A beautifully done short video giving an overview of an Orthodox marriage “Crowning” — filmed this past June at a Romanian Orthodox parish in Ghent, Belgium:
For further reading:
A beautifully done short video giving an overview of an Orthodox marriage “Crowning” — filmed this past June at a Romanian Orthodox parish in Ghent, Belgium:
For further reading:
A very interesting new video just posted to You Tube shows Pascha (Easter) in some Orthodox parishes in Cameroon in Central Africa. The video begins with Good Friday services and Baptisms in Yaounde (the capital) with snippets from the Midnight Pascha liturgy starting at 11:08 minutes.
Of particular note are some of the parish celebrations in small cities away from the capital. For example, Liturgy in the small city of Datcheka in Northern Cameroun is shown starting about 32:00 minutes. Another to watch is the visit to the parish in Touilale starting at 1:00:28 minutes. While recognizable in many respects, one can also see some inculturation. Liturgy is in the local language, the Bishop gives his sermon in French (official language of the country) and it’s translated into the local tongue.
This is part of the mission work of the Greek Orthodox Patriarchate of Alexandria which also includes the operation of schools for children in that country.
This is how Pharisees think. How do I know? Because there is a Pharisee in me too. There is a Pharisee in all of us.
St. Tikhon’s Monastery has just put up a video of the consecration of Holy Chrism held there earlier this year. This is a rite rarely witnessed by the faithful and it’s a treat to see this preparation done in English. The choir is also magnificent. The video description:
His Beatitude, Metropolitan Jonah celebrated the preparatory rites for the Consecration of Holy Chrism on the morning of Great and Holy Monday, April 9, 2012, at Saint Tikhon of Zadonsk Monastery. The Rite will conclude with the actual consecration of the sacred oil during the Vesperal Liturgy of Saint Basil the Great on Great and Holy Thursday, April 12.
The blessing of the ingredients took place before the celebration of the Hours and the Liturgy of the Presanctified Gifts.
The consecration of Holy Chrism is reserved to autocephalous churches. Parishes receive Holy Chrism for local use from the Primate of their respective autocephalous Church. As such, the distribution of Holy Chrism to parish communities offers a visible sign of unity within the Church.
A more detailed explanation from Orthodoxwiki:
Chrism (Greek χρίσμα, meaning “ointment”) is consecrated oil used during the administration of certain mysteries, particularly those of baptism and anointing of the sick (unction), and other rites of the Orthodox Church. Chrism is sometime referred to as myrrh (from the Greek μύρων), holy oil, or consecrated oil.
The use of an oil in Christian ceremonies is mentioned in many early Christian documents including writings by Theophilus and Tertullian. Cyril of Jerusalem details the practices of using oil or ointment that is “symbolically applied to the forehead, and other organs of sense.” He further notes that the “ointment is the seal of the covenants” of baptism and God’s promises to the believer. He taught that being “anointed with the oil of God” was a sign of a Christian (Christos meaning “anointed”), and a physical representation of receiving the Gift of the Holy Spirit.
In Orthodox Christianity, chrism is a prominent part of the baptismal rite in which, under normal circumstances, the newly enlightened (including infants) is anointed with chrism in the mystery of chrismation. Chrism is used also during the consecration of churches in which the altar table and walls are anointed.
Chrism is a mixture of olive oil and aromatic essences following the pattern of the preparation of anointing oil described in Exodus 30:22-33. Chrism is prepared when needed during Holy Week. The preparation rite begins on Holy Monday and ends with the Divine Liturgy on Holy Thursday when the new chrism is carried in during the Great Entrance and placed upon the altar table. The chrism is prepared by the ruling bishop of each autocephalous church, assisted by members of the Holy Synod. After its preparation the chrism is distributed to the bishops, who in turn pass it to the parishes where it is needed.
In the Patriarchate of Constantinople, for example, Chrism is manufactured roughly every ten years. It is produced from 57 ingredients, including the ash from burnt icons.
Romans 9 has confused many Western interpreters, especially since the era of the Reformation. Calvinists point to it as a plain example of the Apostle Paul teaching “double predestination” that is, the idea that God, from all eternity, has chosen (on no condition of faith or works) a certain number of individuals to be saved, and has condemned the rest (again, on no prior condition of faith or works) to eternal damnation. Non-Calvinist interpreters generally see Romans 9 as primarily a discussion of national election, concerning the fate of Israel, the Church, and the Gentile nations, rather than any specific individuals. While this reading has merit, it is incomplete and does not explain the entirety of the passage. What I seek to do, then, is to walk through Romans 9, verse by verse, paying attention to every word that the Apostle writes, and show that it does not, in fact, support Reformed theology.
Before we begin, we must establish an important principle of Pauline exegesis. The Holy Apostle Paul was a devout Jew. He had studied under masterful scholars of Torah (notably Rabbi Gamaliel) and had a firm belief that the one creator God had chosen Israel, the Family of Abraham, to be His special people. To this end, he spent his life studying Moses, the Prophets, and the Psalms. His understanding of them was not confined to a few select proof-texts. He understood each book, and each passage within each book, in the context of the whole sweep of Scripture. The revelation that Jesus was Israel’s Messiah and that the redemption of Israel took place through the death and resurrection of Jesus fundamentally reshaped Paul’s entire outlook, but it did not make him think any less of the Hebrew Scriptures. Rather, it forced him to search them all the more and find out what he had missed. Let us be very careful, then, not to assert that Paul takes select texts from the Old Testament and uses them without regard to the surrounding context.
