Blog

Source: Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese

The Assembly of Canonical Orthodox Bishops of the United States of America will send a delegation to the annual March for Life, Thursday, January 22, 2015 in Washington, DC. The date marks the 42nd anniversary of the Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion.

Metropolitan Methodios will lead the delegation. He will be joined by Metropolitan Tikhon, Bishop Michael, and Bishop Demetrios Mokissos. Metropolitan Tikhon will deliver the invocation at the annual Rose Dinner at the Renaissance Hotel in downtown Washington DC on the evening of the 22nd. On the evening before the March, Metropolitan Methodios will attend the National Prayer Vigil for Life at The Basilica of the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception in Washington, DC.

The rally begins at noon on the National Mall at 12th Street. Orthodox Christian marchers will gather to the right of the stage under the “Orthodox Christians for Life” banner and signs. The march begins at 1 PM and processes down Constitution Avenue to the US Supreme Court, where prayers for the victims of abortion will be offered.

When we suffer wounds, especially traumatic wounds (fired from a job, a divorce, loss of a loved one, abuse, etc.) God can bring healing.

Healing takes time and often the most healing comes through others who have suffered the same kind of wounding.

Wounding changes us however. It leaves scars.

But scars are not wounds. Scars are what remain when the wounds heal.

Don’t pick at the scar. You will cause another wound, but that new wound will be different than the wound that caused the scar.

Instead accept the change that the wounding imposed.

Do this and the future opens again, albeit in a new way.

God heals the wounded, but He works with the scarred.

It’s unfortunate but true: Sometimes priests are treated unfairly and the results can be financially catastrophic.

A friend of mine, a solid priest with a great track record and no hint of scandal, untoward behavior or anything else that warrants the kind of treatment he is receiving, is undergoing some grave difficulty at the moment.

I want to raise $1,000 to help him through his current distress. I need to keep his name private to protect his dignity.

You might ask:

• Why doesn’t the Church help him out? It will if you help.
• Why don’t his fellow priests help him out? That is what I am trying to do here.
• Why doesn’t his bishop help him out? That answer is known only to God.

I wish it were different but unfortunately it isn’t.

Can you help?

If you can help with any amount please donate below:

Thank you very much.

Fr. Hans Jacobse

In my experience the following paragraph from the essay below describes the social world of young men that is accurate and true. I see it as a social crisis of the first order. Pornography imposes personal and social costs we are only beginning to comprehend. I see this time and again when I deal with young men trying to learn how to become men.

Underlying these costs is the broader argument that porn prevents the formation of masculinity and healthy sexual identity in adolescent males, the most impressionable users of pornography. The dangers of porn are only amplified by increasing cultural confusion about what “being a man” really means (cf. any tongue-in-cheek BuzzFeed listicle), as well as a worrying lack of male role models through broken family structures and modern technological isolation from wider communities. This leaves the young adult male essentially alone in his attempt to construct a model of authentic masculinity. The sense of the masculine grows as it is challenged, but without frequent and instructive challenges (ideally, from fathers or father-figures) it runs the risk of becoming at best, stagnant, at worst, warped. The most pernicious form of this warped masculinity comes in the temptation of pornography, which Struthers says “hijacks a man’s mental world” and impedes his progress toward becoming the best man he can be. As a result, we have today a generational arrested development of young males who remain in the emotional stages of boyhood.

By Octavia Ratiu

The modern world of pornography is a force to be reckoned with: Porn consumption has never been higher in the history of the internet age, with content that is more graphic and violent than ever before. Porn draws almost 40 million daily users (70 percent men and 30 percent women), comprising almost 40 percent of all internet traffic. According to statistics reported in The Witherspoon Institute’s 2010 report, The Social Costs of Pornography: A Statement of Findings and Recommendations, 66 percent of men ages 18 to 34 visit a porn site every month, and it is estimated that between 40 and 50 percent of regular internet porn users ultimately develop signs of sexual addiction. More men than women view porn (at least at this point in time): A 2007 survey of American college students showed that 70 percent of the women in the sample had never looked at porn, compared to just 14 percent of their male peers. Accordingly, the porn industry is huge: 4 billion dollars a year is spent on video pornography, more than that on football, baseball, and basketball combined. To put it simply, our culture is oversexed; our culture has become “pornified,” as writer Pamela Paul put it in 2005. What does this mean, and why should we care?

