| Introduction For well over fifty years now, and in virtually every country in Western Europe, that is in countries with a millennium of Catholic-Protestant culture, small numbers of Western Europeans have been joining one or other of the local dioceses of the Orthodox Church. In general it can be said that the numbers joining have been higher in the less traditional and more Protestant countries and lower in traditional Catholic countries like Italy, Spain and Portugal. And numbers have been much higher among more uprooted and cosmopolitan city-dwellers than among more traditional country-dwellers. Here there is something to do with spiritual degeneration. Though there is a detailed thesis here, the full story of this Europe-wide movement has yet to be written – probably because it has so far been very marginal. In some countries, especially small ones like Ireland, Denmark, Norway, Austria and Luxembourg, where also there has been relatively little immigration from ‘Orthodox countries’ until recent years, numbers of native Orthodox are tiny, often a few dozen at most. In other countries, especially larger ones like Germany , France and Great Britain , which have also received more immigrants from ‘Orthodox countries’ in Eastern Europe, numbers of native Orthodox rise into the low thousands. Indeed, the process has been under way for so long that in all these countries we can find adults who are second and third generation Orthodox of purely Western European origin. Some of the first generation are now elderly and have been members of the Orthodox Church for between forty years and seventy years. Some have been present for between twenty and forty years. Others are newcomers who have entered into communion with the Church more recently, only over the last twenty years. On the surface, it might seem that there are today anything between 10,000 and 20,000 native Orthodox living in Western Europe. (Here we exclude those who have already passed on). However, such a high figure is very misleading because in order to understand real numbers we have to look at the motivations of those who have joined the Orthodox Church in Western Europe, sociological and not spiritual motivations which sadly have resulted in a majority of those received and their descendants lapsing from the Faith. |
| In Evangelium Lucas, fg. 1–5 (M.), 1285–88. De dignitate sacerdotali (M.), 1287–88. Præfatio Gretser, 27–32. Notitia FH., 9–26, Gretser, 31–34. Index analiticus (in Hodegum et quæstiones), 1863–70. ANATOLIUS LAODICENUS ep., s. III, 10. Canon Paschalis (Bucherius), 209–22. Ex libris arithmeticorum (FH.), fg. 231–36. Bucherii in Canonem Paschalem commentarius, 221–32. Natitia G., 207–10. ANCHIALUS. Vide MICHAEL A. ANDREAS CÆSAREÆ Capp. ep., s, VI, 106. Commentarius in Apocalypsin, 215–458, Præfatio Peliani, 207–12. Notæ Ft. Sylburgii, 457–86. Capita Apocalypseos, 211–6. Notitia Oudin, 199–208. Monitum Migne, 7–8. Index græcitatis, 1387–94. Index analyticus, 1395–1412. ANDREAS CRETENSIS, arch., s. VII-VIII, 97. Orationes 1–21. ex editione G. el Combefis, juxta ordinem analogicum dispositæ, 1–4. In Nativitatem В. M. V,, 805–20, 819–44, 843–62, 861–82. 5 . In Annuntiationem, 881–914. 6 . In Circumcisionem Domini et in S. Basilium, 913–32. 7 . In Transfigurationem Domini, 931–58. 8 . In Lazarum quatriduanum, 959–86. 9 . In ramos Palmarum, 985–1018. 10–11. In exaltationem S. Crucis, 1017–36, 1035–46. 12–14. In dormitionem S. Mariæ, 1045–72, 1071–90; 1089–1110. 15 . In S. Joannis decollation em, 1109–42. 16 . In apost. Titum, 1141–70. 17 .In S. Georgium, 1169–92. 18 .In S. Nicolaum, 1191–1206. 19 .In S. Patapium, 1205–34 et 1235–54. 20 .In Publicanum et Pharisæum, 1255–68. 21 .De humana vita et de defunctis, 1267–1302. De SS. Imaginum veneratione (Boissonade), 1301–4. De cyclo solari et lunari (Petavius), 18, 1329–34. Canones præcipui et triodia (Combefis), , 97. 1 . In В. Annæ conceptionem, 1305–16. 2 . In B. Mariæ natalem,315–30. 3 . Magnus canon, 1329–86. 4 . In Lazarum, 1385–98. 5 . Triodia majoris hebdomadæ, 1399–1420. 6 . Canon in mediam Pentecosten, 1421–34. 7 . Idiomela 1–6, 1433–38. 8 . Iambi ad Agathonem (G.), 1437–44. Notitia G., 789–92; FH., 791–804. Index initiorum horn., FH., 801–4. Index analyticus, 1645–54. ANDREAS SAMOSATENSIS ep., s. V, 85. Epistolæ 1–10, in Synodico, 84, с 43, 59, 62, 63, 82, 90, 98, 101, 103, 106. |