Romans 9 is absolutely drenched with Old Testament Scripture. In order to discover how carefully Paul used the Old Testament, we will take a look at a single passage before moving step by step through the entire argument. In Romans 9:27, St. Paul quotes the Prophet Isaiah as saying, “Though the number of the sons of Israel be as the sand of the sea, only a remnant will be saved.” This is a quotation from Isaiah 10:22. The immediately preceding verse says that “A remnant, the remnant of Jacob, to the mighty God.” This title for God, “Mighty God” is used only three times in the entire Hebrew Bible, two of them in the Book of Isaiah. The one other use in Isaiah is found in 9:6, where the Prophet writes, “For to us a child is born, to us a son is given; and the government shall be upon his shoulder, and his name shall be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Father Forever, Prince of Peace. Of the increase of his government and of peace there will be no end, on the throne of David and over his kingdom, to establish it and to uphold it with justice and with righteousness from this time forth and forevermore. The zeal of the Lord of hosts will do this.” The point being made here is that “mighty God” is a title for the Son of David, the Messiah of Israel. This same title is then used to describe the one to whom a remnant of Jacob will hearken to. In other words, only a remnant of Jacob will believe in the Messianic King of Israel. Paul’s selection of Isaiah 10:22 to make his point is well made indeed.
Now that we have established that Paul uses the Old Testament with regard to both the narrow and broad context of the verses quoted, let us look at Romans 9 within its own context. The Letter to the Romans is a symphony in four parts. The first part is Romans 1-3. In Romans 1, Paul demonstrates that the nations of the world are deep in sin, and the wrath of God is poured out on them all. Interestingly, Paul understands the wrath of God to be the natural degeneracy of human society due to sin, the loss of the Divine Image in man. In Romans 2, Paul answers the claim of the Jew. The Jews know that the people of Israel was the people through whom God promised to heal the world, but Paul answers them back. They too, are in Adam. Indeed, the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of them. How then can God’s single plan to redeem the world go forward? How can God be righteous if His plan has failed? It hasn’t failed, says Paul. It is going forward, but in a way that is unexpected. In Romans 3, Paul says that the righteousness of God (by which he means the faithfulness of God to his single plan to redeem the world through Israel) has been unveiled in the faithfulness of the Messiah, Jesus, whom God set forth as the mercy seat of faithfulness (the place where God and man meet and man is cleansed of sin) in His blood. This is how God’s plan through Israel for the world has been revealed. This is the way that it goes forward. God has not healed the world through Torah, but through the faithfulness of the Messiah. Now, all who are obedient to the Messiah are renewed in knowledge after the Image of their Creator, which is the meaning of the word “justified.” Justification takes place not through Torah, but through faith in Messiah Jesus.
Paul then retells the entire history of Israel through the lens of the Messianic work of Jesus. He looks at Abraham, the Father of the Covenant People. Abraham himself, when God promised him a great worldwide family, was not made righteous by Torah (indeed, Torah had not been given yet!), but by faith in God. At the very moment when the family was promised, the benefits of the family (understand here that the Family of Abraham was to be a family which bore the Divine Image corrupted by Adam) were realized not through the Torah, but through Abraham’s unyielding trust in God. How then could membership in the family be defined by works of Torah? Indeed, all people, Jew and Gentile, may become members of the Abrahamic Family by following in the footsteps of Abraham. In Romans 5, Paul moves from Abraham to the next stage in Israel’s history- bondage. The true bondage, though, is not physical labor in Egypt, but bondage in Adam. All men are “in Adam” and are enslaved to sin. The Messiah is the true Moses, the true liberator, because through Messiah, we are liberated from bondage to sin (which is enforced by personal, malevolent forces known as the powers and authorities) and made slaves to righteousness. In Romans 6, Paul looks at this Messianic Liberation, seeing Baptism as that which fulfilled the crossing of the Red Sea. It is through Baptism, teaches the Apostle, that we are liberated from slavery to sin. In Romans 7, Paul then looks at what was given after Israel crossed the Red Sea- Torah. What is the purpose of the Torah? What does it do in the new covenant? The Apostle carefully weaves his argument, demonstrating that Torah was never intended to mark out the people of God or lead them to realize the benefits of the Abrahamic Family. Rather, Torah was given so that Israel might know sin and the depth of her sinfulness. Then, in Romans 8, Paul looks at the glorious entrance of the people of Israel into the Promised Land, led by the Spirit of God, who enables them to obey. This time, however, it is not a tiny strip of land in the Middle East entered by a single race. Rather, it is the single Family of Abraham, comprising Jews and Gentiles, renewed in Baptism, filled with the Spirit, obeying in joy, that enters the true promised Land. The true land of Promise is the entire Creation, the whole cosmos, renewed and transfigured by the grace of God, inhabited by the Family of God, living in bodies redeemed after the likeness of the resurrection of the Messiah.
Romans 9-11 is the third act of the symphony. It is the Apostle’s scriptural defense of the above. “That’s all well and good, Paul”, says the interlocutor. “But is that really God’s plan? If Jews and Gentiles are now equal members of the family of God, it seems to me that God has not fulfilled, but broken His covenant with Israel.” And this is where the argument begins.
(Romans 9:6-9) But it is not as though the word of God has failed. For not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel, and not all are children of Abraham because they are his offspring, but “Through Isaac shall your offspring be named.” This means that it is not the children of the flesh who are the children of God, but the children of the promise are counted as offspring. For this is what the promise said: “About this time next year I will return and Sarah shall have a son.”
God has been faithful to Israel, but you don’t know what Israel is, argues the Apostle. Not all who claim physical descent from Israel are really members of Israel. In order to prove this, Paul shows that Abraham’s true offspring were not named through Ishmael, but through Isaac. It is important to note here that Paul is not talking about the personal election of Ishmael or Isaac to salvation, damnation, or even covenant membership. Indeed, Ishmael was circumcised, demonstrating Abraham’s understanding that he was a member of the covenant. No, this is talking particularly about the election of their offspring. The promise of Israel was to go through Isaac. Let us not forget the purpose of Abraham’s calling. Abraham was called so that “all the families of the Earth” would be blessed in him. (Genesis 12:3) Paul understood this to be the very substance of the gospel, calling this proclamation in Genesis 12 “the gospel preached beforehand.” (Galatians 3:8) The promise was going through the family of Isaac, not the family of Ishmael. The last time that Paul used this word “counted” (9:8) was in Romans 4, where Paul teaches that Abraham was counted as righteous through his faith, so that all who are of the faith of Abraham would be counted righteous along with him. This is a return to that theme. The genuine sons of Abraham are the ones through whom and in whom the promise of Abraham would be fulfilled. Not all who come from Abraham’s flesh are genuinely his children. Rather, it is those who are of the promise who are the genuine children.