Although religious arguments against pornography abound, increasingly more critiques of the interpersonal wreckage of pornography are coming from secular voices in public discourse. “For most of human history,” feminist Naoimi Wolf wrote in 2003, “the erotic images have been reflections of, or celebrations of, or substitutes for, real naked women. For the first time in human history, the images’ power and allure have supplanted that of real naked women. Today, real naked women are just bad porn” (my emphasis). Indeed, porn may be determined problematic according to arguments that appeal not only to morality but also to our basic biology.

Dubbed “the new narcotic,” pornography is very much a physical matter, rooted in the biological complexity of our sexual structure, according to neuroscientist William Struthers in his 2009 book Wired for Intimacy: How Pornography Hijacks the Male Brain. Porn sacrifices relationships with real women for the allure of an image of a woman on a screen, a pattern akin to what Struthers calls “a consumption of sexual poison that becomes part of the fabric of the mind.” These effects are exacerbated by the response of the specifically male neurological makeup to porn’s pervasive objectification of the female body.

From a biological perspective, viewing porn fundamentally changes the way our brains see each other: the brain picks up sexually relevant cues, triggering arousal and a series of events that deepen neurological pathways of habit formation. Each time an unhealthy sexual pattern is repeated, this pathway is neurologically (and emotionally) eroded into a trough. So when an adolescent male uses porn, he begins to set in place a neurological habit that creates a strong neural association between the images, arousal and sexual release. When activated simultaneously over and over, this constellation of environmental stimuli reinforces a neurological groove that makes viewing porn pleasurable in a biological sense.

Furthermore, the male brain on porn increasingly generates testosterone in order to heighten sexual desire. If porn is viewed often enough, the brain can be thought of as always in a “ready” state to interpret just about anything as a trigger for sexual fantasizing (whether it’s explicit porn or a girl in class whose skirt is a bit on the short side). These neurobiological findings of porn have dizzyingly high social costs for men in particular, including: lower attraction of females to male porn users, real-life sexual incompetence and dissatisfaction, increased rates of depression, desensitization to violence, and habituation to increasingly extreme forms of porn.

Underlying these costs is the broader argument that porn prevents the formation of masculinity and healthy sexual identity in adolescent males, the most impressionable users of pornography. The dangers of porn are only amplified by increasing cultural confusion about what “being a man” really means (cf. any tongue-in-cheek BuzzFeed listicle), as well as a worrying lack of male role models through broken family structures and modern technological isolation from wider communities. This leaves the young adult male essentially alone in his attempt to construct a model of authentic masculinity. The sense of the masculine grows as it is challenged, but without frequent and instructive challenges (ideally, from fathers or father-figures) it runs the risk of becoming at best, stagnant, at worst, warped. The most pernicious form of this warped masculinity comes in the temptation of pornography, which Struthers says “hijacks a man’s mental world” and impedes his progress toward becoming the best man he can be. As a result, we have today a generational arrested development of young males who remain in the emotional stages of boyhood.

Moreover, our culture has repeatedly diminished a crucial aspect of manhood by misconstruing it as “feminine”: that is, the male need for intimacy. Based on a relational anthropology of the person, we ought to examine how this misunderstood aspect of the masculine makeup contributes to the way young men relate to one another, and in so doing, form their own sense of masculine identity with which they present themselves to the world.

Erik Erikson, 20th century developmental psychologist known for his theory on psychosocial development, provides a helpful structure for the adolescent search for identity in his 1968 work Identity: Youth and Crisis. In the search for a sense of continuity, Erikson says, adolescents must “install lasting idols and ideals as guardians of a final identity.”  In order to combat the uncertainty of this stage, the adolescent “looks most fervently for men and ideas to have faith in, which also means men and ideas in whose service it would seem worthwhile to prove oneself trustworthy.”  Thus Eriksonian personality theory posits that the primary struggle facing an adolescent is that between identity and role confusion. Indeed, successful development of identity in adolescence sets the stage for the next crucial battle in young adulthood between intimacy and isolation.

