Book Review – The Orthodox Dilemma: Personal Reflections On Global Pan-Orthodox Christian Conciliar Unity

The Orthodox Dilemma: Personal Reflections On Global Pan-Orthodox Christian Conciliar Unity

Source: Touchstone Magazine (May/June 2016)

Eastern Union

The Orthodox Dilemma: Personal Reflections On Global Pan-Orthodox Christian Conciliar Unity
George Alexander
OCP Publications, 2015; 202 pages, $12.00, paperback

By John G. Panagiotou

In George Alexander’s “The Orthodox Dilemma” the reader is given a highly accessible overview of the history, current situation, and possible future of Eastern Orthodoxy and Oriental Orthodoxy. Through personal vignettes and historical illustrations, the writer, himself Oriental Orthodox, seeks to explain and address how the Orthodox Churches have found themselves in their present circumstances.

To those with a relatively undeveloped knowledge of Eastern Christianity, many examples that Alexander cites regarding these churches in both Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox expression may seem esoteric and obscure, but his central reason for writing the book is plain—to issue a plea for greater Pan-Orthodox unity of witness on a global platform.

He begins by asserting that before any sort of coordinated form of Orthodox Christian witness can be made, the official estrangement and sacramental division between the Eastern Orthodox (Greek, Russian, Serbian, Antiochian, Romanian, and Bulgarian) and the Oriental Orthodox (Coptic, Armenian, Ethiopian, Syriac, and Indian Malankara) needs to be addressed. He makes very compelling arguments that this “Eastern Schism” is the result of linguistic misunderstandings in Christology that have long since been theologically resolved, and he notes that it has been the long-­standing pastoral practice that Oriental Orthodox receive the sacraments in Eastern Orthodox Churches. It is high time, the author believes, that official communion should be acknowledged and proclaimed on the hierarchal level.

Nowhere is this point more pointedly made than where he observes that both Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox bishops and theologians have made great efforts to dialogue and ecumenically interact with the Western Church in both its Roman Catholic and Protestant expressions (in the World Council of Churches and elsewhere) while the Eastern Church has yet to get its own house in order, for which he provides multiple examples from the Council of Chalcedon (a.d. 451) on down to our own time. In the words of the famed Greek Orthodox theologian John S. Romanides, whom he quotes in the book, “The two traditions (Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox) survived the complexities of history, while always maintaining essentially the same Orthodox Faith.”

The official declaration of reunion of the Eastern Churches would aid much in dealing with the cultural estrangements, prejudices, and suspicions of its members for one another. The irony Alexander notes, however, is that ultimately this needs to be a “grass roots” movement from the bottom to the top, issuing from the laity and the clergy, and facilitated by the hierarchy through better communication and public acknowledgment that the Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox Churches are sisters.

This, coupled with greater opportunities for interaction between the members of both churches, should be happening throughout Orthodoxy. Concerted efforts along these lines would serve to mitigate prejudices, of which the author provides copious examples. Among the paradigms for reunion that the author cites to demonstrate the achievability of this are the reunification of the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad (aka ROCOR) with the Patriarchate of Moscow in 2007, the Patriarchate of Moscow’s recent outreach to the Old Believers’ Church, and the Pan-­Orthodox pioneering work of the Oriental Orthodox theologians Metropolitan Gregorios Paulose and Fr. V. C. Samuel.

It is important to note that Alexander is not calling for a one­world administrative hierarchical bureaucracy, but rather for an integrated Orthodox Christian witness, which will serve as a platform compatible with the concilliar nature of the Church’s episcopacy. This platform would be an expression of sacramental unity in all of its spiritual aspects of love and shared faith. It is not a call for a single form of worship or administration based on ecclesial jurisdiction, but an incorporation of St. Irenaeus of Lyon’s theme of “unity in diversity.”

The author provides numerous suggestions for realizing a unified Orthodox platform through better theological education for clergy, better use of the modern means of communication and media, and work in social justice ministries. To my knowledge, this is the first published book to provide thoughtful detail on the execution of this vital project. In many ways, it is a seminal work.