(Romans 9:10-13) And not only so, but also when Rebecca had conceived children by one man, our forefather Isaac, though they were not yet born and had done nothing either good or bad–in order that God’s purpose of election might continue, not because of works but because of his call– she was told, “The older will serve the younger.” As it is written, “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.”
This is where it becomes very important to examine the contexts of the Old Testament citations used by the Apostle Paul. First, the Apostle cites a passage from Genesis 25. The text says, “And the Lord said to her, “Two nations are in your womb, and two peoples from within you shall be divided; the one shall be stronger than the other, the older shall serve the younger.” (Genesis 25:23) The discussion here is of the election of the nation coming from Jacob and the nation coming from Esau. Esau, in his own life, did not personally serve Jacob. The sons of Esau, the nation of Edom, was however subordinated to the sons of Jacob, the nation of Israel. This demonstrates yet again that Paul is not discussing the personal election to salvation or damnation of Jacob or Esau, but is rather discussing which family the promise will pass through. The “purpose of election” is that purpose discussed in Genesis 12:3, that God would bless and redeem the whole world through Israel. God had chosen to bless the world through the family of Jacob, rather than the family of Esau. The context of the other quotation of Scripture confirms this point. Paul is quoting from Malachi 1, which says, “‘I have loved you,’ says the Lord. But you say, ‘How have you loved us?’ ‘Is not Esau Jacob’s brother?’ declares the Lord. ‘Yet I have loved Jacob but Esau I have hated. I have laid waste his hill country and left his heritage to jackals of the desert.'” (Malachi 1:2-3) Here, it is evident that God is not discussing the fates of Jacob and Esau as individuals, but is rather using them as figures representing the nations which they bore- Israel and Edom. The meaning of the words “love” and “hate” then become plain. By “love”, God means that He has covenanted with Israel, and by “hate” God means that He has not covenanted with Esau. The broader context of this passage provides additional support to the idea that the Apostle is not discussing personal salvation, but the choice of which family to pass the promise through. Malachi writes “A son honors his father, and a servant his master. If then I am a father, where is my honor? And if I am a master, where is my fear? says the Lord of hosts to you, O priests, who despise my name. But you say, ‘How have we despised your name?’ By offering polluted food upon my altar. But you say, ‘How have we polluted you?’ By saying that the Lord’s table may be despised. When you offer blind animals in sacrifice, is that not evil? And when you offer those that are lame or sick, is that not evil? Present that to your governor; will he accept you or show you favor? says the Lord of hosts.” (1:6-8) In the very context where God discusses His election of Jacob’s family rather than Esau’s, He accuses Israel of being unfaithful to her God! To read Romans 9:10-13, then, as “Jacob I have saved, but Esau I have damned” is utterly unwarranted by the text of Scripture.
(Romans 9:14-15) What shall we say then? Is there injustice on God’s part? By no means! For he says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.”
The question of “injustice” does not mean “Is God unjust to unconditionally elect some to salvation and unconditionally condemn others to damnation?” It means “Is God unfaithful, then, to His covenant with Abraham?” This can be understood by looking at the context of the passage quoted by the Apostle. Moses records, “‘For how shall it be known that I have found favor in your sight, I and your people? Is it not in your going with us, so that we are distinct, I and your people, from every other people on the face of the earth?’ And the Lord said to Moses, ‘This very thing that you have spoken I will do, for you have found favor in my sight, and I know you by name.’ Moses said, ‘Please show me your glory.’ And he said, ‘I will make all my goodness pass before you and will proclaim before you my name ‘The Lord.’ And I will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and will show mercy on whom I will show mercy.'” Moses asks God to confirm that Israel is truly His people by the display of the Divine Glory. The Lord God obliges, confirming that He is faithful to His covenant with Israel. The point, then, is this. Even as God chose to pass the promise through Isaac’s family, not Ishmael’s, and even as He chose Jacob’s family, not Esau’s, He is still faithful to that original covenant with Abraham. His choice to pass the promise through particular families does not detract from His covenant faithfulness. The point is certainly not “God is free to unconditionally elect some individuals and unconditionally damn others.” The point is that the covenant has never been broken, even as all the physical sons of Abraham have not inherited the covenant. Furthermore, this quotation of Exodus 33 actually looks forward to Romans 11:32, where the Apostle writes, “For God has consigned all to disobedience, so that He may have mercy on all.” The point of this whole argument is precisely not the limitation of God’s mercy. It is that God is merciful towards all! The promise looked forward to the day when both Jews and Gentiles would freely benefit from the covenant with Abraham.
(Romans 9:16) So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy.
This text has often been used to prove monergism over and against synergism, because it allegedly demonstrates that human freedom has absolutely no role in salvation. Actually, this constitutes a failure to read Paul as a Jew. There was a common idiom in the Hebrew Scriptures known as the “negation idiom.” This meant that when one aspect of something was to be emphasized, it would be phrased as a “this, not this”, even though both components were actually present. For example, God says through the Prophet Hosea, “For I desire steadfast love and not sacrifice, the knowledge of God rather than burnt offerings.” (Hosea 6:6) We know, in fact, that both love and sacrifice are essential, for the Apostle Paul himself affirms that there is no forgiveness apart from the shedding of blood (Hebrews 9:22). Or note what God said through Jeremiah, “For in the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt, I did not speak to your fathers or command them concerning burnt offerings and sacrifices. But this command I gave them: ‘Obey my voice, and I will be your God, and you shall be my people. And walk in all the way that I command you, that it may be well with you.'” (Jeremiah 7:22-23) We know that God in fact did both. These are “negation idioms” and they are peculiar to Hebrew thought. Paul, as a Jew writing against the backdrop of the Jewish Scriptures, follows this precise format in Romans 9:16. The passage fails as a proof for absolute monergism.
