| The success of your multi-faceted activity has been enabled by the education you received at Moscow State University, the Moscow Theological Seminary and the St. Petersburg Theological Academy. For your theological works the degree of doctor of theology has been bestowed upon you. Your labours in the field of external church relations have been marked by numerous awards by the Russian Orthodox Church and other Local Orthodox Churches. For your contribution to the cause of preserving and developing spiritual and cultural traditions, for the strengthening of peace and accord among peoples there have been bestowed upon you state awards of the Russian Federation such as the Order of Friendship, the Order of Merit and the Order of Alexander Nevsky. It is with diligence and a sense of heightened responsibility that you regard the obediences placed upon you by the church hierarchy, and in so doing you show a good example to those who work with you, for which you enjoy the deserved authority of leaders, colleagues and those under you. You successfully combine your broad church and public activities with pastoral ministry in the Moscow Church of the Resurrection ‘na Uspenskom vrazhke’. The clergy and parishioners see in you a good pastor, a wise counsellor and sympathetic father confessor. I am pleased that as you approach this milestone in your life you are full of strength and energy. I hope there will be many years of prolific cooperation in the future too. May the Lord grant you bodily health, peace of the soul and constant joy in Christ Jesus. I call God’s blessing down upon you and your labours.” Addressing Father Nikolai personally, metropolitan Hilarion stated that “I often point you out as an example to our other workers, above all as an example of a conscientious and competent approach towards work. You never fulfill a single task carelessly. You treat every task and every document with the utmost seriousness.” The metropolitan noted that the area for which Father Nikolai is responsible for is not confined to the position of deputy chairman of the DECR as many people turn to him for answers to many different questions which require a scholarly reasoned opinion on topics concerning inter-Orthodox relations, canon law and many others, and it is for this reason that, with the blessing of His Holiness Patriarch Kirill, he is the member of so many commissions and other ecclesiastical bodies. |
| Were you still a member of the Presbyterian? As president of the Christian Research Institute – I had been president of the Christian Research Institute since the late eighties, so during approximately three decades – I was involved in many different Evangelical traditions, from Presbyterianism to Pentecostalism, to several Mega-Churches that I had attended over the years. Did you have own understanding of Christianity in your journey from Church to Church? There was a core set of values that always animated my Christian experience. It is what C.S. Lewis referred to as “mere Christianity.” The idea that in essentials, there must always be unity, in non-essentials, we can have liberty, and in all things charity. So, when we talk about the essentials of the historic Christian faith, we’re talking about such things as the deity of Jesus Christ. If someone denies the deity of Jesus Christ, they are therefore by definition not Christian, because the deity of Jesus Christ is a core value of the Christian faith. The Trinity is another classic example of an essential of the historic Christian faith. We say, “In the Name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit.” These are things in many cases that we can only apprehend, we can’t fully comprehend. Then, there are secondary issues, not in the sense that they are unimportant, but we don’t have to divide over them. For example, we talk about the end times, we know that Jesus will appear a second time, but the details are often debated. Some people believe in the Pre-tribulation rapture, some believe in a thousand-year literal millennial kingdom on Earth. But in essentials there has to be unity, because once you stray from those essentials, you stray from what is the historic Christian faith. You mentioned previously that you felt disenchanted by the attitude of some pastors and that that prompted your search or, your, as you termed it, “exploration”. Can you elaborate on that? I got more and more disenchanted at what I sometimes termed as the “pastor-preneur.” This idea of a pastor being an entrepreneur through learning a particular formula of getting people into seats and then building an enterprise around the charisma of a particular pastor. Then that pastor has their own interpretation or their own nuances that they bring. As a result of that in Protestantism you have thirty thousand or more different expressions. In some cases, you can say that these expressions are tantamount to everyone being their own Pope. There’s no accountability. Someone comes to the Bible and says, “This is what the Bible means to me.” That became increasingly problematic. |