John G. Panagiotou is a Greek Orthodox theologian and writer, a graduate of St. Vladimir’s Orthodox Theological Seminary and Wheeling Jesuit University. He can be reached at johnpan777@gmail.com.

Caught Selling Baby Parts Planned Parenthood Doubles Down on the Lie [VIDEO]

Cecille Richards - President of Planned Parenthood
Cecille Richards - President of Planned Parenthood

Cecille Richards – President of Planned Parenthood

By. Fr. Johannes L. Jacobse

If a man is merely a biological machine, his sole value is determined by where he fits into the larger machine. He becomes a commodity, a thing to be used in ways that bring gain to other people. We call this a utilitarian world view.

Planned Parenthood ‘aborts’ (kills) unborn babies and sells their parts. It’s a bloody but lucrative business, and the profits increase when Planned Parenthood can provide more intact baby parts to its customers. The unborn child is reduced to a commodity (something to be bought and sold) that serves a larger machine.

In order for this uninhibited trade in baby parts to take place without any pangs of conscience however, a profound dehumanization has to occur first. No one, except perhaps a handful of people beyond the reach of normal human love and compassion, would argue that it is proper to slice up a newborn child in order to sell its parts. Yet Planned Parenthood does just that sometimes moments before the child is born.

The lie that justifies this grisly business is that the unborn child is merely “potential human life.” But since when did potential become divorced from being? Only human beings have human potential. Left unmolested, the developing child in a few short months will appear just like you and me.

The Apostle Paul says that we can do not do anything against the truth (2 Corinthians 3:18). When the truth threatens to lay bare the utilitarian justifications Of Planned Parenthood, when the lie that unborn children are not really human is revealed to be the lie that it is, only one option remains: more deception.

In the video below the President of Planned Parenthood Cecille Richards doubles down on deception. To Planned Parenthood an unborn child suddenly becomes human once you can sell its parts. Now that the lie has been revealed, all that remains is the denial that any parts are sold.

Plannned Parenthood is a business built on blood that self-justifies using the utilitarian logic that abortion is a net social good. This is what happens when dehumanization takes place, when human beings are viewed as commodities, as cogs in a larger machine that exists only to make people like Cecille Richards and her cohorts very, very rich (Richards makes almost half a million dollars a year).

Too much blood. Too much burning of the conscience. Too many children dead that who otherwise would be alive. Too many lies.

It’s time to jail the law breakers and shut Planned Parenthood down.

From The Center for Medical Progress, the producers of the video:

Planned Parenthood senior executives and medical directors told CMP investigators that Planned Parenthood’s abortion providers would be happy to alter their abortion procedures in order to harvest higher-quality baby body parts. The representatives with the most experience harvesting fetal organs, Planned Parenthood’s Senior Director of Medical Services Dr. Deborah Nucatola, and Planned Parenthood Gulf Coast’s Director of Research Melissa Farrell, indicated this already happens at their sites as a routine matter. When Planned Parenthood makes decisions about a woman’s abortion procedure based on what will serve its own tissue procurement needs, it is not treating her like a patient with rights and dignity, but like a harvesting pod.

The harvest and sale of aborted fetal organs and tissues exists to meet the demand for fresh and undamaged body parts, typically from the 2nd trimester of pregnancy. These practical constraints, plus the financial benefits offered by tissue purchasers, create incentives for Planned Parenthood to change their abortion procedures and even use illegal methods like partial-birth abortion to get fresh and intact specimens. In tissue harvesting cases, the absence of feticidal chemicals combined with the active attempt to remove the fetus as intact as possible make it far more likely the fetus may be born alive, only to be vivisected to death for his or her body parts.

Planned Parenthood has never provided any justification or explanation for the admissions of their abortion providers in this footage, because it is simply too damning. State, local, and federal law enforcement must listen to the broad public mandate for Planned Parenthood to be held accountable to the law and continue their investigations to criminal prosecution.

St. Theophan the Recluse: Progressive Ravings and the Theoretical Mindset

St. Theophan the Recluse

St. Theophan the Recluse

St. Theophan the Recluse

The more I love humanity in general the less I love man in particular…The more I hate men individually the more I love humanity. -Fyodor Dostoyevsky, The Brothers Karamazov

Source: John Simmons

From “The Spiritual Life” Chapters 16 and 17.