(Romans 9:17-21) For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, “For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I might show my power in you, and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.” So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills. You will say to me then, “Why does he still find fault? For who can resist his will?” But who are you, O man, to answer back to God? Will what is molded say to its molder, “Why have you made me like this?” Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for honored use and another for dishonorable use?
Let us take this passage one bit at a time. First, the example of Pharaoh is brought forth. What must be recognized here is that Pharaoh is the quintissential example of the person who attacks the covenant people and resists the purposes of the covenant God. What happens to the person who resists the purposes of the covenant God? They are hardened. This pattern has already been discussed in Romans 1. The Apostle writes first of the sin of the nations (1:21-23) and then says “therefore God gave them up” (1:24) The resistance is logically prior to the hardening. The hardening is not unconditional, as the Calvinist would claim. This pattern also appears in the Exodus narrative itself. In Exodus 8:15 and 8:32, Pharaoh is the one who hardens his own heart. It is only from 9:12 onwards that God is described as hardening Pharaoh’s heart. This pattern is confirmed by the Old Testament allusion that Paul is using. When Paul describes the potter and the clay, he is alluding to Jeremiah 18, which says “So I went down to the potter’s house, and there he was working at his wheel. And the vessel he was making of clay was spoiled in the potter’s hand, and he reworked it into another vessel, as it seemed good to the potter to do. Then the word of the Lord came to me: ‘O house of Israel, can I not do with you as this potter has done? declares the Lord. Behold, like the clay in the potter’s hand, so are you in my hand, O house of Israel.'” (Jeremiah 18:3-6) Note here that the potter is working the clay for His own purposes, and the clay is then “spoiled in the potter’s hand.” It not that the potter has purposed from the very beginning to destroy the clay. It is instead that the potter is forming the clay, but the clay is resistant. Because it is spoiled in the potter’s hand, he reworks it for another purpose. It is then made clear that the “clay” is not assorted individual Jews and Gentiles. It is instead the “house of Israel” which has spoiled and been reworked. The point, then, is that the Jewish people have become like Pharaoh. They have spoiled in the potter’s hand and resisted the purposes of the covenant God. God then uses them for another purpose. Like Pharaoh was used to make the name of Israel’s God known to the nations, so also the Jewish rejection of God is used to bring the Gentiles into covenant relationship with God. This is why Paul later says, “So I ask, did they stumble in order that they might fall? By no means! Rather through their trespass salvation has come to the Gentiles, so as to make Israel jealous.” (Romans 11:11)
(Romans 9:22-23) Although God desired to show his wrath and to make known his power, he endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, in order to make known the riches of his glory for vessels of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory– [translation of Dr. Ben Witherington]
This passage makes perfect sense in light of everything that has come before. God chose to bless the world through Abraham’s family. He then determined that the promise to bless the world would pass through Isaac’s family, then Jacob’s family. Throughout history, Jacob’s family resisted the purposes of the covenant God, yet the Lord endured them and did not destroy them, in order to bring His purposes to pass. His purpose was to “make known the riches of his glory for vessels of mercy.” The “vessels of wrath” are not individual reprobates, but the unfaithful Jewish people. The word “vessel” is lifted from Jeremiah 18, which is discussing the unfaithfulness and reworking of the house of Israel. God endured their unfaithfulness to make known His faithfulness. Through the family of Jacob, He brought forth the son of Israel, Jesus the Messiah, and the promise is realized in the Messiah. As the promise has been realized through Him, all who are loyal to Him now constitute the “children of the promise” the true people of Israel.
(Romans 9:24-28) even us whom he has called, not from the Jews only but also from the Gentiles? As indeed he says in Hosea, “Those who were not my people I will call ‘my people,’ and her who was not beloved I will call ‘beloved.'” “And in the very place where it was said to them, ‘You are not my people,’ there they will be called ‘sons of the living God.'” And Isaiah cries out concerning Israel: “Though the number of the sons of Israel be as the sand of the sea, only a remnant of them will be saved, for the Lord will carry out his sentence upon the earth fully and without delay.”
These two texts are woven together very carefully. The first text from Hosea is a quotation from Hosea 2:23. It is prophesying the coming redemption of Israel, when God will renew the covenant and render Israel His people again. This is because in Hosea 1:9-10 (the second text quoted by Paul), God declared that Israel is “not my people” because of their unfaithfulness. One day, says Hosea, Israel will be God’s people again. the Apostle juxtaposes this with a citation from Isaiah 10, where the Prophet says, “A remnant will return, the remnant of Jacob, to the mighty God. For though your people Israel be as the sand of the sea, only a remnant of them will return. Destruction is decreed, overflowing with righteousness.” (Isaiah 10:21-22) It was acceptable in antiquity to slightly alter the quotation of a text so as to make clearer the point you are making (there was no such thing as a quotation mark, after all.) Where Isaiah says “your people Israel”, the Apostle Paul says “the sons of Israel.” This hearkens back to what St. Paul wrote in Romans 9:6: “Not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel.” The point is that when God renews His covenant with Israel, only a remnant of Jacob’s ethnic descendants will hearken to the “mighty God”, who, remember, has been defined in Isaiah 9:6-7 as the Messianic Son of David. When God redeems Israel, it won’t be only Jews who are called “sons of the living God.” When God judges the Earth, many of those physically descended from Israel will not inherit the kingdom of God.