| The signatories state that Pat. Bartholomew had no canonical jurisdiction in Ukraine and had no right to restore the schismatics who broke from a different Local Church. Moreover, “the schismatics have never regretted or repented!” they write. The Greek Church’s recognition of the schismatics was preceded by visits from the U.S. Ambassador Geoffrey Pyatt to Abp. Ieronymos and Metropolitan Hierotheos (Vlachos), “whose rhetoric influenced the entire hierarchy,” the faithful recall. They also charge that the Synodal Committees were made up of bishops who were already sympathetic to ecumenism and the schismatics. The faithful also call attention to the fact of the persecution against the canonical Ukrainian Church by the state authorities and the schismatics, which those who recognize the schismatics simply ignore. The hierarchs of the Greek Church who support the schismatics have thus joined the side of the persecutors, they write. What they have done is equivalent to if the Church of Greece were done away with and the Old Calendarists recognized. The faithful also wonder if it ever occurred to the hierarchs that were adding fuel to the fire in Ukraine, where the schismatics are already so hostile to the true Orthodox believers. The authors believe that the laity have a right to know about what is happening in the Church of Greece and what decisions the hierarchs make, because “you have to understand that the Church is not just you, the bishops. The Church is the Body of Christ, the clergy and the people. And you have no right to keep members of the Church in the dark, especially in such serious matters.” The hierarchs who support the OCU are “moral criminals” and are “perpetrators of a colossal split” in the whole of Orthodoxy, the letter states. “Are you not afraid of God, Your Eminence?” they ask. “You don’t care what answer you will give tomorrow at the Last Judgment of Christ? That doesn’t frighten you? Do you remember the words of St. John Chrysostom that the sin of schism is not washed away even by martyr’s blood?” |
| My Suggestions Step #1. Once you review my response, if you’re interested in trying what I’ve suggested, inform your husband that you wrote to me for a second opinion, and let him review my e-mail. If he finds what I’ve written of value, and is willing to try these ideas, make an appointment with one another. You’ll need around an hour to begin taking advantage of these suggestions. Step #2. Formerly commit yourselves to finding some mutually satisfying Christ -centered resolutions. This step is important because it helps you form a partnership that begins to dissolve the- him-versus-her standoff that likely exists between the two of you whenever the issues you’ve described arise. Step #3. Once you’ve formed a partnership, pray together for guidance and assistance. Your prayers should come from the heart. If possible, each of you should take turns praying. Whoever feels the most comfortable with this suggestion should begin. If you’re not certain how to begin this step, begin by reciting prayers from each partner’s tradition. Once you’ve read several prayers, end by speaking to God from your heart just as you might speak to a trusted mentor or parent figure. Step #4. After you pray together, start defining and articulating the issues and problems in respectful language that you both understand. During this step, each of you should take turns speaking. One of you should write down the issues in objective language on a piece of paper entitled, “Our Christ-centered Partnership.” You should also avoid becoming critical and contemptuous. Blame, criticism and contempt will quickly put one or both of you on the defensive and back into gridlock. Step #5. Assuming you complete step four, this next step will require you to clearly and respectfully talk about what you’ve done to loosen the gridlock. Often, partners have different opinions about what’s been done. You should take turns speaking and listening when attempting to complete this step. Both partner’s perspectives are important here and through- out this exercise. As you proceed through this step a common understanding of the issues and problems should emerge, along with a better understanding of the reasons that have caused the gridlock. Warning: Do not proceed to the next step until you both believe steps four and five have been completed. |
