When I was in jail I fell very, very ill. I had tuberculosis of the whole surface of both lungs, and four vertebrae were attacked by tuberculosis. I also had intestinal tuberculosis, diabetes, heart failure, jaundice, and other sicknesses I can’t even remember. I was near to death.

At my right hand was a priest by the name of Iscu. He was abbot of a monastery. This man, perhaps in his forties, had been so tortured he was near to death. But his face was serene. He spoke about his hope of heaven, about his love of Christ, about his faith. He radiated joy.

On my left side was the Communist torturer who had tortured this priest almost to death. He had been arrested by his own comrades. Don’t believe the newspapers when they say that the Communists only hate Christians or Jews—it’s not true. They simply hate. They hate everybody. They hate Jews, they hate Christians, they hate anti-Semites, they hate anti-Christians, they hate everybody. One Communist hates the other Communist. They quarrel among themselves, and when they quarrel one Communist with the other, they put the other one in jail and torture him just like a Christian, and they beat him.

And so it happened that the Communist torturer who had tortured this priest nearly to death had been tortured nearly to death by his comrades. And he was dying near me. His soul was in agony.

During the night he would awaken me, saying, “Pastor, please pray for me. I can’t die, I have committed such terrible crimes.”

Then I saw a miracle. I saw the agonized priest calling two other prisoners. And leaning on their shoulders, slowly, slowly he walked past my bed, sat on the bedside of this murderer, and caressed his head—I will never forget this gesture. I watched a murdered man caressing his murderer! That is love—he found a caress for him.

The priest said to the man, “You are young; you did not know what you were doing. I love you with all my heart.” But he did not just say the words. You can say “love,” and it’s just a word of four letters. But he really loved. “I love you with all my heart.”

Then he went on, “If I who am a sinner can love you so much, imagine Christ, who is Love Incarnate, how much He loves you! And all the Christians whom you have tortured, know that they forgive you, they love you, and Christ loves you. He wishes you to be saved much more than you wish to be saved. You wonder if your sins can be forgiven. He wishes to forgive your sins more than you wish your sins to be forgiven. He desires for you to be with Him in heaven much more than you wish to be in heaven with Him. He is Love. You only need to turn to Him and repent.”

In this prison cell in which there was no possibility of privacy, I overheard the confession of the murderer to the murdered. Life is more thrilling than a novel—no novelist has ever written such a thing. The murdered—near to death—received the confession of the murderer. The murdered gave absolution to his murderer.

They prayed together, embraced each other, and the priest went back to his bed. Both men died that same night. It was a Christmas Eve. But it was not a Christmas Eve in which we simply remembered that two thousand years ago Jesus was born in Bethlehem. It was a Christmas Eve during which Jesus was born in the heart of a Communist murderer.

These are things which I have seen with my own eyes.

"This is the Faith which upholds the world!"

A lot has happened, so here's a quick rundown:

Spent a week on a domestic mission trip with my old Episcopal Church.  We accomplished some amazing work for a homeless shelter and had some fun hanging out with the middle and high school students of the youth trip.  The trip did solidify the decision to leave the Church, and more than likely will have been my last trip as a leader in the youth program.  The only really awkward part of the trip was Sunday worship, where I chose to refrain from taking Communion.  This resulted in stares and whispers from the kids, but I just couldn't do it.

When we returned from the trip I had three days to move out of my apartment into a new house.  This is still causing me problems (it took an hour to get ready for work this morning as I still cannot find half of my clothing, toiletries, dishes, etc.). The new house is amazing, backs up to the water and gets me away from the constant sirens in the middle of the night (my old apartment was a block from the two major hospitals in my area). 

Last Friday I left town again to go with my parents to see the Beach Boys in concert... my friends have had a good time mocking me about my choice of concerts for the summer, but really, I grew up on the "Oldies" and I love the memories that accompany them.  Between the Beach Boys, Ringo, and Edgar Winter I have had a fantastic summer of music and fun.

This brings me up to date.  I unfortunately have not been to a service in the last two and half weeks and I miss it dearly.  But it has been good to step away and make sure that I was not swept up in the novelty of it all.  This Sunday is the official start of my being a Catechumen and I am looking so forward to it. I've even convinced my parents to come to Liturgy!!

The monastic calling is considered to be a personal gift from God, which is for the salvation of the monk or nun and a service to the Church (or Body of Christ). The monastic vocation is the calling to personal repentance in a life dedicated solely to God. The ultimate Christian virtue of love is sought by the monk or nun primarily through prayer and fasting, and through the exercise of the Christian virtues of poverty, chastity, humility and obedience.

The monastic Christian does not normally exercise any particular ministry in the Church such as that of priest, pastor, teacher, nurse or social worker. The monk is normally a layman and not a cleric, with each monastery having only enough clergy to care for the liturgical and sacramental needs of the community itself.