(Romans 9:29) And as Isaiah predicted, “If the Lord of hosts had not left us offspring, we would have been like Sodom and become like Gomorrah.”
The citation here is from Isaiah 1:9, where the Prophet writes, “Your country lies desolate; your cities are burned with fire; in your very presence foreigners devour your land; it is desolate, as overthrown by foreigners. And the daughter of Zion is left like a booth in a vineyard, like a lodge in a cucumber field, like a besieged city. If the Lord of hosts had not left us a few survivors, we should have been like Sodom, and become like Gomorrah.” (Isaiah 1:7-9) This is a continuation of Paul’s discussion of when the Lord carries out His sentence on the Earth. The Apostle modifies “survivors” to become “offspring.” God is faithful, says Paul, because there are still genuine Israelites among the Jewish people. There is still a righteous remnant. (9:27, 11:5) The others, those who sought righteousness by the Torah, have been left desolate, estranged from the covenant, judged along with Sodom and Gomorrah.
(Romans 9:30-33) What shall we say, then? That Gentiles who did not pursue righteousness have attained it, that is, a righteousness that is by faith; but that Israel who pursued a law that would lead to righteousness did not succeed in reaching that law. Why? Because they did not pursue it by faith, but as if it were based on works. They have stumbled over the stumbling stone, as it is written, “Behold, I am laying in Zion a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offense; and whoever believes in him will not be put to shame.”
This brings Romans 9 to a close, though the argument continues to press on in 10-11. For now, however, we will conclude here. The “righteousness” is that same righteousness that was counted to Abraham when he believed that God would create a massive family through his own offspring. (Genesis 15:1-6, Romans 4:1-4) God had chosen to renew the Divine Image in man through the Family of Abraham (as is recognized in Jewish texts like Jubilees), and he does this through inspiring a man to “live by faith.” (Habbakuk 2:4, Romans 1:17-18) It is this life of faith that marks a person out as a son of Israel, a genuine child of promise, an heir to the covenant with Abraham. Even though the nations were worshiping idols, God has redeemed them by bringing forth the perfect Image of God from among the sons of Abraham. Now lifted up, the Messiah draws all men to Himself (John 12:32), and the people of God live not by the bondage of Torah, but by faith in the Son of God. (Romans 7, Galatians 2:17-20) Those who seek to be children of Abraham by Torah will inevitably fail, but those who seek it by faith will have God’s righteousness established in their hearts. To wrap this up, St. Paul draws together two texts from the Hebrew Bible. First, he alludes to Psalm 118 which says, “Open to me the gates of righteousness, that I may enter through them and give thanks to the Lord. This is the gate of the Lord; the righteous shall enter through it. I thank you that you have answered me and have become my salvation. The stone that the builders rejected has become the cornerstone. This is the Lord’s doing; it is marvelous in our eyes.”(Psalm 118:19-23) He links this with Isaiah 28, which says “therefore thus says the Lord GOD, “Behold, I am the one who has laid as a foundation in Zion, a stone, a tested stone, a precious cornerstone, of a sure foundation: ‘Whoever believes will not be in haste.’ And I will make justice the line, and righteousness the plumb line; and hail will sweep away the refuge of lies, and waters will overwhelm the shelter.” Then your covenant with death will be annulled, and your agreement with Sheol will not stand; when the overwhelming scourge passes through, you will be beaten down by it.” (Isaiah 28:16-18) When God annuls the grave, when God destroys death, this will be through a stone laid in Zion, and everyone who puts their trust in it will find redemption. But the builders of the house have rejected this stone, and are thus put to shame.
Romans 9 is not an isolated discussion about double predestination. It is the natural answer to all the questions raised in Romans 1-8. It is not about the restriction of God’s mercy to a select few. It is about how God has worked all things together for good. Even as the Jewish people were unfaithful, God has been faithful. God has used their unfaithfulness to make His name known throughout all the Earth, to bring many nations to the throne of the God of Israel. Though they stumble, their stumbling was not for damnation, but for the salvation of the nations. Indeed, not even their stumbling is permanent. As St. Paul writes, “For if their rejection means the reconciliation of the world, what will their acceptance mean but life from the dead?” (Romans 11:15)
Understanding these things, we are inspired to look to Heaven and cry out with the blessed Apostle in Romans 11:
Oh, the depth of the riches and wisdom and knowledge of God!
How unsearchable are his judgments and how inscrutable his ways!
“For who has known the mind of the Lord, or who has been his counselor?”
“Or who has given a gift to him that he might be repaid?”
For from him and through him and to him are all things.
To him be glory unto the ages of ages.
For further reading:
A very interesting commentary on the historical development of the Liturgy by Sister Vassa (Larin), given recently at St. Nicholas Orthodox Cathedral in Washington, DC:
Both Eastern Orthodoxy and Roman Catholicism are facing difficult new challenges. Christianity has become an open market where competition from upstart denominations is extremely fierce. The temptation to bury one’s head in the sand (Eastern Orthodoxy) or to mimic successful Evangelical methods and worship styles (Roman Catholicism) is as great as it is destructive. In North America, converts from Protestantism have provided their respective ‘teams’ with solid theological responses, but the struggle remains very difficult. In the rest of the world, the tide of sectarian Christianity (notably Adventism, Mormonism and Pentecostalism) continues its damage to the ancient apostolic Churches.
While Rome has effectively embraced a liturgical modernism as a remedy that has proven even worse than the disease, Orthodoxy is often in denial that anything needs to be fixed liturgically or organizationally. In fact, both sides can learn and benefit from the other’s strengths and experiences, as we shall see.