If no appealing examples of positive identity are offered to the adolescent, then the choice of a negative identity becomes attractive. Such an identity, Erikson asserts, is “perversely based on all those identifications and roles which, at critical stages of development, had been presented to them as most undesirable or dangerous and yet also as most real.” This concept of negative identity, I believe, encompasses the identity gained through the experience of viewing porn, for each entry into the world of porn further cements the idea in the male adolescent’s brain that this is the real world, and that the women in these pictures and videos are real women. The fleeting sense of novelty and control during this experience draw him back for more until these virtual escapes form an intrinsic part of reality and identity for the adolescent. After all, as embodied beings, our thoughts translate to actions, which, when repeated often enough, become the habits by which we understand ourselves and form the identities we present to others.

Erikson’s discussion of the difficulty in adolescence of creating and preserving identity rings truer today, perhaps, than when he first wrote it, considering the current lack of a healthy cultural and social support system for the modern male teen or young adult. The necessary difficulties of navigating relationships with his female peers at school, for example, just may not be worth the trouble when he has constant, free and anonymous access to the objectified women in porn. As he compares the obligations of real-world relationships to the “freedom” from accountability in the virtual realm (all the while battling the insecure sense of identity in adolescence) it should hardly be surprising that he prefers the online world of fantasy. After all, he’s the one in control, right? He may be alone, but at least he calls the shots with each effortless click. Erikson even goes so far as to say that the “youth who is not sure of his identity throws himself into acts of intimacy which are ‘promiscuous’ without true fusion or real self-abandon.” What’s missing here is an opportunity for the young man to be vulnerable in the real world with real women.

Erikson’s work urges us to consider the full trajectory of adolescence and how modern pornography is toxic to the process therein of healthy identity development, especially for young males. The robust ideological commitments that society should present to youth in the form of continued traditions are today either absent or rendered meaningless in an individualistic and emotivist culture. Navigating the consequent vacuum through the isolating world of porn has severe implications for the adolescent male, whose isolation spurs withdrawal from the social interactions and commitments needed to develop his relationally masculine identity. We must call for a renewed culture that will mitigate the struggles of youth by offering instead an account of “the good life” as it relates to the person conceived as rational, volitional, emotional and ultimately relational.

Such a conception of human nature and culture is reflected in Covenant Eyes, an internet accountability software company that began in 2000 based on the concept that behavioral change related to viewing online porn comes through relational accountability rather than the superficial use of technological filters. Instead of using a “filter mentality” that simply blocks access to porn sites, Covenant Eyes holds its customers accountable for their online histories by setting them up with “accountability partners,” often family members or close friends, who have access to their online activities. Accountability without filtering, according to this logic, allows us to choose virtue freely of our own accord—striking the root of the problem—whereas filtering without accountability is simply a “prison of safety,” a flimsy Band-Aid solution that is hardly sustainable. Companies like Covenant Eyes help to renew our culture and our place in it because it operates on an anthropology of the person that respects the autonomy of the individual within the broader context of relationships with our family, friends, and communities. Initiatives like these can effectively help those troubled by porn, especially young adolescent males who crave both freedom and relationships with others.

I’d like to expand on the arguments I’ve sketched above in a final reflection. We do live in a “pornified” culture that at our every turn pressures us to choose such instant pleasures of the modern age. In gratifying these temptations we run the risk of warping the alignment of our will with what is good, what is true and what is beautiful. It does not follow from this that we are passive products of our society, and thus excused from the choices we make. Rather, we form ourselves through our own choices, which impact both ourselves and the communities of which we are a part. Wrong action is never private, simply because we are not private beings, but relational creatures whose happiness is contingent on the happiness of those around us. Although to some extent we are all products of the culture in which we live, we are, each of us, individually accountable for the choices we make. And here enters the blessing of being human: that although we may choose incorrectly, we are never so far removed from our human agency (aided by grace) that we cannot still choose the light shining in the darkness.

This article first appeared on the Irish Rover on April 4 and was adapted from Ratiu’s presentation for a panel on pornography at the 2014 Edith Stein Conference at the University of Notre Dame. It is reprinted with permission of Irish Rover.