| Both Greek and Jewish mystics sought to contemplate and experience the divine, and John probably invites his hearers to do the same in Jesus (cf. 14:8–9); but the earthly images suggest an intimacy not limited to philosophers or mystics. Eating and drinking Jesus, depending on him like branches in the vine, suggest that Christ is the very life of his followers, and all their welfare derives from his indwelling (cf. 14:19,23; 15:4–5). The idea probably stems from the intense experience of the Spirit attested throughout the earliest Christian sources 2747 and resembles the ideals of the earliest NT writer ( Rom 8:9 ; Gal 2:20 ; Phil 1:21 ; cf. Eph 3:16–17 ; Col 1:27, 29; 3:16). Whatever the symbolic value of the images by themselves (e.g., bread as Torah), their cumulative impact evokes organic images with which all hearers were familiar. They also suggest that John connected Christology closely with early Christian experience. Conclusion regarding Christology Johannine Christology is among the most exalted in the NT, but its portrayal of Christ " s subordination to the Father is equally sharp. Taken together, the emphasis of these various strands suggests their polemical function: one could not deny Jesus» Lordship while truly following God the Father, as the synagogue leadership claimed to do. Jesus was the Father " s appointed agent, greater than Moses and the prophets, and rejecting him was tantamount to rejecting the one who sent him. Many elements for this portrait appear in less developed form in earlier Jesus tradition, although John has employed and developed that tradition in distinctive ways. Some Other Johannine Themes Most themes in John will be treated only as they present themselves in the commentary, since each relevant passage further develops the theme in question. For example, we treat the «witness» motif at John 1:6–8 and pneumatology passim, and focus on several sample themes here only. Many of these themes have been treated in various monographs, such as Segoviás treatment of the love commandment. Here we will comment briefy on realized eschatology in the Fourth Gospel, then still more briefly on the themes of love, faith, life, and the «world.» |
| What do we know about the sixth continent other than that it is the abode of penguins and polar explorers, and that endless icebergs move around its shores like “ice mountains”, as they were called by the sailors on the “Mirny” and the “Vostok”, who discovered Antarctica? Many have heard something about the warm lake Vostok, conserved under three kilometers of ice, perhaps even retaining examples of flora and fauna that disappeared from the face of the earth eons ago, others may have read of the mythical Nazi base 211 hidden between the layers of ice on Queen Maude Land. In general Antarctica is shrouded in “ominous secrets”, and publications on these secrets have increased in recent decades. Aside from all this, the polar explorers themselves, in the words of Hieromonk Pavel (Gelyastanov) of Moscow’s Novo-Spassky Monastery who spent a year there, are skeptical about all these secrets. But this does not diminish the icy continent’s dark and menacing aura. And whether or not there really are gigantic quarries photographed by satellite in the seas of Bellinghausen, Admunsen, and Ross, with fireballs shooting out of the Earth’s longitudinal lines and leaving smoldering corpses in the snow, the icy continent remains a white spot in the direct as well as figurative sense. The traveller who finds himself, not even on the continent, but at its threshold on one of its islands, feels like he’s on another planet; a planet where a steel rod shatters into pieces when it slips out of your hands in temperatures seventy below Celsius, and an incautious breath can frostbite your lungs; where the lights of the stations that lie beyond lengthy mounds shine an eerie green, and you can slice the kerosene with a knife like an aspic. It’s like outer space here, where anything can happen; and a winter here differs little from a stay on a space station or in the Martian desert. King George Island, called “Waterloo” by Bellinghausen (Russian sailors, veterans of the Napoleonic wars, named the lands they discovered after famous battlefields), which has the least harsh climate, is called by the polar explorers, “the resort”. But even it is not without danger, even during the Antarctic summer, which comes in January-February. |
| Yes, quite often repentance is understood as self-flagellation and self-condemnation, consistent long-term and extremely painful (which is a prerequisite) admitting oneself to being completely and absolutely wrong and very bad. A significant part of penitential prayers is based on such rhetoric, sometimes using exceptionally strong imagery: “ For just like a swine lying in the mud, so I serve sin”, “From sullied lips, from an abominable heart, from a tongue impure, from a soul defiled”, etc. Everyone who read it remembers. It entered the language, into the mass consciousness. When one reads about someone “repenting”, one imagines how they beat themselves in the chest, tear their shirt, knock their head on the ground, in other words they are humiliated in every possible way and suffer. Suffer terribly. Actually, a strong connection has formed in people’s minds that “repentance” equals “suffering”. Everyone