1. Catholics must become Orthodox
The rift between East and West was already extreme by the ninth century and reached its apex with Vatican I. But this apex was also marked by a growing sense that the theological and liturgical path of Roman Catholicism had reached some kind of a dead-end. Vatican II was an attempt to engineer a conciliar return to the sources that would reinterpret the Roman Catholic legacy of the past thousand years for the next millennium. Jean Danielou and Yves Congar – both Early Church scholars – were very influential at the council, but their vision was only partially achieved. As we have seen, the new mass of Pope Paul VI was an overreaction to the possible excesses of the Tridentine rite of Pius V. What was obscured or even lost in modern Roman Catholic worship is not just reverence and a few prayers; it is the eschatological experience of the Eucharist as an ascent to heaven, a manifestation on earth of the eternal liturgy of the angels and saints. Everything comes together to make the modern mass an expedited Eucharistic gathering of the community – or at least part of it since there are now various kinds of masses served at different times. Vestments and architectural styles are a manifestation of today’s trends and attitudes: universal ecclesiology becomes incarnate in its liturgical consequence. As a result of this anchoring in the present and disconnection from the apostolic past and eschatological future, the Roman Catholic priesthood is often disoriented. Liberal theology is rampant in seminaries and universities where many have rejected both patristic and scholastic theology in order to look for new ways to ‘rescue Christianity from the New Testament.’ I would like to suggest that if Roman Catholicism rediscovers and embraces the liturgical spirit of Eastern Christianity, the crisis of post-Vatican II liturgics will end. But this cannot be achieved without a concurrent embracing of eschatological-Eucharistic ecclesiology and pre-Nicene theology. Time is running short for a Vatican III council that would prepare the Roman Catholic world for the third millennium with an era of convergence and reconciliation with Eastern Orthodoxy.
2. Orthodox must become Catholic
The message of the Eastern Orthodox world to Roman Catholicism (and all other Christians) is often reduced to ‘leave us alone, we’d like to pretend you don’t exist.’ This fortress mentality is also a subconscious admission that ‘the God-protected city’ is in fact a weak and easy prey. The temptation to curl away from the world leads to nationalism and a failure to embrace the catholic-universal vocation of the Church. As a result, Orthodox Christians see themselves as Russian, Serbian or Greek Orthodox members of a national Church whose head is located in a political capital.
The contrast with Roman Catholicism is striking: the ability of the Church of Rome to coordinate worldwide missions, social work and a consistent doctrinal message should make the Orthodox think. The need for a universal center of unity and arbitration is obvious, and it does not have to mean absolute supremacy or infallibility. Two admonitions of our Lord come to mind:
“Why do you notice the splinter in your brother’s eye, but do not perceive the wooden beam in your own? How can you say to your brother, ‘Brother, let me remove that splinter in your eye,’ when you do not even notice the wooden beam in your own eye? You hypocrite! Remove the wooden beam from your eye first; then you will see clearly to remove the splinter in your brother’s eye” (Luke 6:40-41)
“Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, until the end of the age.” (Matthew 28:19-20)
The real tragedy about the Schism is the lack of concern about its tragic consequences. The voice that should still cry out from heaven is that of Patriarch Peter of Antioch who had written in 1054:
“I tremble lest, while you [Photius] endeavor to sew up the wound, it may turn to something worse, to schism; lest while you try to raise up what has been smitten down, a worse fall may be in store. Consider the obvious result of all of this, I mean the yawning gulf that must ultimately separate from our holy Church [Orthodox Antioch and Constantinople] that magnanimous and apostolic see [Rome]… Life henceforth will be filled with wickedness, and the whole world will be overturned…”
We should not have to think in terms of ‘mutual interest’ to discuss cooperation and reconciliation, but it may be that a common threat will do more for the cause of unity than our concern for the unity of the body of Christ.
3. Loving the Saints
If we confess Cyprian, Basil, Leo and Martin as saints and members of the same Body, what we also confess is that in spite of our earthly differences, heaven is filled with both ‘Roman Catholic’ and ‘Eastern Orthodox’ saints. In order to achieve visible and authentic unity, there must first be a desire to embrace what is best on the other side, and to find room for legitimate differences of expression. I am convinced that if Orthodox Christians can discover and love such lights as St. Therese of Lisieux or St. Solanus Casey, and if Catholics can embrace as their own St. Seraphim of Sarov or St. Elizabeth Fyodorovna, a new form of dialogue can take place: one motivated by love and respect. In general, Roman Catholicism has been more generous with its beatification and canonization process, with the result that a great variety of remarkable souls are presented as inspiring models for us today. By contrast, recent Eastern Orthodox saints tend to be martyrs and monastics: to my knowledge, not a single woman has been glorified for North American Orthodoxy, which means that if we can embrace Sts. Leo and Martin, we can certainly be inspired by Sts. Mary Cabrini or Katharine Drexel.
If we fail to realize that we are only “witnesses to the Truth” of Jesus Christ and imagine that our witness – in life and theology – will always be perfect, we are chasing the same mirage that leads countless American Christians from denomination to denomination, until one imagines that ‘the perfect Church’ has been discovered. If we accept the fact that our priests, bishops and ecclesial structures can make mistakes, we can focus on the incarnate Truth and deal reasonably with the theological formulas that are as fingers pointing to the moon: they are only signs, imperfectly crafted in human language, to a reality that is “ineffable, inconceivable, invisible, incomprehensible.” In a court of law, a human witness can be accurate without being perfect, but inaccuracies can also lead to a ‘falsification of the word of God’ (2 Corinthians 4:2) This is the mandate given to us by Scripture, both as individuals and as communities. Let us deal with our shortcomings without trepidation and strive to be conformed to Him who is the “faithful witness” (Revelation 1:5; John 18:37)
Reproduced with permission from His Broken Body: Understanding and Healing the Schism between the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches by Laurent Cleenewerck. Google Books preview here. Blog readers may also enjoy Fr. Laurent’s website Orthodox Answers.