In Orthodox Christian history many missionaries, teachers and bishops have come from men with monastic vocations. For centuries the bishops have been traditionally selected from among the monks. These additional callings, however, are considered to be acts of God's will expressed in his people, and are not the purpose or intention of the monastic vocation as such. Indeed, one must enter a monastery only in order to repent of his sins, to serve God and to save his soul according to the ideals of monastic ascetism. The ceremony of monastic profession indicates this very clearly.

The monastic hierarchy

Types of monasticism

With the Reformers, we insist that liturgical idolatry is a most dangerous temptation and sin for many within Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy. This includes the veneration of man-made images, statues, relics, Eucharistic elements, the invocation of the saints, as well as other practices and traditions which are not according to Scripture. Likewise, we warn all the faithful to flee those doctrines or practices which, whether in doctrine or in practice, undermine the fundamental and sovereign graciousness of God in salvation. 

Finally, while we consider divisions in the body of Christ most grievous to the calling of the Church, and we confess that the Reformed tradition has contributed its own failures to this state of affairs, we do not believe that abstract considerations of church polity, apostolic succession, or institutional unity rise to the level of weightier matters of the law. Therefore, however helpful the study of those issues may be, they must not jeopardize genuine Christian fellowship, justify the denunciation of the least in the kingdom of God, or result in disparaging the validity of the ordinations or sacraments of other churches that worship our Triune God in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ. Individuals who join communions that effectively excommunicate their Protestant brothers and sisters contradict their search for catholicity, and ironically, the goal of unity comes at the expense of further divisions in the body of Christ. We desire to be of one mind with all the saints, not by coercion, but by the same patient love of our brothers and sisters shown by Christ in His patient love for His Bride, the Church.

The definition of heresy is:

belief or opinion contrary to orthodox religious (esp. Christian) doctrine

"for a heresy to exist there must be an authoritative system of dogma designated as orthodox" (wikipedia)

"a value judgment and the expression of a view from within an established belief system" (wikipedia) 

I think the key word there is orthodox, which is defined as:

conforming to what is generally or traditionally accepted as right or true; established and approved

I can only assume that most people think immediately of Christianity when they hear the word heresy, and likely their mind assumes that heresy is automatically against truth. Not so, according to the definitions above. It is simply saying that I disagree with the commonly held opinion of the institution in question and am open and honest about my disagreement with it.

Heresy is a disagreement with orthodoxy and orthodoxy is a consensus of human opinion and tradition. Not a definition of absolute truth or the idealism expressed by God. Heresy is a culturally relative term, meaning that its implementation depends on the commonly held belief of a culture. If only the church were God...

I hope this makes sense, but thanks everyone for the conversation. I'm always up for more precisely defining the terms used within the scope of another idea.

And hey, I can't end this post without encouraging anyone reading this to do the same. What comes first, of course, is thinking and asking questions. Status quo does not equal truth. Mike of subversivechurch says it well: 

Jesus’ message was listened to by the masses, but only carried out and followed to the end by a few.

I think its more obvious than we're willing to realize that this statement describes both then and now.

He told me that the latest church growth statistics show that up to 9 out of 10 church plants in this country fail. He further said that it appears that the heyday of church planting is past in this country. He was not saying that it could not return, but rather saying that it us currently not that heyday. In the heyday of church planting, one could start a simple fellowship group and grow it quickly into a church. Nowadays, people will no longer go to such a church plant. Rather, from the beginning, people expect a church plant to have the latest high tech equipment, and, even when meeting in a rented space, to show the characteristics of a modern multimedia church.

I suspect that the Orthodox equivalent would be to have a mission that already has the liturgical accutraments necessary to present an Orthodox-looking worship, and a priest already in situ. He said that at least one denomination is already feeling as though they need to budget multiple thousands of dollars for each church start, if they hope for it to be successful. He further stated that too many denominations are still working from the old model, and sending pastors into situations in which they are doomed to fail. That is, they are sending them there without the financial support that is currently needed in order to even have a hope of beginning a church.

I could spend time bewailing this development in American culture. And, I must admit, it is worthy of bewailment. What an incredibly self-centered attitude we have in order to require so much! In other words, as he put it, we have become such a consumer society that even God must bend to our requirements before we will attend His Church.

I would rather ask the missionary question. What is necessary for us to reach this country for Christ? It is not relevant whether our attitudes are inadequate. After all, we cannot expect people who are not committed to Christ to have appropriate attitudes. Rather, without compromising our Orthodoxy, what can we do to reach out to a consumerist society, to change a consumerist way of thinking about the Church, and to incorporate them into the Church as vital members of the Body of Christ?

God is the Lover of my soul.

God is Love; within His name dwells His glory

Before I am the beloved of man

I am the beloved of Christ.

May I unashamedly be captivated by His love.

Before I am the responder of man

I am the responder to the Holy Ghost

May I love as He first loved me.

Oh song of my spirit!

You are a fire in my bones

I can’t hold it in, indeed I am weary

“Abba! Father!”  My lips refrain

Lull me to a passionate outcry.

Oh how you haved loved me!

Oh how you have called me to yourself!

I am and adulterous bride,

Yet You see me as blameless.

May I forever be a child of God

The bride of Christ

And Cleave to Your Spirit.