remembers Eustace the Dragon from the “Chronicles of Narnia” whose skin was peeled off and everyone remembers that he was in pain too. There is even an idea, which is usually not expressed aloud, that the more painful is the better. Repentance is thus more effective. The more you treat yourself like dirt and the harder you criticize yourself is the better. It means that you have repented. No, we, of course, all read that repentance is a joyful process, some even remember the words “joyful grief”, which sound like something only saints could do, some special people, not us, but someone better. We are left with repentance, which we read like “we are left with suffering”. Everything in the world can be divided into two groups: not even good and bad, but valuable and worthless. The valuable is good in itself, no matter what. In fact, the only valuable one is God, Who is the source of everything precious. Everything else can be valuable in relation to Him. People are of value, because they are loved by God and were redeemed by Him. Even very bad people. Even completely disgusting ones are still valuable. |
| In 1949, the South Korean authorities banished the head of the Mission, Archimandrite Polycarp (Prijmak). Due to certain political reasons, the Mission’s work was suspended and its property was confiscated. Today, when there are no factors preventing missionary and pastoral work in Korea, we can speak of continuation of the work that began long ago. The circumstances of the modern time when a considerable number of the faithful of the Russian Orthodox Church – not only Russians but also citizens of other states under the canonical responsibility of the Russian Orthodox Church – are coming to Asian countries for permanent residence and for temporary business trips, oblige our Church’s authorities to take pastoral care of these people, who do not want to break their spiritual ties with their Church. Thus, in the Republic of Korea alone, the number of registered Russians is about 20 thousand people, and in 2018, some 300 thousand Russian tourists visited South Korea. Evidently, a considerable part of these people wishes to take an active part in church life and to attend divine services celebrated in accordance with the traditions and church calendar adopted in Russia. As for the establishment of a Patriarchal Exarchate in South-East Asia, it is not an innovation either in the history of our Church but rather the rebirth of once existing church structures. In December 1945, the parishes in China and Korea were united into a Metropolis of East Asia, which, by the decree issued by Patriarch Alexis I in 1946, was transformed into an Exarchate of East Asia based in Harbin. The exarchate was abolished by a decision of the Russian Orthodox Church Holy Synod in 1954 due to the circumstances of the time. Today, it has been restored with taking in account the changed conditions. I would say that we had better revive the Russian church structures in Korea earlier. However, when diplomatic relations were established between Russia and South Korea in 1990, the Russian Church in its homeland experienced a difficult period of revival after decades of atheistic captivity. The Russian parishioners who visited the Republic of Korea used to find spiritual support in the existing parishes of the Patriarchate of Constantinople. Nowadays, the Church in Russia is actively developing its missionary service seeking to accompany her faithful in all the life circumstances. The flow of Russian-speaking people to Korea has grown by dozens and perhaps hundreds of times, and the need for the Moscow Patriarchate to open parishes in Korea has clearly ripen. In addition, because the Eucharistic communion with the Patriarchate of Constantinople has been discontinued, our faithful have found themselves in a situation where they have nowhere to go to, the opening of parishes of the Russian Orthodox Church in Korea and other countries of South-East Asia meet their vital need. |
| The Council authorizes the Sacred Synod to organize a Permanent Commission with departments in Russia and abroad for the further study of Old Catholic and Anglican obstacles in the way of union, and for the furtherance, as much as possible, of the speedy attainment of the final aim.” No Commission could be organized in Russia at that time, but the work of Russian theologians in Western Europe in the ecumenical field was in line with the desire and commendation of the Council. 