Schizo Ecumenists

     Not too long ago a brilliant interview with Archimandrite Robert Taft, SJ about ecumenical relations between the Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches was published. Unfortunately, immediately after it was released it was met by a backlash of bigotry and extreme views. It seems his comments that referred to the Orthodox churches as "Sister churches" became an inconvenient truth that many people did not want to hear. However, despite the ideologies that seek to undermine his views the way he used the term "Sister church" is 100% in line with current magisterium of the Catholic Church. It makes you wonder if his critics are hearing different voices in their heads or are just not well informed about the official Catholic ecumenical relations with the Orthodox.
     When it comes to the proper use of the term "Sister church" for Catholics the official use is described by the CONGREGATION FOR THE DOCTRINE OF THE FAITH in question 4 from RESPONSES TO SOME QUESTIONS REGARDING CERTAIN ASPECTS OF THE DOCTRINE ON THE CHURCH. In reference to the terms use by ecumenists since the Vatican II council the former inquisitors said the following:” The Council wanted to adopt the traditional use of the term. “Because these Churches, although separated, have true sacraments and above all – because of the apostolic succession – the priesthood and the Eucharist, by means of which they remain linked to us by very close bonds”, they merit the title of “particular or local Churches”, and are called sister Churches of the particular Catholic Churches”. Based on this the use of term designates the real familial sense of the word sister. As a result, Catholics can legitimately say that Orthodox and Catholic churches come from the same mother and even though our relationship is estranged our churches belong to the One Church of Christ.
     The sad fact, which the congregation also points out, is that because of the estrangement that we Catholics share with the Orthodox the “the fullness of universality “of the Church is not yet realized. I think this realization as taught by the former inquisitors demonstrates a fact that makes many Catholics uncomfortable, which the Archimandrite himself speaks of when he says ”we are no longer the only kid on the block, the whole Church of Christ, but one Sister Church among others”. Some have claimed that what the Archimandrite said is an innovation of his part and doesn’t officially represent the Catholic Church. However, this couldn’t be farther from the truth based on the following statement from the Balamand Declaration (par. 13), which is about the Catholic and Orthodox churches not holding the exclusive rights to be  known as the only true churches of Jesus Christ:   “On each side it is recognized that what Christ has entrusted to his Church - profession of apostolic faith, participation in the same sacraments, above all the one priesthood celebrating the one sacrifice of Christ, the apostolic succession of bishops - cannot be considered the exclusive property of one of our Churches". For those that don’t know the Balamand agreement represents the official relations that Catholics currently hold with the Orthodox churches. As an official agreement it demonstrates that the Archimandrite represents well the official position of the Catholic Church.
     The Archimandrite once said in another place that “"I have spent my entire life trying to build bridges to Orthodoxy. The world is full of people who are bridge destroyers. They want to destroy the bridges that already exist. That’s not me. I want to reach out to other people." Obviously, his recent critics demonstrate well the desire to destroy the bridges that now exist between Orthodox and Catholics. However, unlike them he is not ignorant of the history of the Church or the current official relationship between the Catholic and Orthodox churches. To those Catholics that would oppose him I would encourage you to embrace the true teachings of your church. It might be difficult to recognize that you are not the only “kid on the block” but it is necessary in order to achieve the healing that we all need. To continue in any other position in the end becomes nothing less than a presentation of an ideology of pure bigotry.

