulus. S.72–86; Kümmel W.G. Einleitung. S.326; Краткий обзор дискуссии вокруг авторства Послания к Ефесянам см. в: Ткаченко А.А., Неклюдов К.В. Ефесянам послание. С.10–11. 751 Против подлинности обоих посланий см„ в частности: Brown R. An Introduction to the New Testament. P.592–594, 610–617: Pervo R.I. The Making of Paul. P.64–71, 77–83: в защиту их подлинности: Köstenberger А., Scott Kellum L., Quarles Ch.L. The Cradle, the Cross, and the Crown. P.432–445, 600–610. В защиту подлинности Второго послания к Фессалоникийцам см. также: Weima J.A.D. 1–2 Thessalonians. Р.46–54 (содержит подробный критический разбор высказываний против подлинности); Simpson J.W. Thessalonians. P.937. B защиту подлинности Послания к Колоссянам см.: Seitz Ch.R. Colossians. P. 21–50; O’Brien P.T. Colossians. P.150–152; против подлинности: Wilson T. The Hope of Glogy. P.14–50. Краткий обзор мнений относительно авторства Послания к Колоссянам см. в: Пономарев А.В., Калинин Μ.Г. Колоссянам послание. С.416–417. |
|
|