194 In the later period of discussion, the whole ecclesiological problem was brought to the fore. The main issue was: what was the Church Universal? and in what sense do “schisms” belong to the Church? Various answers were given, or often simply taken for granted in advance. Unity of belief does not by itself constitute the corporate reality of the Church, since the Church is a Divine institution. The “Branch-theory” of the Church was obviously unacceptable to the Orthodox. In any case, it minimizes the tragedy of disruption. Again, a schism is not just a human separation: it violates the basic structure of Christian existence. The only alternative available for Orthodox theologians seemed to be this: either separated bodies did not belong to the Church at all, and therefore were, not only historically but also spiritually, outside of it; or they were still, in a certain sense and under special conditions, related to the Church existentially. The latter conception is characteristic of Roman Catholicism, and goes back to St. Augustine; for that very reason many Orthodox would hesitate to accept it. It was, however, held by many Russian theologians, if not quite in the same sense (Philaret; Kireev; Svetlov). Accordingly, the Sacraments were not necessarily reiterated for the non-Orthodox, in the case of conversion, but were understood as having some real charismatic significance even outside of the strict canonical boundaries of the Church. This has been the common practice of the Russian Church in the last centuries. On the other hand, this practice could be interpreted in the light of the theory of “Economy”, which is characteristic of modern Greek theology; in this case, the fact of non-reiteration would not imply any recognition of these non-Orthodox ministrations, and should be interpreted simply as a pastoral dispensation. This point of view had already been represented in Russia by Khomiakov, and in recent times was elaborated with daring radicalism by the late Metropolitan Anthony (Khrapovitsky). He had an occasion to express this view in an ecumenical context, when he was invited to participate in the “Conference on Faith and Order”, in 1914. The delegation of the Planning Committee in the U.S., appointed in 1914, could not go because of the war but invitations were sent to all Orthodox Cheches. In Russia, they were favorably received in high ecclesiastical quarters and some epistolary contacts were established. |
| The title «Spirit of truth» is undoubtedly particularly relevant to the Farewell Discourses because of the earlier identification of Jesus as the truth (14:6). 8720 This again binds the Spirit to Jesus. 4. Coming and Staying (John 14:15–20) If the disciples keep Jesus» commandments (14:15), especially loving one another to the death (13:34–35), he will send them another Advocate to minister for them in his stead (14:16–17). Thus, when Jesus comes to them after the resurrection to give them resurrection life (14:18–19), he will in some sense remain with them–indeed, in them (14:20). Although John presupposes that his audience knows of Jesus» ascension (20:17), like Matthew he does not narrate it because, as in Matthew, Jesus in some sense remains among his people (Matt 28:20). Those who love Jesus keep his commandments (14:15, 21; cf. 21:15); those who keep his commandments will abide more securely in his love (14:21; 15:10). What Jesus describes here is not a formula–it is far too circular for that–but the pattern for a developing relationship. For discussion of the significance of the commandments of 14:15, see comment on 14:21–25. 4A. The Paraclete Brings Jesus» Presence (14:16–17) For discussion of the «Paraclete,» the «Spirit of truth,» and possible legal implications of the image, see the lengthy introductory sections above, pp. 953–71. Of primary significance in these verses is the relation of the Spirit to Jesus; he is «another Paraclete,» Jesus» «successor» (see discussion above). Further, like Jesus, the Spirit may be related in some manner to the image of divine Wisdom in early Jewish sources (see discussion above); if this connection is likely, then just as Jesus» opponents attacked the very divine Word they claimed to uphold, so do the opponents of John " s audience attack what they purport to defend. Later, after Jesus returned and the disciples were empowered, disciples would be able to ask what they wished in Jesus» name (16:26), but until that time they remained dependent on Jesus, who would secure the other Paraclete for them (14:16). Clearly, the Father must authorize the Spirit " s sending (cf. Acts 5:32; 1Pet 1:12 ), but Jesus also plays a direct role in it (15:26; 16:7; cf. 3:34; Luke 24:49). Further, as the Father dwelled in the Son (14:10), so would the Spirit dwell in the disciples (14:17). The remaining of the Spirit with them «forever» (14:16) reflects language familiar in the Johannine circle (cf. 2 John 2 ; perhaps John 8:35 ); just as the Spirit «remained» on Jesus (1:32), the Spirit would remain with the disciples (cf. 1 John 2:27 ). The disciples, ready to lament Jesus» departure, would in fact obtain his continuing presence by the Spirit once he was glorified! |