| – In the event that tension will rise and incidents will occur, affecting the clergy and parishes remaining faithful to the Moscow Patriarchate, how could you defend them? Have you thought of that? – Suffering of the Orthodox Ukrainians is a matter of my unceasing concern. To support them the Church will use all means possible, first and foremost, prayer to our Lord Jesus Christ and trust in Him Who, we believe, will preserve His Church. Despite the tremendous pressure exerted by the Ukrainian state, out of 90 bishops of the Ukrainian Church only one ruling and one vicar hierarchs joined the schism. The absolute majority of archpastors, clerics and laypeople are faithful to their Church and its Primate. What is going on in Ukraine is the grossest interference of the state in church affairs, a clear violation of the Constitution of the country and of fundamental human rights. Surprisingly, at the same time declarations are being made of Ukraine’s commitment to the basic European values, one of which is the principle of Church’s separation from the state. The international community should more often pay attention to this outrageous discrepancy between declarations and actual deeds. – You used tough expressions when speaking of the Ecumenical Patriarchate and of the Phanar’s financial gains for resolving the Ukrainian ecclesiastical issue. You have also called the unification council “politicized,” hinting at the presence of the Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko at it. In your opinion, what motives and reasons did the Ecumenical Patriarchate have to grant the autocephaly? – No one makes secret of the fact that the Phanar and the Ukrainian authorities coordinated their actions in the matter of granting the autocephaly. Suffice is to recall that a special agreement on cooperation and interaction between the Patriarchate of Constantinople and Ukraine was signed on 3rdNovember last year. The presence of the Ukrainian President in the presidium of the “unification council,” which you mentioned, is only one of many examples. We see the incumbent President going from one schismatic church to another, with the “Tomos” in his hands, and realize why on the threshold of the presidential elections in Ukraine he was in such haste to receive it. As for the reasons that induced Patriarch Bartholomew to grant the so-called “autocephaly,” I would prefer not to speak about it now. Regardless of what they were, it has become clear to everyone that this “autocephaly” did not lead to the restoration of unity among the Orthodox Christians in Ukraine, but endangered the integrity of the whole world Orthodoxy. |
| The tie between struggle and consolation is most powerfully revealed in the liturgical experience of the Church. By joining in the liturgical life, the faithful learn to engage in the struggle of prayer, so distinctly unique in the Eastern Church by reason of its profundity and lengthiness, and they find true spiritual consolation according to the Savior’s testament: Verily I say unto you… where two or three are gathered together in My name, there am I in the midst of them (Matthew 18:19, 21). The apotheosis of spiritual consolation in the life of the Church is the Divine Eucharist – the real and mystical union of man with God. But it is unthinkable to enter at once into the spirit of this most sublime consolation, without due preparation, without bridling the turbulent worldly spirit, without the development of spiritual compunction. Really, how can one take part in the Supper made in remembrance of the Lord Jesus Christ Himself, and in accordance with His promise, without due preparation: without clothing one’s soul in the proper garment, without reconciling the conscience, without a consciousness of one’s unworthiness, or a feeling of the great benefit of this saying mystery? Can a musical instrument make a beautiful and pure sound without prior tuning?! Remembering that, in the Biblical and New Testament Tradition, days are calculated from the evening. The holy Church enjoins the faithful to enter into the spirit of the Eucharistic sacrifice through a preparatory service in the evening, on the eve of the Liturgy. It is in this evening service that genuine life in God and with God is revealed in all its spiritual beauty, when those who are praying “become attuned,” with trembling anticipation, to union with the Lord through communion of the Holy Body and Blood of Christ. Even if a man does not commune at the Liturgy, this in no wise excuses him from joining in the Eucharistic spirit, from thankfully experiencing Jesus Christ’s whole saving exploit. After all, the Liturgy is the moving commemoration and the co-suffering experiencing of the life of the Lord and Savior – from the Bethlehem manger, through the death on the Cross on Golgotha, the resurrection from the dead and the ascension into heaven, to the descent of the Holy Spirit on the Apostles, and through them on all the faithful in the bosom of Christ’s Church. From Apostolic times, the faithful have been called to participation in the “little Pascha,” to the Eucharistic banquet each Sunday. |