Reflections on Reunion

          When it comes to overcoming divisions I am reminded of a passage from the Philokalia. It says that through the sacrament of baptism we receive “mystically the fullness of grace” (St. Mark the Ascetic v1, pg.133)”. This is important to understand because through baptism we become fully members of the Catholic Church and receive mystically everything that God is. It doesn’t matter if I get baptized by a Roman Catholic or an Eastern Orthodox because all those that are baptized into Christ are now “clothed with Christ” (Galatians 3:27). In addition, this is also described in the Vatican II Decree on Ecumenism where it says, "All those justified by faith through Baptism are incorporated into Christ. They therefore have a right to be honored by the title of Christian, and are properly regarded as brothers and sisters in the Lord by the sons and daughters of the Catholic Church"(15)”. As a result, everyone that is baptized is truly a member of the Catholic Church. Being all members we find ourselves now with the obligation to overcome our divisions and establish a full visible communion.
     Even though we who are baptized have the fullness of God, growth in this reality is not achieved in isolation. The scriptures describe certain ministries that bring about a unity of faith (Ephesians 4:13). Based on this God works through other people to help us develop our spirituality. This is why the Church  like the incarnation of our God in human flesh is made up of not just the invisible but it is also a visible means of salvation. This is also stated Vatican II Dogmatic Constitution of the Church where it says that the Church is a "complex reality" involving both human and divine elements for salvation (8). As a Catholic I believe the fullness of these elements"subsists" in my tradition. However, as long as there are divisions it does not matter if have all of the Church at my disposal because my spirituality  remains personally effected (1Cor. 12:26). Whether we like it or not a division will always be a mutual problem and if I am not doing my part to heal the Body of Christ than the divisions will continue.
     Without a communion in faith those in the Church are weakened in there spiritual progress. However, as I said there are as  the scripture teaches different ministries that help bring about the unity that we need. With this in mind we should take advantage of the fact that the Eastern Orthodox and Catholics share in the fullness of these ministries needed for unity. It is for this reason Blessed John Paul the Great called the Eastern Orthodox sister churches. He also referred to the sister churches (Rome and Constantinople) as now working to reestablish a mutual communion that they both lack. As he says in UT UNUM SINT 59: “Since its establishment in 1979, the Joint International Commission for the Theological Dialogue between the Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church has worked steadily, directing its study to areas decided upon by mutual agreement, with the purpose of re-establishing full communion between the two Churches”. The language he uses here is vital because in one way it reveals that the churches on both sides of the division are hurting. Some might say to me it’s because they don’t have a Pope but I believes that  Blessed John Paul the Great would say it’s because we don’t have them. The Great Schism is a two way street and we who are Byzantine Catholics have a special obligation to do what is in our power to heal what separates our churches.
          My suggestion for the ecumenical effort is pretty simple. It is not to go on a Latin purge, something that is often proposed in our ranks, but rather to purge the worldliness in our lives. We need to fully embrace the ascetic traditions of our byzantine fathers, which help us to be enriched in our relationship with Jesus Christ. This includes regular fasting, daily mediation in the word of God, and most of all to set a time each day for deep prayer. In addition, we should always be working toward establishing our churches as places of evangelization and prayer. We can do this by making available the opportunity to have traditional liturgical services during the week in addition to establishing various ministries that flow from the life of our churches. This may seem simple but if we remain committed to Christ we can only hope to see God healing what divides our churches. The only thing that will heal us is what made us what we are and this is what we must embrace, which is to say that we must become what God is through the grace that we all have received in baptism.

Bad Religion

     My uncle told me once that it was easy to follow Christ. In his explanation all he needed to do was stop getting drunk and start going to church. After hearing this I couldn't help to think that this might also be the way that many people understand the Church. It seems the example that some have received is one in which we are strictly a moral religion. Even though this understanding is false, for some reason it has made its way into our churches. For instance, countless times I have heard teachings about what we should be doing or how bad others are doing it and little about experiencing God. In coming to believe this is the norm, people are left with only one side of spirituality which is the moral. In accepting this spirituality a person is then faced with a life of dealing with guilt instead of learning to encounter God. Consequently, for people like my uncle and others, this type of "bad" religion has very little to offer.
     There are some of us who are horrible with moral obligations. For many the struggle with sin is so overwhelming that the opportunity for failing seems constant. Unfortunately, if we only focus on the moral aspects of our spirituality we are left without any real hope of encountering God. In addition, with a strictly moral focus we will have a religion where we are always in some ways dealing with the bad. If this then is the only religion that people know they sometimes are forced to conform to certain standards like the pay, pray, and obey model. In fact, some people get real good at conforming and so good that they learn to transfer their guilt onto others. For example, I knew a person of wealth who gave a lecture to someone less fortunate about making sure they tithe a tenth of their paycheck and to do so according to what was made before taxes came out. In this ridiculous display of piety, which just so happens to reflect what happened between the publican and the pharisee, the wealthy person walked away feeling great while the poor person was left to struggle with feelings of not being faithful to God. This event made me wonder if such people would have any religion at all if they did not have the power to make others feel bad.
     When it comes to guilt and our moral place before God I think some forget where they stand. In this regard, St. Symeon the New Theologian teaches that because we have sinned, “all of us have become both corruptible and mortal, and there is nothing that might set aside this great and frightful sentence”. According to this there is no such thing as a the truly moral person because there is nothing in our power that can rescue us from what we have become. No matter how good we may get at doing religious activities or achieving moral standards we will not escape our own corruption and mortality. It is for this reason, according to St. Symeon, that God “annihilated” through Christ all that keeps us from Him. For without such mercy on God’s part we would be left with constantly trying to manage a failing morality that would eventually destroy us. However, in the place of experiencing failure we are offered through Christ a constant hope in the love of God.
     With the hope we are given in Christ the truth about morality in the Church is real simple. It does not involve escaping different states of feeling guilty because we now participate in the divine nature (2petet 1:4). To say this more simply, we who are in Christ have been given all of what God is.For us there are no barriers, guilt, or anything that can keep us from God. I believe this is further emphasized in scripture where it says that there is no longer any condemnation for those that are in Christ (Rom. 8:1).In addition, for those times that we do fail and are faced with guilt reconciliation is offered continually through the sacraments of the Church. Now being that there is no longer any condemnation and having a constant way out of guilt there is only repentance. Repentance as it is classically defined means to turn away from sin. However, for a Christian to do so means that it does not end in achieving a good behavior. Rather, it gives them an opportunity to experience more fully the gift of the experience of God that they have been given through baptism. It is for this reason that repentance is to be continual for there is no end to growing in the experience of what God is.
     When it comes to my uncle I would have to say that there is only one thing easy about my religion. It’s the fact that the Lord Jesus Christ is always giving us the opportunity to repent. No matter how bad we have been at religion or how much we will fail at in the future there is no end to His mercy. However, where I would disagree with my uncle is in his belief that it’s easy to follow. For quitting getting drunk and going to church, as he said,  would never be enough. Nor would be sufficient always going to a liturgy, doing a daily prayer, or keeping a fast. In the end St. Symeon teaches there is only one thing that will be enough and that is in how we have become like Christ. For us now, we are called to make the most of every opportunity through repentance and embrace the gift that God has hidden in us.As the fathers of our Byzantine tradition teach us, God became man so we through grace can become what He is. We may never be good at trying to achieve this but we can be rest assured that if we don’t give up there is an endless supply of God' grace waiting for us.