By St. Theophan the Recluse

What has happened to you? What kinds of questions are these? “I do not know what to do with my life. Should I be doing something in particular? Should I define some particular purpose for myself?” I read this and I was dumbfounded; where could such odd thoughts have come from? Indeed, you already settled all of this when you expressed the desire to stand at the level of human dignity.

I would guess that among your friends are progressive thinkers, or that you have joined a society having such people in it, and they have scattered your good sense. Such people usually rave in this manner.

It seems to me that all of this is clear and simple; there is no reason to torture yourself with difficult problems. You need to put out of your mind any plans about “multi-beneficial, all-embracing, common-to-all mankind” activity such as the progressives rant about.

Phrases such as “the good of mankind” and “the good of the people” are always on their tongues…the progressives have in mind all mankind or at least all of its people lumped together. Probably you, after hearing so many profound ideas, were captivated by them, and when you turned your eyes to your real life, you saw with regret that you had vegetated in your family circle without benefit or purpose. Oh! Only now has someone opened your eyes!

The fact is, however, that “mankind” or “the people” does not exist as a person for whom you could do something right now. It consists of individual persons. By doing something for one person, we are doing it within the general mass of humanity.

If each one of us did what was possible to do for whoever was standing right in front of our eyes, instead of goggling at the community of mankind, then all people, in aggregate, would at each moment be doing that which is needed by those in need, and by satisfying their needs, would establish the welfare of all mankind, which is made up of haves and have-nots, the weak and the strong. But those who keep thoughts of the welfare of all mankind inattentively let slip by that which is in front of their eyes. Because they do not have the opportunity to perform a general work, and let slip by the opportunity to perform a particular work, they accomplish nothing towards the main purpose of life.

I was told of such an instance in St. Petersburg. There was some sort of meeting of young people who were advocates of universal welfare – this was at the very height of the progressive raving. One gentleman was making an impassioned speech about love for mankind and the people. Everyone was enraptured.

But when He returned home, his servant did not open the door quickly enough – he had not seen him coming. The servant did not give him a candle quickly enough, somethng had happened to his pipe, and it was a little cold in his room. Our philanthropist could not stand this, and finally he sharply reprimanded his servant. The latter answered something back, and the former struck him in the chest. And so here is our fine fellow who was overflowing with love toward mankind in one place, who could not behave properly toward even one person at home.

Also at the very height of progressive raving, there were some pretty girls who threw themselves into the work of bookbinding establishments, who often left their mothers without a crust of bread. All the same, they imagined that they were in some way moving forward and establishing the happiness of mankind.

All troubles come from a mental outlook that is too broad. It is better to humbly cast your eyes down toward your feet, and to figure out which step to take where. This is the truest path.

St. Theophan the Recluse (January 10, 1815 – January 6, 1894) is a well-known saint in the Russian Orthodox Church. He was born George Vasilievich Govorov, in the village of Chernavsk. His father was a Russian Orthodox priest. He was educated in the seminaries at Livny, Orel and Kiev. In 1841 he was ordained, became a monk, and adopted the name Theophan. He later became the Bishop of Tambov.

He is especially well-known today through the many books he wrote concerning the spiritual life, especially on the subjects of the Christian life and the training of youth in the faith.

We Wish You an Ascetic Christmas! Understanding the Ascetic Struggle in Orthodoxy

The Nativity of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ

 

Ancient Faith TodayFor Orthodox Christians Christmas is a problem. Western culture celebrates the Holy Days (what is left of them anyway) with parties leading up to that day. Orthodoxy sees the days leading up to the Holy Day as a period of ascetic struggle — an inward reorientation towards greater prayer, fasting, and caring for the poor.

To accomplish this our lives need structure. We conform our lives to a calendar where outward practices and disciplines helps foster the inward reorientation (see the essay “The Twelve Days of Christmas“).

In the most recent podcast of Ancient Faith Today, host Kevin Allen discusses with Father Gregory Jensen, author of the book The Cure for Consumerism, the reason for the ascetic struggle for Orthodox Christians and offers some practical reasons for applying it in our lives.