By John G. Panagiotou

Many things are said and written about the great Cappodocian Father of the 4th century St. Basil the Great of Caesarea. In Basil the Great, we find the consummate theologian, liturgical scholar, ascetic and evangelist of the Faith. Too often, however, one more aspect of Basil is left overlooked and that is Basil as the first great Christian philanthropist. It is with this focus on Basil’s care, concern and heart for the poor, the underpriviledged, the sick, the unemployed, the homeless and disenfranchised that marks the level of profound theological reflection and insight that Basil exudes in his writings.

St. Basil the Great’s Early Life

Let us first, however, examine the context of the world in which Basil was born and matured in the Christian Faith so that we may better understand his notion of philanthropy. Basil was born into a wealthy established noble Greek Christian family in the city of Pontus in Asia Minor (modern day Turkey) in the year 330 A.D. By this time, nearly two decades had passed since the Emperor Constantine’s Edict of Milan which legalized Christianity in the Roman Empire. It was not long after this that Christianity would become the official religion of the Roman Empire.

Basil’s maternal grandfather was martyred for his unwillingness to deny the Faith in the years prior to the legalization of Christianity. Macrina his widowed maternal grandmother and his pious parents raised Basil and his four siblings in the Christian Faith. In all there were nine members in his family who would become recognized saints, especially of note was his sister Macrina (who was named after their maternal grandmother).

Basil would go on to study in the great prominent intellectual centers of the day such as Athens and Alexandria. During which time meeting and cultivating life-long friendships with luminaries such as St. Gregory of Nazianzus. He would finally complete his studies and open a law practice and tutorial service in rhetoric in the city of Caesarea. His life would radically change direction upon his meeting with the pious and charismatic bishop Evstathios of Sevasteia. After which, Basil would write that as a result of meeting with Evstathios, “I beheld the wonderful light of the Gospel truth and I recognized the nothingness of the wisdom of the princes of this world.”¹

Basil would then be baptized at age 27. It is important to note that although infant baptism was practiced from the earliest days of the Church, delayed adult baptism of Christians was not uncommon during the first four centuries. We find both practices from Apostolic times.

The Monastic Tonsure and Preparation for Debate

Basil then headed to the Cappodocian region of Asia Minor (Turkey) to live for a time in the caves there. Prior to his Cappodocian departure, Basil would give his material goods to the poor, thus marking his monastic embarking with great Christian philanthropy. Upon his return from Cappodocia, he founded a monastic community on his family’s estate. It was within the monastic context that as part of the cenobetic rule of life in community that Basil would expose that is was with the understanding that it was to be a life of service to both those within the monastic community and to those outside of its walls. For Basil, asceticism in of itself could be self-serving and demonic if it were not tempered by service to others. Thus, his contribution to monastic endeavor was not limited to the ordering of a community, but in that community’s outreach and service to the greater community as a sense of mission and purpose. In his theological works, Moralia and Asketika, he outlines the guidelines for proper Christian living in the secular world² and within the monastery walls.³

During this time, Basil would begin his great engagement of and in the tumultuous theological debates and controversies of the time. Namely, his contributions and renown would be made at the Council of Constantinople in his affirmation of the term” homoousios” (“the same essence”) in reference to Christ against the Arian heresy. It was his defense and articulation of the orthodox Christian teachings on the Holy Trinity, Christology and Incarnation that helped shaped the one holy catholic and apostolic Church’s theological formulations on these crucial matters of faith in the fourth century. Of all of his copious theological works which are too numerous to mention here, his On the Holy Spirit stands out as his appeal to Scripture and Tradition as the illuminators to the facts of the divinity and consubstantiality of the Holy Spirit with the Father and the Son.⁴ Thus, providing the formulation of three distinct “hypothesis” (Persons) in on Divine “ousia” (essence).

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

Basil’s ascetical, theological and liturgical contributions alone would have assured him a place in church history. Yet, he would also, albeit reluctantly, contribute in the later years of his life to church history as a clergyman. In 362, Bishop Meletius of Antioch ordained him a deacon and he remained as such for three years until his ordination as a priest by Eusebios of Caesarea. It was during this time that the Arian controversy would rage and Basil would be very much involved.