May this covenant never be broken.

Let purity and light guide my steps as I walk

The path divinely placed before me.

Being wooed by my Author my Perfector,

May I run in the way of your commands.

You have set my heart free!

With my lips I recount
all the laws that come from your mouth.
I rejoice in following your statutes
as one rejoices in great riches.

Your Law is my delight, my counselor

May I never leave the shadow of Your wings.

Why are we to love others?

You have first loved us.

How are we to love?

“Do unto others as you

Would have them do unto you.”

May my love be everlasting

Unconditional

Unwavering

Unadulterated

Full of purity

Abundant

Life giving.

Because You have first loved me

May I protect others,

As you have protected me in love.

May I nourish others

As you have nourished me in love.
As a vine cleaves to its branch

May I so dearly depend on you.

Let me stay in your shade

as you protect me.

Let me stay connected to you

As you supply my soul with all I need.

Nothing can separate me from this love.

My unworthiness brings me to tears

Yet rejoicing still, for You call me as Your own.

As crown is to her husband

May my life reflect Your glory;

For you have chosen me as your bride.

No greater Love could I ever find.

Then he made the disciples get into the boat and go before him to the other side, while he dismissed the crowds. And after he had dismissed the crowds, he went up on the mountain by himself to pray. When evening came, he was there alone, but the boat by this time was many furlongs distant from the land, beaten by the waves; for the wind was against them. And in the fourth watch of the night he came to them, walking on the sea. But when the disciples saw him walking on the sea, they were terrified, saying, "It is a ghost!" And they cried out for fear. But immediately he spoke to them, saying, "Take heart, it is I; have no fear." [28] And Peter answered him, "Lord, if it is you, bid me come to you on the water." He said, "Come." So    Peter got out of the boat and walked on the water and came to  Jesus; but when he saw the wind, he was afraid, and  beginning to sink he cried out, "Lord, save me." Jesus immediately reached out his hand and caught him, saying to him, "O man of little faith, why did you doubt?" And when they got into the boat, the wind ceased. And those in the boat worshiped him, saying, "Truly you are the Son of God." And when they had crossed over, they came to land at Gennesaret.

This sermon is a follow up on last Sunday's sermon, The disciples' Private Picnic. Last week if you recall Jesus and the disciples were tired and wanted to escape to a deserted place to be by themselves.  The disciples apparently had packed a little picnic with which to surprise Jesus -  5 loaves of bread and 2 fish.  But when they got to their wilderness beach retreat the crowds like the paparazzi had guessed where they were headed and beat them to the beach using a land route.  So when Jesus and the disciples come ashore at what they think is going to be a deserted place, a large crowd is waiting for them.

The crowd who crashes their private picnic is not like Aunt Sue , Uncle Jim and your four cousins.   For it is 5000 men who show up besides the women and children!  This is like the first Woodstock, with people coming not for a concert, but to be hear Jesus teach.  In the time of Jesus 5000 men plus women and children would have been an entire fair sized town.

And you remember the disciples' problem - they eventually get hungry and want Jesus to send the crowd away so that the crowd can go buy food for themselves.  Meanwhile the disciples are hoping to show Jesus their little surprise - they have brought along a little food, just enough for themselves.

Our Lord Jesus has other ideas and tells the disciples to feed the crowd which makes the disciples incredulous, but that is exactly what happens.  Jesus takes the food the disciples brought and by praying over it, miraculously multiplies the food so that everyone has more than enough to eat.  And as it turns out it is the disciples who have to distribute the food to the thousands of people sitting there waiting to be served.  And so the disciples learn a significant lesson about being leaders in the kingdom of God - their role is to serve the people, to feed and nurture and care for the people of God before they feed themselves.

And they see the sign of the kingdom of God, that it is not by their strength and preparation alone that God's Kingdom breaks into the world.  They realize they also are there to serve their Master.  And they learn humility, and generosity and charity all in one lesson.

At the end of the day, there are 12 baskets full of food leftover - just enough for each disciple to get to take one basketful home with him. They are overwhelmed with the abundance, as if they were in Paradise. 

Jesus sends the disciples off in their boat, stomachs full and now the boat is full too of all of this blessed food.  All in all the day didn't turn out so bad.  They were fed, it didn't cost them anything, the crowd was very pleased, and they had plenty of food left for the next day.   The Kingdom of Heaven is a blessing indeed.

Jesus waves to the disciples as they disembark, and he stays behind to dismiss the crowd.  The crowd is an interesting phenomenon itself.  5000 men besides their families came to this wilderness place, all to hear Jesus.  They gave up their day's work and routine to follow Christ.  This is not insignificant in a subsistence culture where one has to work every day in order to be fed.  But here they give up pursuing the things of this world in order to hear about the Kingdom of God, and for this they are richly rewarded, for Jesus feeds all of them.  And he does it purely to give them a sign, a hint about what the Kingdom of God is really like.

And we know Jesus wasn't mainly a miracle worker, but the Messiah.  And we know this because if Jesus was mostly a miracle worker and could so easily feed the masses, he could have opened up a wilderness resort restaurant right on that spot and the masses would have come every day to be fed, not 5000 but 500,000. 