Listen here:

Podcast courtesy of Ancient Faith Radio.

Order from Amazon
Order from Amazon

Fr. Gregory Jensen is author of “The Cure for Consumerism,” a serious of monographs dealing with Orthodox Social Thought.

Despite the rapid increase in human flourishing since the onset of the Industrial Revolution, critics of the market economy insist that it leads inevitably to consumerism and other excesses of materialism. Those who make this indictment—including sociologists, political pundits, and religious leaders—also ignore how economic liberty has brought about one of the most remarkable achievements in human history: an 80 percent reduction in world poverty since 1970.

“The Cure for Consumerism” examines popular prescriptions for addressing consumerism that range from simply consuming less to completely overhauling our economic system. In this lively and accessible book, Rev. Gregory Jensen synthesizes insights from the spiritual tradition of the Eastern Orthodox Church with modern social science to craft a clear understanding of consumerism, to offer real solutions to the problems, and to put faith and economic freedom to work for both the common good and the kingdom of God.

Fr. Gregory Jensen blogs at the Palamas Institute for Orthodox Christian Pastoral Studies.

The Revolutionary Mentality is the Confusion of our Time

Che Guevara

By Fabio L. Leite

The ideas of the Brazilian philosopher Olavo de Carvalho provide important tools not only to analyze, but to criticize and resist the destructive current cultural currents of our time. Many of these currents spring from the ideologies that oppressed our brothers and sisters in Europe.

THE THREE INVERSIONS

Three “inversions” characterize the revolutionary mentality (Nazism, Communism, feminism, homosexualism et.al.) writes philosopher Olavo de Carvalho regardless of their putative values or whether they use peaceful or violent means.

They are:

  1. Inversion of Perception of Time

    The utopic future is fixed, everything before it is fluid. The past can be reinterpreted as many times as necessary to justify the progress toward that fixed future. The present can be shaped at will to bring that future. Because the past and present are seen as naturally fluid, there is no sense in the concept of reality itself resisting the coming of this inevitable progress. Any resistance can only come from other ignorant or evil wills who oppose this natural fluidity.

  2. Inversion of Morality

    Because the fixed future is the sum of all good, anything done to achieve it is equally good; the “tribunal of history” would absolve all “crimes” committed by the revolutionary who helped bring about that future, after all, in hindsight, when that future arrives, those actions will not be seen as crimes at all. The revolutionary is thus rendered incapable of feeling guilty for whatever lie, deceit, theft, or even murder he/she commits. They are all virtuous acts, because in his heart they bring about the sum of all good.

  3. Inversion of Subject-Object

    Because that future is fixed and somehow inevitable, any person who is killed in individual murders, terrorist acts or even genocides, is not the victim, but the culprit. They were opposing the inevitable coming of the fixed future that is the sum of all good. They put themselves in front of the unstoppable train of history.They are not only victims, they are *guilty* of opposing the revolution.

    Actually, the revolutionaries who killed them, see themselves as the real victims, who were forced to do something they wouldn’t because of the stubbornness of those killed in not accepting, or not even adapting, to the revolutionary supremely good future. He did not kill them. He was just a tool of history. They used him to commit suicide by throwing themselves against the wave of history. They maculated him, for had they not being evil and opposed him while he was bring the perfectly good future, he would never have had blood in his hands.

THE REVOLUTIONARY MENTALITY IS IDOLATRY OF THE FUTURE

The revolutionary mentality is not simply a political movement. Indeed, it has adopted politically contradictory positions several times, and even at the same time. See Liberals who are pro-feminism and the homosexual agenda in the West and at the same time are supportive of Islamic regimes where women and gay rights are crimes punishable by death.

It is not an accidental contradiction that they don’t notice. It is a calculated ambiguity, for both positions help to destroy the enemy (the West or the US) and that destruction advances the coming of the progressive future they envision. So both actions will be taken at the same time, not out of ignorance, but of astute planning.