| Of the hundreds of homilies, there exists the Lenten series entitled Hexaemeros which provide valuable parabolic moral teachings. These would articulate the moral chassis which would form the underpinnings of his Christian philanthropic worldview. Philanthropy Emerges From Worship, Prayer, and Ascetic Practice As with Basil’s delving into the monastic life, his approach to high academic theology does not remain merely in the theoretical. He makes it relevant precisely because he makes it applicable to the lives of the common members of society. Thus, in doing so, he makes it a ministry which reflects the Incarnation of Jesus Christ coming in the flesh and of life in communion with the Holy Trinity. This can be seen in his homily Sermon to the Rich where he instructs the hearer to treat the needs of other as we would treat our own, regardless of what those needs are. 5 In the realm of liturgical theology, Basil is attributed with many prayers within the Eastern and Western rites. Most notably however are two that stand out above the rest and they come down to us through the Byzantine liturgical tradition: the Divine Liturgy of St. Basil the Great and the “Kneeling Prayers” at Pentecost Vespers. To what extent, these are the exact words penned by Basil verbatim is not the question that is important, the fact that they are attributed to him is reflective of his enduring influence and legacy of his focus on the synthesis of good liturgy through the formalization of liturgical prayers and hymnography with a sound theological basis. Throughout all of these works, Basil’s deep concern for the sick, the suffering, the hurting, the poor, the disadvantaged, and the oppressed is present throughout. Inn the anaphora (Eucharistic prayer) attributed to him in the Liturgy, the celebrant prayers, “defend the widows; protect the orphans; liberate the captives; heal the sick…For You, Lord, are the helper of the helpless, the hope of the hopeless, the Savior of the afflicted, the haven of the voyager, and the physician of the sick. Be all things to all, You know each person, his requests, his household, and his need.” 6 |
| As His Beatitude said in his homily, the prayers lifted up together by representatives of the Patriarchate of Antioch and the Moscow Patriarchate in the Church of the Holy Hieromartyr Ignatius the God-Bearer served as a visible sign of friendship between the two Orthodox Churches that have been together for centuries, supporting each other as members of one family and like-minded in the matters of the present-day church life. His Beatitude also noted that nowadays people are beset with many problems, including political, worldly ones. Fr om the mass media, they learn of many examples of interpersonal relationships that run counter to the Biblical understanding of family; they see fundamental notions being perverted, virtue condemned and a good person called bad; what is true is regarded as wicked while something bad receives approval. However, the voice of the Gospel will never fade, as Patriarch John emphasized, and Orthodox Christians, including those belonging to the Russian Orthodox Church and the Orthodox Church of Antioch, continue to preach the Gospel of Christ to the world. “We are aware of the current situation in Russia, we see what is now happening to believers in Ukraine. We feel your pain and our prayers always go out to you,” the Primate of the Orthodox Church of Antioch also said and added that the visit of the Moscow Patriarchate’s delegation to Syria was a sign of great love of Patriarch Kirill and the plenitude of the Russian Church for the Orthodox Church of Antioch, which is suffering today. “We love you very much. We are always with you. We are one family and one Church,” His Beatitude Patriarch John added. Metropolitan Anthony of Volokolamsk cordially thanked His Beatitude for his kind words and his blessing to visit the ancient Church of Antioch wh ere the disciples of Christ had been called Christians for the first time. He conveyed to Patriarch John brotherly regards, kindest wishes and assurances of unwavering support from His Holiness Patriarch Kirill of Moscow and All Rus’. The DECR chairman also thanked the Primate of the Church of Antioch for everything he did to uphold the unity of worldwide Orthodoxy, which, regrettably, is currently under threat. “Devout children of the Russian Orthodox Church hearken to your powerful and wise words in support of ecclesiastical unity and of our Church’s faithful who, as you have mentioned, are being subjected to the most severe persecution in Ukraine,” Metropolitan Anthony said, in particular, “It was hard to imagine that time would come again when bishops, priests and laypeople would be imprisoned, churches would be destroyed, and schismatics would seize church buildings, forcing local communities out. Your words, along with the statements of the Holy Synod of the Church of Antioch and many of its hierarchs fortify and encourage our Church’s flock, especially those undergoing terrible persecutions.” |