But Jesus' miracle was a sign of the coming Kingdom, a foretaste of God's blessings.  And certainly in Jesus' own teachings He makes it clear that people should not seek Him just to have their bellies filled with food, but should look beyond the miracle and the food, to what secret and hidden power the miracle refers:  The Kingdom of God!

Meanwhile the overfed disciples are having a rough time of it at sea, and that is where we return to them.  The wind is blowing hard against them and they can't make progress toward their destination.  It is now past 3am and they are still at sea, and no doubt feeling a lot less secure about this  Kingdom of God thing, for what good does it do to have 12 baskets full of food if your boat can't make it to land, or if the weather threatens to swamp the boat?    Worse yet, it is Jesus who sent them off into this storm and He chose not to come with them.  And then suddenly their worst fears are realized, for not only is the weather against them, but suddenly they see a ghost walking on water, a sign of sure doom, death is stalking them.

And the fact that the Messiah provided food for them becomes much less important as they realize that despite the signs of the Kingdom, disaster can still strike, and they are not protected from every single threat the world has to offer.  They are blessed by God's Kingdom, but still living in this unpredictable, fallen and hostile world.  And in this world they have to work hard to survive - in this world even receiving from God's hand a banquet does not magically protect  one from danger, nor does it mean that we no longer have to work or worry in this world. The Kingdom of God is real, but so are the problems which come with living in a fallen world. 

And it turns out it is no ghost stalking them, but it is their Lord and Master walking on the stormy, turbulent sea.   He does not stop them from having to work hard, nor from having to worry about threats to their existence.  But he once again in an unpredictable way gives them another sign of the Kingdom of heaven.  That Kingdom is coming but is not here yet, and Peter wishing to experience the blessedness of that Kingdom is not yet ready to live in it as he is far too threatened by this world.

And in this world of the kingdom of God, Peter is saved even if shaken by the events, and the disciples recognize that Christ is somehow bringing that Kingdom to them, as He enters their boat, they realize the kingdom of God is very different than they might have envisioned it.  And the Kingdom of  Heaven is not cheap or to be taken lightly, for it is a matter of life and death.

Even when we experience the Kingdom of God breaking into our lives, and when we are filled with the blessed food - the Holy Body and Blood of our Savior - we are not spared the stormy troubles of life.  And sometimes Jesus sends us into these storms, and we feel left alone, and sometimes in these storms we are confronted by our worst fears - our demons and ghosts which haunt us.  But the blessings of the Kingdom of God are real, as real as the storms of life.  We are promised salvation by the Savior, but we are not told that we will be spared the storms of life.   And sometimes we walk in faith onto the stormy water, but the storm is more real and threatening than the kingdom of God and we begin to sink and we cry to the Savior for help.

Indeed, at every liturgy, when we say the petitions of the litany and cry, "Lord have mercy!"  We are taking on the role of the Apostle Peter in the midst of the storm and asking God's mercy not just for us in the ship of salvation but for the entire world.

If this is you, you are a foolish person. Maybe a foolish virgin, but nonetheless a fool. All around us ---within and without--- the church is under unprecedented attack from false prophets of every stripe. Instead of contending for the faith, most are groveling after false teachers who throw them shards of rotten food. So I speak to those who have an ear to hear what the Spirit is saying. Beware false teachers, evildoers and workers of iniquity planted in the church by their master, satan. Most can't remain hidden long because their very nature will soon expose them. Hint: there is a reason Jesus called them "ravenous wolves".

While reading about the major debacle caused by false prophet Todd Bentley in Florida, I saw this quote by prolific Christian theologian, teacher and author Derek Prince:

“The Bible gives us no liberty to tolerate the incursion of evil into the church.”

How true and apropros. While misguided Christians are buying into the "dont judge" and "only God can judge", evil is barreling into the church virtually unopposed. But God never told us to stand by silently while evil we can see mounts our pulpits and perverts the word of the Lord. Why are we comfortable with the house of prayer being a den of thieves?

As astute as Prince was in the faith, even he had a serious bout with involvement in a false movement.

In 1968, Prince joined the Holy Spirit Teaching Mission (HSTM), which linked him to three other Charismatic Christian pastors living in Ft. Lauderdale: Don Basham, Bob Mumford, and Charles Simpson. The HSTM had been founded by businessman Eldon Purvis; but after the discovery of Purvis’s homosexuality, Prince and the others formed Christian Growth Ministries (CGM). In 1974, CGM sought to counter what were seen as excesses within the Charismatic movement by emphasising the authority of a few shepherds over their “sheep”. The group was joined by Ern Baxter, and the five men became known as the Fort Lauderdale Five Their ministry became known as the Shepherding Movement.

CGM’s strong emphasis on submission was controversial. Lydia Prince herself disapproved, and as stories of abuses came out the movement was condemned by Pat Robertson>, Kathryn Kuhlman, and the Full Gospel Businessmen's Fellowship International. Lydia died in 1975, and when Prince later wanted to marry Ruth Baker, his fellow shepherds forbade him. However, they later gave permission, and Prince was remarried in1978. Derek later repented in public over being a member of this group.