Quotes taken St. Symeon’s Homilies on Creation (Click) to read.

Panagia

     It is said to be the foundation of all the feasts of the Lord that we celebrate. For in this feast the Lord takes for himself human flesh and changes human nature forever. As you might know by now I am speaking of the feast of the Annunciation of Lord, which the Byzantine tradition celebrates on March 25. In celebrating this feast I am reminded of a special title that my tradition gives to the Theotokos, which is the Panagia (All-Holy).We give this title to her because in addition to being  pure she was also the most worthy of the human race to give our God flesh. In thinking of this we should be filled with wonder because no other person was chosen to conceive our salvation. Her son might have been the one to ultimately grant salvation to all but our Lord chose first to manifest our hope through the Panagia.
     As we know from our traditions when God took on flesh through the Annunciation a complete deification of human nature took place. However, what we may not know from our traditions is that before the Annunciation deification was still possible for human nature but not in a complete way. We first see this in the various holy people of the Old Testament like Moses who's face radiated the divine light or even the Prophet Elijah who was mysteriously taken by God while still alive. However, whatever experience of deification the saints of the Old Testament had it was not enough to overcome death. It would not be until the Panagia that we would find a person with some capacity to silence the grip of death.
     In a way the Panagia was the completion of the work of those that came before her. The fathers before her were also exposed to God’s grace and in such a way that humanity became more and more purified for that moment when God would become man. However, where death held the fathers back the Panagia became the vessel where the Divine Nature would have no barriers. In addition, by being the completion of the flow of grace through those that came before her we find that the Panagia was given a special role in the salvation of the human race. I believe Blessed John Paul the Great emphasizes this when he once said, “Redemption was the work of her Son; Mary was associated with it on a subordinate level. Nevertheless, her participation was real and demanding. (Inseg VI/1 (1983) 1136 [ORE 783:1)”.
     In one way the Byzantine tradition shares the Blessed Father's understanding of Mary's role, which is seen in our feast of the Entrance of the Theotokos into the temple. This feast specifies that Mary did something that was not normal and has even been dismissed by scholars as myth. For this feast proclaims that the Panagia did something only proper for the high priest by entering into the Holy of Hollies in the temple. Normally it was the high priest alone that would go to such a place to mediate atonement of sin but the Panagia by her own virtue presented herself to God there. By doing this she demonstrated through her actions that she was "Panagia" and the true temple in which sin could ultimately be abolished. Its unfortunate that some have dismissed this feast because it demonstrates the work of God at its climax in saving us from the power of sin. Before this there was no one worthy to fulfill the qualifications that could bring salvation to the human race. It was only through Mary's constant obedience and response to grace that we find for the first time in history someone who was worthy to experience the fullness of God.
     By the time the Annunciation happened we find Mary by her own virtue being the Panagia. She participated in the divinity in such a way that she surpassed what might have been humanly possible for Eve before the fall. Consequently, she was filled with the Grace of God in such a capacity that she only awaited greater perfection, which she received through the Annunciation. It was at this time when she received by her consent to the angle the divinity of the Word of God. In one way it is the same gift of perfection that we also receive through the sacraments. However, for her she received the grace unmediated through God becoming man in her. In fact, her experience of the divine nature from that point became so profound that one of the Byzantine Fathers St. Gregory Palamas called her the boundary between the created and the uncreated. For in her alone there was and ever will be a total and unrestricted access to the divine nature.