Following the defeat of the Arians, Basil was appointed by Eusebios to become his assis him at the diocese and become his protosynkellos (chancellor). Basil quickly gained reputation and influence as a capable administrator. This became problematic because Eusebios became jealous and felt threatened by Basil so Eusebios permitted Basil to return to his asceticism, thereby leaving diocesan administrative life However, Gregory of Nazianzus persuaded Basil to return to diocesan service and there Basil remained for several years coexisting with Eusebios by giving him all the credit and acclaim for successes in the diocese.

Election to the Episcopacy

Upon the death of Eusebios in 370, Basil was elected bishop amidst opposition from others and his own apprehension and lack of desire to be elevated to the episcopacy. In St. John Chrysostom’s On the Priesthood, Chrysostom relates his coercion of Basil to accept ordination to the episcopacy for the good of the Church.⁷ In spite of all that, Basil would go on to have a dynamic and fruitful episcopacy. He came to see being a bishop not only as a burden which he definitely felt it was for him, but as an opportunity to even greater service because of his episcopal office.

With this in mind, Basil established the first formal soup kitchen, hospital, homeless shelter, hospice, poorhouse, orphanage, reform center for thieves, women’s center for those leaving prostitution and many other ministries. All the while, Basil was personally involved and invested in the projects and process. He gave all of his personal wealth to fund the ministry to the poor and downtrodden of society. All of these ministries were given freely to all who sought help regardless of their religious affiliation. Basil himself would put on an apron and work in the soup kitchen. He would refuse to make any discrimination when it came to people who needed help saying that “the digestive systems of the Jew and the Christian are indistinguishable”.8⁸

In addition to all of the above, Basil would maintain a daily schedule of morning and evening schedule of liturgy and preaching at his own church. He saw that the outreach ministry, as importantly vital as it is, is to be seen within the context of worship and prayer.

Finally, Basil had built a large ministry complex outside of the city walls which included a poorhouse, hospital and hospice. It was called the Basiliad. For a variety of reasons, one being its consolidation of outreach ministries into one centralized location outside of the confines of city walls gained it great world fame because like many other things, Basil was the first to conceive of and realize something as ambitious such as this.

Basil died on January 1, 379 at the age of 49 suffering from liver disease. Customarily in Greece, St. Basil’s Day (January 1) was when gifts would be exchanged. Also, a sweet bread is baked for that day with a coin inside. Both of these customs emerged as an expression of the Christian philanthropy exemplified by Basil.

To Be in Christ is to Engage the World

It is interesting to note that Basil is sometimes referred to as “Ouranofantora” (“revealer of heavenly mysteries”). Perhaps, the greatest revelation that we can receive from Basil is that to truly be “in Christ” means necessarily having to engage the world and all of its problems, trials, and tribulations with radical trust that God will deliver us and provide for us. What are the implications for today’s Christian? What are the implications for the contemporary Church? In the last portion of my article, I want to explore these concepts and their implications offering what might be a viable blueprint for meaningful expression of Basil’s radical ancient Christian worldview in today’s context.

First, people are formed by people. What more could be said by the fact that Basil grew up and was nurtured in a spiritual household that was even marked by the family patriarch being martyred during the persecution. Within that context, the piety of his grandmother and parents shaped the man who he became. There is no substitute for authentic piety. The charity and love that begins at home cannot help but expand beyond the house door. It is a truism in life that the people we have around us define our identity today and mold our identity tomorrow. For the Christian, we should seek out pious people.

Second, people are moved to action by people. When Basil meets with Evstathios of Sevasteia, it is Evstathios’ charisma and radiance that inspires Basil to embark on a new life journey. It was not lofty theological treatises or ornamental grandeur that impresses him. Rather, it is Evstathios’ personhood. It is precisely this personal focus which focuses ontologically who are a person is not functional definition which focuses on what function a person performs. The “Evstathios” in our lives can take many forms. He may be a plumber who inspires us to live fully for God by whom he is Christ, not what station in life one holds. God always works in the personal often speaking to us through others if we are open to him.