Many people mislabel what is going on as "wheat and tare" situation (Matt 13:24-30). But its not so. The context of the wheat and tare is that they are indistinguishable spiritually to such a degree that only Jesus himself can accomplish the separation of the two without damaging the wheat. This is not the case with the well documented cases of false prophecy, immorality, and evil out in the open view of the church today. We are commanded to "try the spirits whether they are of God" (1 John 4:1). We test and try them not by our emotions, science, other spirits, traditions and creeds or church polity, but by sound biblical doctrine.

As Derek Prince stated, it is in this context we must oppose all people, spirits and practices in the church which are condemned  by the scripture. Did I just say "people"? Yes, people. People who are controlled by anti-Christ spirits. Reference Revelation 2:18-23. By oppose I mean to restrict their influence and voices by any biblical allowances at our disposal.

Like the example set by Noah, this message must be preached without fail until the end comes. The hope of redemption is not in horizontal love, but in repentance and relationship with the living God through his Son, the Lord Jesus Christ. The church is being set up to fall without challenge to the antichrist. Todd Bentley and the numerous false prophets we have noted here are more than enough evidence to this fact

God is not calling for us to establish rapture cults, nor are we to going into hiding to "save" ourselves. But like true salt and light,  we should engage the culture and evil subcultures in the church with God's Word, our sword. Until he returns let us not be weary in well doing, for we reap if we faint not. Even if it takes our very lives, I encourage you to cross the line of indecision and decide that you will not compromise the gospel and give sanctuary to demons and their destructive doctrines.

Related: The adultery of Todd Bentley

We continue to teach congregants how to follow. It 's a dot-to-dot type of method, really. The leader declares a thing right or wrong and the congregants, if only mentally, are left to keep a growing list of what things are acceptable and what things are not. Following Christ then simply becomes reduced to following the rules declared by leadership of a particular tradition.

Leaders are not held accountable for study, and congregants are relieved of their duty of critical analysis of all things presented as God's truth. In the typical black church, there is little, if any, reference to the ecumenical counsels of old, no regard to the accepted truth of the body of Christ at large, nor to the tradition and history of the Church.

Leaders then are free to teach opinion as fact, and fiction as new or special revelation of God. Where there is no standard, the people perish. The same lack of emphasis on orthodoxy, or right thinking, has lead to what can only be described as the hijacking of the black church. Intelligent and ambitious men and women have been exalted to a near God-like status. No one is to question the logic of their thinking or actions, and one dare not suggest that teachings of today's preachers hold up in light of scripture and church history.

This problem is widespread and the machine is large. When we only give instruction and there is no given value to understanding, what do we really have? We end up with shallow Christianity, Christians tossed about by every wind of doctrine... Christians who are opposed to nothing. What good is the watchman in the tower if he sees all approaching as friends? One leader recently asked me, "if we don't agree with another's doctrine, why can't we just leave it alone?" The very question is sad. This is not personal, never was and never will be. Our enemy is not the communicator of the error but the spirit behind the error.

Have we forgotten that our enemy is not flesh and blood? Have we forgotten?

If there is truth, then there is error. If there is error, then there is deception. And if there is deception, then there is death. We cannot sit by nonchalant and act as if the enemy has not invaded our camp. Nor can we be distracted by the personalities of deception. We must teach our brothers and sisters how to think critically, how to evaluate, how to know truth so well that whenever and where ever error arises, they instinctively know the difference.

Now, isn't it true that right thinking leads to right action? Too many are serving God mindlessly. They have no assurance of what they believe, because they don't know what they believe. They have no concept of the history of our faith, and no exposure to the thinkers of our past. They are easily pulled astray from the faith, thinking that the objections of their minds are new, never exploring the extensive answers prepared by those before us and preserved by history.

Our Christian faith has always been a faith carried on by thinkers. Jesus would often present truth in the form of a parable or riddle. Why? May I suggest, He understood the importance of his followers' ability to think.

Hebrews 11:1 The fundamental fact of existence is that this trust in God, this faith, is the firm foundation under everything that makes life worth living. It's our handle on what we can't see. 2 The act of faith is what distinguished our ancestors, set them above the crowd. 3 By faith, we see the world called into existence by God's word, what we see created by what we don't see.

Somewhere along the line we have diminished faith to some mindless act resembling that of the three blind mice. Our faith can never be blind. We are called to investigate, evaluate, and come to a rational conclusion. We have so over-simplified things, that all one needs to do to be deemed a Christian is chant or recite a prayer. We celebrate this and then maybe encourage a micro-class, much to do about our organization.

What happened to the days of the converts class, the day when you were simply considered a new convert until you were presented the gospel in great detail? You were presented with having to confront sin in your life upon understanding that power of the gospel, given a firm foundation. And then in a glorious exhibition of your choice, you declared to friends, family and the public your rational decision and faith to follow after the ways of Jesus Christ.