I Dream of Celibacy

     After reading the homilies of St. John Chrysostom on marriage I never looked at my wife the same. For some time before that my understanding of marriage was not what it should have been. The reason for this is the often mythical understanding of celibacy that is expressed in many catholic circles. This understanding uses certain teachings of the Apostle Paul on celibacy to demonstrate that marriage is an inferior state. As a Byzantine I have seen this demonstration many times and usually as a debate point against our tradition of married clergy. However, those that hold to this way of thinking ignore one of the most fundamental facts of scripture concerning the sacrament of marriage. For there is nothing in this life that expresses Christ better than the sacramental intimacy of the divinized union of man and wife.
     Before I met my wife I wanted to discover how God was calling me to serve him. To discover this for some time I committed myself to a life solitude, fasting, and prayer. By doing this I hoped that God would allow me to discern if He wanted me to join a monastery or enter into a married life. After a time I found myself in a place where I got my answer and met the most wonderful person I have ever know, my wife. What was unfortunate though was that I was exposed to the popular thinking often expressed by the celibacy apologists. I felt to some degree that I failed to completely devote myself to God because I was no longer living the way I did before marriage. Eventually, my wife discovered my feelings and this was very hurtful to her. Not only was it hurtfully to her but I came to understand that this was also hurtful to God. For it was God that called me to married life and to think of myself as a failure was nothing short of not trusting Him.
     St. John Chrysostom said in one of his homilies that “there is nothing which so welds our life together as the love of man and wife”. In trying to understanding this level of love I would  learn that matrimony is nothing less than a way to become what God is by grace. It is a sacrament and the Apostle Paul teaches in scripture that marriage is a “profound mystery” that represents Christ and His Church(Eph. 5:32). When it comes to using this spousal language about Christ and the Church celibate priesthood has sometimes been demonstrated as the fullest expression of this.However,even though it is a legitimate expression of priestly ministry there is nothing in scripture that speaks of ordained ministry in this way. The only time this imagery is used exclusively in scripture is in the description of the sacrament of matrimony itself.
     There is no doubt that celibacy plays a vital role in spirituality but there is no place in Holy Tradition where we can find a foundation for the way that some use it today. For in an almost warlike manner celibacy is being used by some as a weapon to show the inferiority of the married state and most often in context against the Byzantine tradition of married clergy. What celibacy does accomplish is way in which a person can give greater devotion to God. Sometimes people get confused when they read the Apostle Paul when he speaks about this. In scripture Paul speaks of celibacy as a means devotion and he even also calls married people to practice it in some ways. Never does he say it makes a person’s ministry superior,better, or makes one more like Christ.
     From a Byzantine perspective celibacy is a form of asceticism that allows for the deepest commitment in order to experience God. In this regard, many may not realize that in our tradition it’s not a strange thing for married people who after a life of developing a family might choose to end their days in a monastery. For us the monastic life is central to our spirituality and it is lived in different ways according to how God has called each of us. In the homilies of St. John Chrysostom we see this where he describes a married household similarly to how other saints would describe life in a monastery. For in both there is way in which we fight against the fallen nature and learn to experience God. Based on this, for someone to say that marriage is for the weak or an inferior state demonstrates a great ignorance of its divinizing reality.
     In my own life I am grateful that I have a wife that I can seek the Lord with side by side. I regret the way I once felt about marriage and could only hope that others would overcome the false dreams people hold about celibacy. When it comes to what ever state we are in many saints would affirm that in the end the only thing of value is how much we have become like Christ. In my case marriage is the means by which God has called me to accomplish this. It’s no easy feat to have a Christian marriage for it is a life of dying to self and becoming like God. I think I would leave this post with one reminder from St. John Chrysostom for those that would speak of the married life as the inferior state or something not compatible with ordained ministry: “This then is marriage when it takes place according to Christ, spiritual marriage, and spiritual birth, not of blood, nor of travail, nor of the will of the flesh. Such was the birth of Christ, not of blood, nor of travail. …Yea, a marriage it is, not of passion, nor of the flesh, but wholly spiritual, the soul being united to God by a union unspeakable, and which He alone knoweth”.