Third, Basil whether in ascetical reflection, theological debate, or in the midst of chancery politics, let God use Him for His greater glory unto service of others. He did not make an excuse for not being a philanthropist in the hermitic caves of Cappodocia by saying what can I do here for others in this remote isolation. He did not make an excuse for not being a philanthropist by his attendance and involvement in the Ecumenical Council and other synods defending the Faith. And he did not make an excuse for not being a philanthropist while he worked in the political world of the diocese and hierarchy. Instead, he used his stations and positions in life to promote the Gospel and minister unto people who were in need.

Instead of Liberation Theology or the Social Gospel is Basil’s Church as Hospital

Make no mistake, Basil was not an ancient versions of a promulgator of “Liberation Theology”. To think that is to utterly miss the point of the man, his message, and his ministry. He never saw his role of addressing an injustice and relating it back to Christ and working for social change in humanistic political terms. Rather, he saw his role as abiding Christ and seeing a world through His Divine ocular lenses in hopes of leading and helping everyone come unto Him for transformation and transfiguration. Rather, Basil is consonant with his view of the Church with the likes of his contemporary St. John Chrysostom who reckons the Church as the spiritual hospital. Basil, as with so much of his theology, takes this theoretical premise and literally makes it incarnational.

In the Body of Christ today, we hear rhetoric such as “we can only do so much” or “we can only help ‘our own’”. That mentality is totally antithetical to the teachings and “fronima” (mindset) of Basil the Great. To really understand and grasp, the essential iconic image of Basil, we should not just be see him in Byzantine episcopal vestments, but rather in wearing an apron in a soup kitchen serving and identifying with the poor, the homeless and the disenfranchised.

We as individual believers and collectively as the Church are called to Christian philanthropy. It is ancient. In view of the Lord Jesus’ words in Matthew 25, it is essential not optional. Anything short of this and we are failing our calling as shown to us by Basil the Great. Yes, it is the mission of the Church to minister to the poor, homeless, unemployed and disadvantaged. Ministries to those in need should be held daily, not just occasionally. It should be just as regular in schedule as any other liturgy, Bible study, or meeting at the Church.

For far too long, the Church has lived under the fallacy that it is not supposed to prosyletize, only to use that as an excuse for it not to evangelize, thus failing in the Great Commission through the sin of omission. Now, more than ever with the world as it is, to miss the opportunity to serve because of the fallacy that “the Church is not a social service center”, only to use that as an excuse not to serve and help those in need whatever the multitude of needs may be is to fail in the mission of the Church, as St. Basil believed it to be and taught it should be through his example. For if we ascribe merely to a nominal definition of what Church is as merely being in unity of doctrinal faith with St. Basil and yet not incorporate the essential meanings and practice of his life, then we deceive ourselves because we are not authentical practicing Christianity. It is time for us to put our aprons on and get to work in that soup kitchen, in that hospice, in that nursing home, in that homeless shelter and anywhere else God leads you to serve and minister.

ENDNOTES

1 Basil the Great, Epistle 223, 2, as quoted in Patrology, v. 3. Christian Classics trans. Quasten, Johannes (1986) p. 205.

2 Basil the Great, Asketiki Prodiatiposis, Athn., De Syn. v. 31, in Christian Classics Ethereal Library, p. 467.

3 Basil the Great, Moralia, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers Series II, v. 8.

4 Basil the Great, On the Holy Spirit, St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, (1980).

5 Basil the Great, Sermon to the Rich, [bekkos.wordpress.com/st-basils-sermon-to-the-rich/]

6 Divine Liturgy of St. Basil the Great, edited trans. Vaporis, Nomikos M., Holy Cross Orthodox Press, (1986).

7 John Chrysostom, On the Priesthood, St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, (1996).

8 Kiefer, James E. Basil the Great, Bishop, Theologian [http;//justus.anglican.org/resources/bio/186.html]

9 John Chrysostom, “Homily Against Publishing the Errors of the Brethren”, Patrologia Graeca 62, trans. edited by Migne, Jacques. pp. 755-57; see also Vlahos, Ierotheos. Orthodox Psychotherapy, Birth of Theotokos Monastery publisher, (2005), pp. 25-26.

John G. Panagiotou is a graduate of St. Vladimir’s Orthodox Theological Seminary and Wheeling Jesuit University. He is the owner of Zeon Financial Group which provides insurance and retirement solutions. You may connect with him at johnpan777@gmail.com and on LinkedIn.