God, help us to love you with all of our mind. Amen.

Please feel free to comment, let's reason together.  Go ahead, scroll down and leave a comment, what are you thinking?

"As Russia sees it, Bill Clinton turned the American Air Force into air support for an Islamic revolution against the Orthodox world. The attack against the Serbian homeland was an exercise of naiveté equivalent to bombing Vatican City then wondering why Roman Catholics might be upset and stay upset. Then George Bush decided it would be a good idea to place a missile defense system in Poland, disregard Russia’s advice and invade Iraq and further insult and encircle the heart of the Eastern Orthodox world."

As I read the blog, I sadly read the blog of a man who has gone from one extreme to another. As he, himself, comments, he was the son of evangelical royalty, Francis Schaeffer. He claims to be one of the founders of the religious right, who then lived to take most of it back. But, as I read this particular blog, I found myself thinking that he still continues to interpret events through a hyper-religious lens. It is not that he is wrong in interpreting events through a "God-lens." That is appropriate. In fact, the biggest failing of the news media is their inability to find people who can report on all the religious motivations that are present in many a news story. Rather, it is that his methodology has not changed one whit, only his theological orientation. And I fear that his methodology is one of pressing events into a religious mold, whether or not those events bear an only-religious interpretation.

My particular sadness in this is that it was his father, Francis Schaeffer, whose books led me into the love of philosophy and theology that I have. And, while I think that Francis never realized the logical conclusion to which his books were leading, I think that many of his readers eventually did. It should be no surprise that many of the leaders of the, then, Evangelical Orthodox Church had read Francis (or even met him and visited him in Switzerland) and discussed his writings. It was Francis' books that forced me to consider concepts like culture and worldview and made my wife and I better missionaries when we were overseas for many years. And, eventually, it was his books that opened up the path that eventually led me to Orthodoxy.

But, unlike Frank, I did not come to Orthodoxy rejecting what had come before. I came to Orthodoxy with a loving appreciation of all that my background had taught me. Like the Law, there is much in evangelicalism that is sound and is good. But, like the Law, evangelicalism was merely a schoolteacher designed, even in its failures or maybe especially because of its failures, to give me a love for Truth and for the Holy Scriptures. That has stood me well through my life, ever since I gave my life to the Lord at a discipleship center. I have a desire to find Truth that has stood me in good stead, even when I have been forced to change my mind as I have continued to study the Scriptures.

As to Russia, I feel that too much of the American news media have ignored the story before the invasion. Now and again you catch hints of it when you read words like "break-away province" cropping up. Like the Yugoslavia situation, Georgia is not homogeneous. Moreover, apparently there was a certain pressure on those who are Russian-descended to either move out or keep politically quiet. In fact, some news media now admit that it may have been going towards a Yugoslavia-type of situation. Frank was right in pointing out that the West is being a little hypocritical given our massive and forcible intervention in Yugoslavia. But, he is wrong in attributing it to Orthodox payback. There is simply little, if any, evidence that it was done for Orthodox reasons, but much evidence that it was done for ethnic reasons. If only the USA government would be more aware of those ethnic reasons before they spoke.

All of us get e-mails forwarded from our friends. Many of them contain some story or other that either has a deep meaning, or tell an incredible story, or give us the truth behind some event. Unfortunately many of them are wrong. And, they are not simply wrong, they are fabrications, or even outright lies. One can, at least, forgive the pious story that has a good point, the story that makes us smile, or even the story that makes us laugh and go through the rest of the day in a good humor. Generally, no one is injured, and the point that is made is a true and fair one. One can even ignore those awful superstitious "magic" e-mails that assure us that if we pass that e-mail on we will have good luck, but if we do not we will have bad luck.

But, what about the stories that needlessly frighten people? What about the stories that convince people to try (or avoid) some health treatment that is of not help (or is of help, but you are told to avoid it)? Worst, what about the stories that deliberately lie and distort the truth to libel someone or to commit calumny? Do we bear any moral responsibility for passing on those false and deceptive e-mails?

You may ask, "What brought this on, Fr. Ernesto?" Well, I have formed the habit of checking out e-mails to try to ensure that they are not an urban legend. To tell the truth, anymore I generally simply delete the e-mails. It is not worth my time to check them out, and statistics collected by urban legend sites show that over 90% of "tale-bearing" e-mails are either false or have had the facts altered. But, today, I went to http://www.snopes.com/ , a favorite site of mine for checking out e-mails and other urban legends. I checked out their list of the 25 hottest e-mails being currently forwarded. What I found both startled and saddened me.

The number 1 top e-mail being forwarded turns out to be a legend. And, it is not one legend but a set of e-mail legends being passed on. They are 30 e-mails about Barack Obama. Only three of them are listed as having facts, but are listed as urban legends because of the interpretation given to them. Twenty-four of them are listed as outright lies. Three of them are undetermined, which means that they can neither prove nor disprove them, therefore, they question how the person quoted happened to know that particular fact(s). As far as e-mails, John McCain is not even in the top ten, and has only five e-mails, two completely false, two undetermined, and one true, but with an interpretation that is questionable.