Quotes takes from St. John Chrysostom’s Homily on Ephesians (click) to read.

Death on the Byzantine Cross

     Just about every month I get a knock on my door from someone trying to save me. For me it is always an honor to talk with such people because it gives me a chance to share my faith. Usually, when these people present their gospel they demonstrate how guilty I am in the sight of God and that because of this he is going to punish me with Hell. However, because God loves me he sent Jesus to be punished in my place by dying on the Cross. At this point I have no trouble with agreeing that God punishes sin but from their point of view they make it seem like God is schizophrenic. For God is mad enough to put me in Hell but at the same time loves me to the point that He would sacrifice his only son. My question to them usually is why couldn’t God just forgive me and why is it necessary for him to kill his own son? You would think it would be more logical to just forgive rather than to have someone suffer for me.
     The way it is expressed above about Christ dying on the cross is very popular in modern evangelization. It’s easy to understand that we are guilty and to see that we need someone to make us right with God. However, this presentation of the Lord’s sacrifice is not without criticism or weakness. In fact, to some degree it often makes the Lord’s death resemble a sacrifice that is thrown into a volcano to stop the anger of the volcano god. Even one of our Byzantine fathers St. Gregory of Nazianzus had the following to say about this approach: “On what principle did the Blood of His Only begotten Son delight the Father, Who would not receive even Isaac, when he was being offered by his Father, but changed the sacrifice, putting a ram in the place of the human victim? Is it not evident that the Father accepts Him, but neither asked for Him nor demanded Him; (On Pascha Oration 45, XXII)”. There is no doubt that we are guilty of sin but there must be more to the Lord’s death then paying for our crimes.
     In the Byzantine tradition I believe there is a more complete understanding of the Lord’s death. In fact, each year we proclaim this during Holy Pascha when we say, “Christ is risen from the dead, By death He trampled death, And to those in the tombs He granted life”. From this perspective the Lord’s death becomes the means to end the problems with the human condition, which are the problems that keep us from God. Based on this, the guilt debt from sin is given a different position. Instead of our guilt being something that specifically makes God punish us with the fires of Hell it becomes more a power that leads us to our own self destruction. Being under the power of sin we are stuck in this cycle that leads to death, which is also a cycle that leads us to sin because we die. Finding ourselves in this impossible condition we are without a doubt in need of redemption. A redemption that not only just satisfies God’s wrath but one that gives us the freedom from our own condition.
     When it comes to understanding our redemption we are often faced with a powerful contradiction. If we die and sin because we die how can we free ourselves. This of course is why the Son of God became one of us. By becoming man the Lord was not only free of sin but he also suffered the effects of our condition in order to heal it. We see this healing at its fullest when the Lord experienced death on the cross. When it comes to show how this healing took place I believe St. Gregory of Nyssa gives the best explanation. In explaining the Lord’s death the saint teaches that the humanity of the Lord was like the bait on a fishing hook. When death came like a fish to swallow the bait it encountered the hook, which was the Lord’s Divine Nature. The saint demonstrated that it was Lord’s Divinity that healed us from our condition. The resurrection of the Lord from this point of view becomes for humanity the last act to free us from the slavery of our condition.Since by the Lord's death he destroyed what ultimately keeps us in the cycle of sin.
     There is no doubt that punishment for our sin is an aspect of the Lord death. However, the Byzantine tradition offers much more in understanding sins effects and also the power of God’s love. For not only do we receive forgiveness through Christ but we also receive the freedom from all the keeps us from God. Through the cross God has broken down every barrier that kept us from Him. As the scripture says, “For he has rescued us from the dominion of darkness and brought us into the kingdom of the Son he loves (Colossians 1:13)”. For us there is now by the cross not only just forgiveness but the ability to participate in the heavenly life or as our fathers have called it Theosis*. In addition, by cross we also receive the same power through Christ to heal our own condition. It is only by this power that we shall also overcome our own death.


*In Byzantine theology Theosis is the transforming effect of divine grace, the spirit of God, or the atonement of Christ. It literally means to become more divine, more like God, and/or take upon a divine nature.