It is not about coherence, it is not about morality, right or wrong. It is a sick idolatry of the future, in which all actions are moral for the simple reason they are “progress” toward that future. It is, as the name say, a mentality, a mentality that can adopt religious or anti-religious discourses, Anti-Christian or Christian agendas, right or left issues, nationalist or internationalist approaches.

We can spot it when we find the three inversions in the perceptions and attitudes of a person or movement. It’s never about the topics that might be in discussion but in how they are dealt with. In Olavo’s words, it’s “a spiritual and psychological problem, but it’s most visible manifestation and its main tool is political action.”

Actually, revolutionaries could even bring many to their numbers by putting forward an issue and allowing their enemies to fight it and even win over it, as long as they fight with a revolutionary mentality as well.

THE REVOLUTIONARY MENTALITY IS A GLOBAL CULTURAL MOVEMENT

The revolutionary mentality is more than simply a kind of framework with which we can understand current issues. It is a cultural movement that can be traced back to its origins with historical documents. Actually, it is the *only* global cultural movement that exists with continuity and historical self-awareness in the last 500 years, along and over a number of countries, many times pretending to be a local group in each. It started forming around the 15th century and the French Revolution is its first major expression, starting the era of totalitarianisms, world wars and constant genocides.

Revolutionaries refer to each other, sometimes disagreeing, sometimes seeking perfect continuity, or creative ways of applying what they consider to be universal principles to the circumstances of their time. This means that it is a spiritual and cultural movement that is aware of its own history, not a cabal of enlightened, not a conspiracy, neither an up-down movement with elite leaders, nor a bottom-up endeavor.

Like once the Germanic tribes were forming an entirely new civilization we would call the West while the Greek-Romans of the East Roman Empire still thought of them as mere barbarians, the revolutionary mentality is a new existential way of being in the world and of how understanding this same world. Its pillars, and the common thread in all forms of revolutionary actions, are the three inversions explained by Olavo de Carvalho.

In the 200 years since the revolutionary mentality acquired political expression, it killed more than all the previous wars, epidemics, natural catastrophes in history put together. These genocides committed by those imbued with revolutionary mentality include not only wars but even the persecution of their own innocent populations in peaceful times – those who “resisted” the coming of the glorious future.

Indeed, every failure of that impossible future coming to existence is attributed to some kind of personal resistance or betrayal, never to the fact that reality cannot be molded and the glorious future is but an illusion.

THE REVOLUTIONARY MENTALITY JUDGES ALL HISTORY

Olavo further defines the revolutionary mentality thus:

[I]t is a state of spirit, permanent or transitory, in which an individual or group believes to be able to reshape the whole of society, sometimes even human nature itself, by means of political action. This individual or group also believes that as an agent or carrier of a better future, he/it is above any judgment made by present or past humanity. They only respond to the “tribunal of history.”

That tribunal, though, is by definition the very future society that the individual or group claims to represent in the present; and as this future society can only provide witness or judgment in the present through this very person or group, he/it becomes its only sovereign judge over his/its own acts.

Not only that, he/it becomes the judge of all humanity, in the present, in the past and in the future. Thus abled to accuse and condemn all laws, institutions, beliefs, values, costumes, actions and works of all ages, and above the judgment of them all, the person or group sees him/itself so above historical humanity that is accurate to call him Super-Man.

A significant work of literary fiction to depict that mentality is “The Time Machine” by H.G. Wells. By traveling to the future, it claims it is as fixed as space. H.G. Wells, a socialist to whom social-democrats were not radical enough, believed a World State was inevitable and desirable and promulgated it in his book “The Open Conspiracy: Blue Prints for a World Revolution.”

Olavo compares three evils to better illustrate his concept. Nazism and Communism are revolutionary movements, but the Ku Klux Klan is not. Both Nazism and the KKK believe in the superiority of a race, which is a disgusting idea in itself. But, at least currently, KKK believers do not want to mold all reality and society to put their twisted idea forward. They would be satisfied to eradicate all black people from their area.