So, what has inspired this remarkable and vitriolic outpouring of lies against Barack Obama? Even worse, why are "good" Christians believing these e-mails and passing them on to others? I must admit to having received several of the e-mails listed, and they have come from "good" Christians who were obviously passing them around as though they were true. I took the trouble to check them out and did not pass them on. But, I certainly did not expect them to be part of the number 1 urban legend in the USA, which has turned out to be the attempted personal destruction of one of our Presidential candidates.

And, so I ask, should we not, as Christians, be much more cautious in what we pass on and whether we believe what we read? During this campaign season, I have received too many e-mails from fellow Christians who seem to consider it to be their Christian duty to pass on to me these falsehoods, and thus have done their part to make the "lying of America" the number one urban legend. Even sadder, I have received not one e-mail about John McCain from anyone. This means that my fellow Christians only seem to believe false e-mails about one of the candidates but not the other! Do we really think that this pleases God? And, do we really think that He will continue to bless us if we continue to bear false witness by forwarding these e-mails? The last I read, the bearing of false witness is a violation of one of the Ten Commandments, and, therefore, the violation of one of God's supreme commands.

Let us then begin to take responsibility for the e-mails we forward, particularly if they involve negative news about a person. Remember, bearing false witness violates one of the Top Ten.

[gallery] 

 Click on the pictures to make them larger.

   Today I want to talk about Fr. O. Fr. O was the Romanian priest in our first camp. He is an extraordinary, yet very humble man of God.

Fr. O is 32 years old and is a priest assigned to work with youth at risk. He deals a lot with drug addicted and suicidal youth. He is so passionate about children. He loves them so much. As of right now, he and his wife have no children, but when they do, he will be a wonderful father. In his limited English, he was always saying that "the kingdom of heaven begins with just one child."

Fr. O bonds with all children immediately. The main reason for this is that Fr. O is a big goof ball and is really 10 years old at heart. At the camp, he was always joking, laughing, and making funny faces. He loves sports and is very competitive! In a soccer match, he even broke his nose. In fact, the bone popped out, but he just pushed it back in. However, within 2 days he was out playing just as roughly!

However, Fr. O. wasn't all silliness and games. He had a childlike spirit that was full of hunger and thirst that spilled over onto the campers. I believe that he opened up a hunger for God in many of the campers. He showed them that the Orthodox faith was not just one of history and rules, but that the Faith was living and breathing and a part of their everyday life.

Fr. O always thought about others first. One afternoon, I was down. He wanted to cheer me up so much. He started singing me Romanian Orthodox hymns. He also sang some random English songs for me. His singing and care for me warmed my heart and brought me out of my funk.

There was always one song that I requested from him. He taught it to the campers line by line. It is called "Bucura-te Marie." I think it translates at "Rejoice Mary." The camp ended with us going to a monastery. He and the children just randomly sang that song at the monastery. I was so mad at myself. I should have thought to record the song being sung in the monastery with the amazing acoustics. But I didn't think of that until halfway through the song, and for some reason I still didn't record it then.

However, a couple of day before I left, I surprisingly saw Fr. O at a Holy Unction service at the ASCOR church on the campus of the local university. I took the chance after the service to record him singing it. I also recruited 2 ASCOR students to sing with him. However, while I was recording, I noticed that the students seemed very embarrassed to sing with the priest and didn't really know the song that well. I felt bad about that. I put the video on youtube. Here is the video.

 Where shall I go from your Spirit?
   Or where shall I flee from your presence?
 If I ascend to heaven, you are there!
    If I make my bed in Sheol, you are there!   (Psalm 139:7-8)

A frequently asked question is "What is hell?"   Some think it a place of physical torture of sinners, others believe it to be a state of being (perhaps self created).  Whatever it may be, Christianity affirms that Christ our God has conquered it, in order to submit it to the will, love and lordship of God. 

As St. John Chrysostom says in his famous Paschal Sermon: 

The One Who was the Prisoner of Death has utterly destroyed it;
the One Who descended to Hades took it captive. ...

So, Death, where is your sting?
So, Hades, where is your victory?

CHRIST IS RISEN, and you are overthrown!
CHRIST IS RISEN, and the demons have fallen!
CHRIST IS RISEN and the angels rejoice!
CHRIST IS RISEN and life takes command!
CHRIST IS RISEN, and not a single corpse remains in the grave!

John Chryssavgis writes in his book , BEYOND THE SHATTERED IMAGE:

"Our joyful optimism lies in the conviction that there is no place devoid of God.

Hell- that is to say, the place where God is not- can only be created as a result of an estrangement between our world and God.  If we hold on to the earth and the fullness thereof (Psalm 91:1), then everything (even death and destruction) is a ferment of divine life, the air itself (no matter how polluted) is vibrant with the Spirit.  Beyond the shattered image, there always lies the reflection of the divine reality that has no end and the re-presentation of the vision of God that knows no darkness.  This faith alone can transform evil and pain, while disclosing a loving purpose beyond suffering and isolation."   