Eschatology is the area of theology that deals with the ‘last things’, the ‘eschata’. Unfortunately, the ‘last things’ has come to be viewed in very narrow terms: the antichrist, judgement day, heaven and hell. But as an area of theology it is much more profound than this. It is unfortunate that eschatology is often viewed purely in terms of hell and judgement – when ultimately it is positive: it is, after all, the fulfilment of God’s promises and as such, it is what all Christians are to look forward to.
To understand eschatology we must begin not with the ‘last things’, but with the past. If eschatology is ultimately the coming of the Kingdom of God, then we must begin with the gospels, in which Christ proclaims that the Kingdom has arrived. This is illustrated in the miracles and exorcisms which Christ wrought. The kingdom of death and sickness was overthrown. And yet, Christ also speaks of a kingdom to come. He speaks also of His second coming and the last judgement. Herein lies the paradox of the Church in its eschatological dimension: the Kingdom of God has already arrived, and still it is yet to come. This is the basis of our understanding of the Church, of the Kingdom of God, of heaven and hell.
The Church is, in the words of Fr George Florovsky, “the image of eternity in time”. Thus it lives both in this age and in the age to come. The “eschatological” dimension of the Church begins with Christ’s Resurrection. This was the beginning of the end. The early Christians spoke of their living in “the last days”, not because they simply got it wrong, but because they understood that the age to come had already broken through in this present age because Christ had already raised human nature into the heights of heaven by His Resurrection and Ascension, and promised to return in glory.
Eternal heaven and eternal hell are the consummation of our relationship with God here and now. Thus heaven and hell are not two different places. They instead signify two different ways of experiencing the “uncreated energies” of God. Or, more precisely, they are the same experience, except that they are perceived differently by man, depending on man’s internal state. From the moment of His Second Coming, through eternity, all people will be seeing Christ in His uncreated light. As we read in the Gospels, “The hour is coming, and now is the time, when all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, and shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation. On 5:28-29). In the presence of Christ, mankind will be separated as sheep are separated from the goats, to His right and His left. In other words, they will be discerned in two separate groups: those who will be looking upon Christ as Paradise and those who will be looking upon Christ as hell.
This is what is depicted in some icons of the Second Coming. From Christ a river ﬂows forth: it is radiant like a golden light at the upper end of it, where the saints are. At its lower end, the same river is ﬁery, and it is in that part of the river that the demons and the unrepentant are depicted. This is why in Luke 2:34 we read that Christ stands as the fall and the rising (resurrection) of many. Christ becomes the resurrection into eternal life, for those who accepted Him and who followed the suggested means of healing the heart; and to those who rejected Him, He becomes their demise and their hell. There exist numerous patristic testimonies: St. John of the Ladder says that the uncreated light of Christ is “an all-consuming ﬁre and an illuminating light.” St. Gregory Palamas observes: “Thus, it is said, He will baptize you by the Holy Spirit and by ﬁre: in other words, by illumination and punishment, depending on each person’s predisposition, which will bring upon him that which he deserves.” Elsewhere, The light of Christ, “albeit one and accessible to all, is not partaken of uniformly, but differently.”
Heaven and hell are thus different experiences of God’s glory and indeed, of His love. This is beautifully expressed by St Isaac the Syrian:
“Those who are tormented in hell are tormented by the invasion of love. What is there more bitter and violent than the pains of love? Those who feel they have sinned against love bear in themselves a damnation much heavier than the most dreaded punishments. The suffering with which sinning against love afflicts the heart is more keenly felt than any other torment. It is absurd to assume that the sinners in hell are deprived of God’s love. Love is offered impartially. But by its very power it acts in two ways. It torments sinners, as happens here on earth when we are tormented by the presence of a friend to whom we have been unfaithful. And it gives joy to those who have been faithful. That is what the torment of hell is in my opinion: remorse”
Consequently, Paradise and hell are not a reward or a punishment, but the way that we individually experience the sight of Christ, depending on the condition of our heart. God does not punish in essence, although, for educative purposes, the Scripture does mention punishment. We must bear in mind that in scripture Christ and the authors of the scriptures use allegories and images to convey things that are otherwise incomprehensible. Thus we have images of fire, of light, of torment. But these are not to be taken too literally. These are simply the means by which we can grasp the incredible joy or incredible pain of the realities of heaven and hell.
The notion of hell is something that many people, including some Christians, reject as incompatible with Christian belief in a loving and forgiving God. But this displays a perilous confusion of thought. Love is free, and since we are free to love God or to hate Him, the realities of this choice must also exist, and those realities we call heaven and hell. To reject hell is to reject the belief that we are free to choose whether to love God, or at best, it is to reject that hating God has any consequences: all the benefits of religion and none of the cost. Is the rejection of hell not the greatest example of wishful thinking the world has ever seen? If it is true that God is the source of eternal life, then is the rejection of God not eternal death? But if it is true that heaven and hell are not, as in paganism, simply places of reward or punishment, but the experience of the one eternal God, then surely heaven and hell must be eternal, for heaven and hell are in fact God Himself. This is why we believe in eternal hell: it is not because we relish in the thought of eternal punishment. After all, however evil people may be, eternal punishment far outweighs the crime! But it is precisely this idea of punishment that we must get away from. Heaven and hell are eternal relationships with God. Since God has no end, then heaven and hell can have no end.