Nazists and Communists, on the contrary, not only want to eliminate a certain groups of people from a certain area. That would be an evil, but limited. They really think that the very existence of these people and their roles in society is a “bug” in reality, and they seek to correct reality itself. They envision a fixed future, to which they work to progress, and where every means is moral for the simple reason of helping this progress, and everyone who does not support it, or who is simply not changed by it, is an enemy, found guilty and worth of death.

THE REVOLUTIONARY MENTALITY JUDGES ALL HUMANITY BASED ON A HYPOTHETICAL FUTURE

Olavo provides the following further description of the revolutionary movement:

[W]hat typifies the revolutionary movement without any confusion is that it gives all authority of judgment over all humanity, present and past, to a hypothetical future. The revolution is, for its own nature, totalitarian and universally expansive: there is no aspect of human life that it does not wish to submit to its own power, no region of the globe it does not seek to touch with the tentacles of its influence.

That is why the American Independence is not considered a revolutionary movement by Olavo. It was a conservative war of independence, to solve a limited, local problem, that of an authoritarian king. It did not purport to know any fixed universal future, it did not invert morality, it did not invert subjects and objects of moral actions, it did not have a solution for the world: it wanted a United States of America, not a United Nations of the Globe.

THE REVOLUTIONARY MENTALITY VS. “THE CULTURE WARS”

It is of uttermost importance that we understand these three inversions of the revolutionary mentality, so we can spot it wherever it appears, independently of the issues being talked about, even when they are issues we ourselves care about.

These are powerful tools to write analysis of all the cultural and political “mess” we see around us today. It can explain politicians obsessed with “change”; the “cultural wars”; and why traditional values from different countries seem to not cope with the wave of revolutionary thought that invades them.

It can explain how a country that was fiercely atheist and leftist yesterday can have leaders trying to play the role of pious conservatives; the rise of the left to the main presidencies of Latin America; why a communist super-power has become the reference for growing capitalism; and why even conservative churches participate in world councils that seek the utopic future of a union among all churches, “saving” the whole religious scenario of the world from itself.

The “issue” is never the issue. The issue is always the revolution. And the revolution is, despite all issues, the concentration of power, the union of forces, through the spread of the revolutionary mentality and its three inversions.

HOW TO FIGHT THE REVOLUTIONARY MENTALITY

To fight this cultural monstrosity, we must also not put the “issues” first, even if they are being pro-life, pro-Christianity, “pro-love”, “pro-truth”. We have to fight the very substance of the revolutionary mentality, because it can advance even with pro-Life and pro-Christian ideas. Either being pro or against gay parades and unions, if the political action advances a whole planning for the whole of society, it is the revolutionary mentality in action.

We must radically abstain from working for, or even wishing, any kind of fixed future, any kind of whole planning for the whole of society. We must abstain from considering we can revise the past to justify this image of the future.

We must, at the cost of our very souls, avoid measuring the goodness of our actions according to their impact in “changing” the world toward a “better place”, and never judge people and ourselves as “pro” or “con” utopic ideals. Actually, we should not judge others even regarding their final salvation, much less concerning if they are “helpful”, “conscious” or not in relation to any social good.

We must reestablish that the past is fixed and unchangeable, that the future is like an amorphous foam of possibilities wherein our own choices are but few among the infinite elements of circumstantial tensions that will influence it. We can be saved from our sinful past, but not really change it.

We must always remember that our choices in the present have much more impact in our stand in Eternity than in our own future.

Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own (Matthew 6:34).

Read Olavo’s original article “A Mentalidade Revolucionária

Fabio L. Leite lives in Brazil and is a reader of the AOI Blog

>Olavo de Carvalho

Olavo de Carvalho

Olavo de Carvalho currently lives in Virgina.


Fatal error: Uncaught Error: Call to undefined function nuthemes_content_nav() in /home/aoiusa/public_html/wp-content/themes/prose/index.php:21 Stack trace: #0 /home/aoiusa/public_html/wp-includes/template-loader.php(106): include() #1 /home/aoiusa/public_html/wp-blog-header.php(19): require_once('/home/aoiusa/pu...') #2 /home/aoiusa/public_html/index.php(17): require('/home/aoiusa/pu...') #3 {main} thrown in /home/aoiusa/public_html/wp-content/themes/prose/index.php on line 21