| A survey of Jesus» «works» in the Fourth Gospel will indicate that these may include miraculous signs (5:20, 36; 7:3; 9:3–4; 10:25, 32–33, 37–38; 15:24) but also his mission as a whole (4:34; 17:4). One might also apply the term to Jesus» ethical deeds (3:19–21; 7:7; 8:39, 41). 8505 Thus Jesus might refer to his followers multiplying his righteous acts because there would be more of them to do them; 8506 thus «keeping commandments» in 14may include doing the Father " s «works,» because «works» in this Gospel includes doing God " s wil1. But the ethical nuances, while probably present, are probably not primary here. The «commandments» of 14match more properly the line of thought in 14:21, 23–24, where they function as prerequisites for more fully acquiring or maintaining Jesus» presence, suggesting that 14has more to do with 14:16–17 than with 14:12–14. In John most ethical uses of the term apply to others besides Jesus, who «works» in this context, and the immediate context is probably one of miraculous works (14:10–11), for it echoes 10:32, 37–38, which probably reflects Jesus» recent healing of a man born blind (9:3–4). Jesus had done many signs (20:30), and the world itself could not contain them all (21:25), but somehow his followers could do more works, whether by virtue of their numbers or the new state in salvation history. Thus disciples should do miraculous works through faith (though such signs by themselves cannot produce adequate faith and must be supplemented with proclamation, which remains central; cf. 20:29) as well as continue Jesus» ministry in other respects. This idea is consonant with the disciples joining the Spirit as witnesses (15:26–27) and the Spirit presenting the living Christ through their word (16:7–11); in short, disciples would reflect the life of Jesus present in them the way branches revealed the life of the vine (15:1–8). The reason for «greater» works may be debated. Some contend that the works are greater because Jesus worked in only one land whereas his followers work everywhere; 8507 or that the work would be multiplied because no longer confined to one person " s ministry; 8508 or because the disciples participate in the newer and greater phase of redemptive history after the completion of Jesus» earthly work («because I go to the Father»). 8509 In any case, «greater» works imply greater magnitude than one has seen in Jesus» earthly ministry (for this sense of «greater magnitude,» see the parallel language of 1and 5:20). The promise of «greater works» calls John " s audience to look not only backward but also to the present, where Christ continues to remain active through his presence by the Paraclete and his proclaimed word. 8510 |
| Among the Greek-speaking parishes, Greek immigration reached plateau in the 1960s. In Canada today, some suggest a reverse immigration is underway, as Greeks in their retirement years return to the land of their birth to take up residence in family-owned homes. Like many Orthodox jurisdictions in Canada, there is a struggle between those who want to retain younger generations through nationalism (a demonstrated failing strategy for the Church), and those who cultivate spiritual life through connection to attendance at holy services and at monasteries. There exists a growing phenomenon of Greeks – as well as converts in Greek parishes – effectively considering as their home parishes the many Greek-language monasteries in Canada and the states along the Canada-U.S. border, a practice virtually unknown in Canada a decade ago. The spiritual and demographic implications of this trend for the Greek parishes is gradually being felt, although the spiritual awakening of many Greek community councils has yet to be fully manifested. Ukrainian Orthodox Canadians – the pioneers of Orthodox Christianity in Canada’s vast rural provinces, and a century ago the dominant Orthodox community – are an aging group, yet attendance and support of parish life remain strong in many areas. While the transfer of the faith to new generations remains in doubt, the clergy seem acutely aware of this reality, and something of a quiet spiritual resuscitation through increased holy services, spiritual education, and spiritual life have brought new life to a significant minority within the Ukrainian Orthodox jurisdiction. While attendance patterns among the Ukrainian Orthodox faithful in Canada remain consistent, the absence of youth and the fading of the use of the Ukrainian language in daily life (Ukrainian was noted as the fastest shrinking language of use in the country in the last census) have an impact which must still be faced. Among the Serbs in Canada, immigration in 1990s as a result of the conflicts in the Balkans has increased membership and attendance in most Serbian parishes, and has seen a handful of new parishes begin in major residential areas in the last decade. |
|
|