| The consequences of this soteriological revolution are entirely understandable: the borderline between life according to Christ and pagan life became even more indiscernible. The same S. Bulgakov wrote: " Protestantism, as opposed to Medieval Catholicism, departs from the destruction in principle of any opposition between the ecclesiastical and secular or worldly. Worldly occupations, secular professions … are viewed as the fulfillment of religious duty, the sphere of which thus broadens to include all worldly activity. " Any ordinary labor and, it follows, earthly life itself with all its values take on a sort of religious character for the faithful. There is a clear return to paganism with its cult of everything earthly. Theological, religious, and philosophical questions arise due to this, along with philosophical systems of thought based upon a new view of the meaning of human life, and man’s relationship to earthly activities. Materialism and atheism became the logical result of this process. The Protestant Church essentially turns into just one more charitable department of the government. The concepts of an “unearthly heaven” and an “unspiritual earth” had different fates. The former, viewing the body as something contemptuous and any care for its needs as something approaching sinful, sank into the past. The second, for which material needs are not only the foremost, but in the final analysis, the only needs there are in the world, grew and developed rapidly during the modern era and is now marching triumphantly through the Christian world. The words of Christ— Seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you (Mt 6:33); These ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone (Mt 23:23)—are increasingly forgotten. From the theological point of view, these positions could be characterized in Christological terminology as Monophysite and Nestorian, while the Orthodox point of view would be Chalcedonian. As we know, a referendum of the Fourth Ecumenical Council of 451 in Chalcedon determined that the Divine and human natures were joined in Christ “with no confusion, no change, no division, no separation.” The same Council also condemned the idea that Christ’s human nature is subsumed by His Divine nature (monophysitism), as well as the separation and autonomy of these two natures (nestorianism). In the context of the question at hand, this means that the one-sided spiritualism of the Middle Ages and the materialism of the Reformation are equally condemned. From this angle, the Chalcedonian dogma serves as a foundation for an Orthodox understanding of the nature of the Church’s social actions. |
| The Primate of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church also addressed the Orthodox Montenegrins, “Dear Eminences, brothers and sisters, all the faithful of the Holy land of Montenegro! We are pleasantly surprised by your numerous processions with the cross, as they have encompassed your land to strengthen your spirituality and protect your shrines. We are pleased by your vigil in the faith, your unity in the Orthodox faith. For us, Orthodox Ukrainians, your example is inspiring. We are with you today not only to share the joy of the feast but also to reassert the truth of the biblical words, ‘A brother offended is harder to be won than a strong city: and their contentions are like the bars of a castle’ (Pr. 18:19). In the evening, Metropolitan Onufriy and his delegation, joined by Metropolitan Amfilohije, visited the Ostrog monastery in Montenegro to venerate the relics of St. Basil of Ostrog. On February 29, Metropolitan Onufriy led the celebrations devoted to the commemoration day of St. Simeon the Myrrh-Flowing and the 800th anniversary of the Diocese of Zeta, now the Metropolis of Montenegro and the Littoral. During the service, a prayer was lifted up for peace in Ukraine and Montenegro. After the Cherubic Hymn, Metropolitan Onufriy administered a hierarchal consecration. After the liturgy, there was a procession with the cross along Podgorica streets. Before the procession, Metropolitan Onufriy addressed the faithful in the cathedral square. He said in particular, “Today we are lifting up our heartfelt prayers for the cessation of disorders in Montenegro and also for peace in Ukraine. We are ardently praying to God, to His Most Holy Mother and to all the saints that the evil hearts may be softened and peace and well-being may come as soon as possible to our sister Churches. “Sharing with you the joy of the great feast, I wish that, through the intercession of St. Simeon the Myrrh-Flowing the Lord may open His eyes day and night (cf. 3 Kings 8:29) towards your God-loving people. May, through the intercession of these great mem of God, your country be filled with the fruits of righteousness, which are by Jesus Christ, unto the glory and praise of God (Phil. 1:11). |
|
|