Now, if heaven and hell are two different experiences of God’s love, then it is no coincidence that the criterion for our ‘judgement’ is also love. On Meatfare Sunday, we hear Christ tell us how we will be judged: by whether we have fed the hungry, clothed the naked, visited the sick and imprisoned, welcomed strangers. Christ says that inasmuch as you showed love to others, you showed love to me. Here we see the principle of God’s co-suffering love. Christ identifies Himself with every human being. If we treat others badly, we treat Christ badly; if we treat others well, we treat Christ well. Another parable of the judgement is given again in the gospels in the parable of the rich man and the poor Lazarus. The rich man lives sumptuously and ignores the poor Lazarus living on the street, starving and suffering. Both die, and the rich man ends up in hell, and Lazarus in heaven. The rich man too would have been where Lazarus is not by being poor, but by sharing his wealth with the poor. What happens in the day of judgement is all our sins will be revealed and we will perceive within us the real nature of our deeds and the condition of our heart. It is as though, if we are today living blissfully unaware of just what rotten people we are, all of a sudden we will recognise what we are really like and what we have really done, and the pain of that realisation is our hell. This is why the Church teaches that there is no salvation without repentance. It is only by acknowledging our true selves and all the sins that separate us from God and turning to Him for forgiveness that we can be spared the horror of finally meeting the brilliant radiance of God’s goodness face to face. People speak as though meeting God, meeting absolute goodness, would be a lovely thing. They need to think again. To meet the ultimate good only to find that we are His enemy, that we have hated Him, that we have rejected Him, would be terror. St Nicodemos of the Holy Mountain explained this by describing God as fire. To those who approach the fire with fear, love and respect, it gives light and warmth; but to those who approach it carelessly, it is a scorching flame.
Thus it stands to reason that the Church teaches that there is no repentance after death. As I said, heaven and hell are the consummation, fulfilment and realisation of our love or lack of love for God and neighbour. Surely, on the day of judgement or in hell, repentance would be all too easy. Who would not admit he was wrong before the glory of God Himself or in the midst of hellish torments? But again this is to think in childish and simplified terms. The unrepentant heart cannot experience God’s love as anything else other than a tormenting presence that it wants to escape from but cannot, because God is everywhere and everlasting. Repentance is not a case of admitting you were wrong because now God is here in front of you and showed you the reality you ignored all your life, as though repentance is simply a way of escaping the unpleasant reality of hell. Love is not about happiness or misery, and so we cannot repent simply because we want to be happy or do not want to be miserable. Love is about truly wanting the person we are with, and their presence and embrace being the source of our joy. For those who hate God, this eternal and omnipresent embrace of God is torture, and thus they will experience that love as eternal torment.
Consequently, the ﬁre of hell has nothing in common with the Roman Catholic doctrine of “purgatory,” – it is not a created fire, nor is it a purifying one which people must go through to ‘atone’ for their sins. This view has been utterly rejected by Orthodoxy. Hell is God Himself no less than Heaven is God Himself, and whether we experience the one or the other depends on whether we want God’s love or hate it.
But I have spoken too much of hell. I said that we should not view eschatology in negative terms, and that eschatology is the consummation and fulfilment of God’s promises. This fulfilment and consummation is described in the last two chapters of the bible. It is a pity that so many people are too afraid to read the last book of the bible, because it is in this book that we are given a glimpse into the very thing that Christians are waiting for: the fullness of the Kingdom of God and the renewal of all creation. Too often modern Christians forget that the Church is not just an institution, but the Kingdom of God that is here but is still to come. The Church is described as the Bride of Christ. We are betrothed to Christ. The second coming is the wedding day and the final consummation. Therefore, we live this present life in two dimensions: as saved and yet hoping for salvation; as betrothed to Christ and yet in anticipation and anxiety for the consummation of the marriage; as joyful and yet penitent; as having everything and yet possessing nothing; as living in this world and yet “having here no continuing city”; as in the world yet not of the world; as being members of Christ’s Church, receiving the new life of baptism and eternal life in the Eucharist; and yet as striving to be made worthy of the Kingdom to come. This double character of Christian life is absolutely essential to the Church’s spirituality and role within society. Awaiting the Kingdom of God by no means amounts to being disinterested in the present world, but the exact opposite. It is this present world that is the stage on which the history of salvation is taking place. This life is the history of eternity. The present world and the world to come cannot be separated. So permit me to end with some passages from the last two chapters of the bible, which describe this coming of God’s kingdom to earth, and the happy ending that we Christians wait for with eager anticipation:
Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and there was no longer any sea. I saw the Holy City, the new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride beautifully dressed for her husband. And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, “Behold! God’s dwelling place is now among the people, and he will dwell with them. They will be his people, and God himself will be with them and be their God. He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away.”
He who was seated on the throne said, “I am making everything new!” Then he said, “Write this down, for these words are trustworthy and true.”
He said to me: “It is done. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End. To the thirsty I will give water without cost from the spring of the water of life. Those who are victorious will inherit all this, and I will be their God and they will be my children.
One of the seven angels… came and said to me, “Come, I will show you the bride, the wife of the Lamb.” And he carried me away in the Spirit to a mountain great and high, and showed me the Holy City, the new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God. It shone with the glory of God, and its brilliance was like that of a very precious jewel, like a jasper, clear as crystal.
I did not see a temple in the city, because the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are its temple. The city does not need the sun or the moon to shine on it, for the glory of God gives it light, and the Lamb is its lamp. The nations will walk by its light, and the kings of the earth will bring their splendor into it. On no day will its gates ever be shut, for there will be no night there. The glory and honor of the nations will be brought into it.
Then the angel showed me the river of the water of life, as clear as crystal, flowing from the throne of God and of the Lamb down the middle of the great street of the city. On each side of the river stood the tree of life, bearing twelve crops of fruit, yielding its fruit every month. And the leaves of the tree are for the healing of the nations. No longer will there be any curse. The throne of God and of the Lamb will be in the city, and his servants will serve him. They will see his face, and his name will be on their foreheads. There will be no more night. They will not need the light of a lamp or the light of the sun, for the Lord God will give them light. And they will reign for ever and ever.
“Behold, I am coming soon! My reward is with me, and I will give to each person according to what they have done. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End.
The Spirit and the bride say, “Come!” And let the one who hears say, “Come!” Let the one who is thirsty come; and whoever desires, let him take the water of life freely.
Amen. Come, Lord Jesus.
Blog readers may be interested in Fr. Vassilios’ lecture series entitled “Lessons in Orthodox Faith & Theology” which can be listened to here.