The very icon of Christ descending into Sheol/Hades is one which depicts Christ filling all things, even that region of outer darkness and death so that there is indeed no place where God is not.  (Ephesians 4:9)  And humanly speaking, this means that where ever we are - even in a state of despair, place of pain, the darkest reaches of our minds and when we feel totally forsaken - no place is beyond the reach and presence of God.  That is a truth to give us hope in times and places when we seem unable to believe. 

"Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or danger, or sword? ... For I am sure that neither death nor life, nor angels nor rulers, nor things present nor things to come, nor powers, nor height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord"  (Romans 8:35, 38-39).

Often, coming from a Protestant background I was confronted by verses such as the following that seemed to "prove" that we should only pray to God.

Now, however, I can see clearly that this is not what is being said here. When approaching a passage of scripture it is important to not get caught up with particulars and see it as a puzzle to be put together. Instead the context of the passage along with the views of the Fathers of the Church need to be taken into effect.

I urge, then, first of all, that requests, prayers, intercession and thanksgiving be made for everyone— for kings and all those in authority, that we may live peaceful and quiet lives in all godliness and holiness. This is good, and pleases God our Savior, who wants all men to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth. For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself as a ransom for all men—the testimony given in its proper time. And for this purpose I was appointed a herald and an apostle—I am telling the truth, I am not lying—and a teacher of the true faith to the Gentiles.

It seems pretty clear to me now that when the verse references that Christ is the one mediator between God and man that St. Paul is not referring to the method to which prayers should be ascribed, but to the way that  the second person of the Holy Trinity comes to bring us to union, or theosis, with God.

The passage is speaking specifically of the blessed incarnation where Jesus who was truly and fully God, became truly and fully Man, taking on flesh to bring us back into communion with God. When viewed this way, it is much more powerful, taking on life that sustains us in faith, instead of being ammunition to be used to chastise those in "heresy". (This is referred to as patristic theology I believe).

The rest of the Protestant argument against against praying for the intercession of the saints really falls under two categories. First there is the theological misunderstanding that praying to the saints invokes a heretical pantheistic structure where the saints are taken to be gods. This is not the case. The Orthodox Church has always condemned this view as heretical. The prayers to the saints are merely the same as if I were to ask my friend here on earth to pray to God for me. In Orthodoxy there is no chasm or canyon separating here and eternity, and anyone who claims to have evidenced some kind of act of grace in their life, as nearly all protestants do, can attest to the fact that God is indeed involved in our realm. This leads me to the other part of the argument that I feel needs to be dispelled which is simply a modern metaphysical one.

It is simply hard for us, modern and enlightened as we are, to understand that those who are dead are not dead but are indeed living (in Christ through his resurrection) and are able to not only hear us, but pray for us to God and even perhaps intervene by God's direction in our lives. It is important to remember that we are not called biblically to a "relationship with God" simply by ourselves, but to a "relationship with God" within the context of the Church which is his body. So really, the issue of praying to the saints for intercession is not only one of metaphysics, but one of communion. If we are one body, why should the hand say to the feet I don't need you. Why should the brain tell the foot to move left and instead it decides to more right.

To all of the saints in heaven, dearly departed yet alive with us in Christ. We ask that you would pray to God for us, asking for us to be united in faith, hope, and love for one another; that we would learn to be charitable with our neighbor and to pray for our enemies, just as you did and still do.  Pray that we may be one just as God is one, Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, acting as one body as Christ directed us, and the Spirit compells us to do. Amen

God, grant that we may have peace, loving one another, just as you have loved us. Teach us to be humble, learning your ways not ours. Allow us the strength and patience to love our enemies, and indeed to even see none as enemies but as children of God. Teach us to be charitable and kind to all, for they truly may indeed be angels among us unaware. Now Lord, we pray that your will be done, and that all men may be saved. Amen

In a New York Times opinion piece Walking the Abortion Plank, Judith Warner reports that the new official Democratic Party platform

"speaks of how ‘health care and education help reduce the number of unintended pregnancies and thereby also reduce the need for abortions.' It declares, ‘The Democratic Party also strongly supports a woman's decision to have a child,' and was spun all week as an olive branch to evangelicals, a significant departure from past policy, and a victory for the opponents of abortion rights."

The shift in the platform's language is significant and not just symbolic, for it means the Democratic Party is acknowledging the power of pro-life voters and trying to reach out to them.  This is not the same as a shift in policy; the Democratic Party is not backing away from defending pro-choice laws, but it is recognizing that to win elections, you have to win votes, and that there are a significant number of voters who will not vote Democratic on this single issue even if they agree with the Democratic platform on a majority of other issues.

The change in the platform language propmpted ABC News to ask, "Are Democrats Now Pro-Life?"

For the Sanctity of Human Life Movement, victory consists not only in getting Pro-life candidates elected, but also in getting all other candidates and political parties to move toward the Pro-life position or to begin respecting pro-life ideals.  In changing its language from supporting a woman's right to have an abortion to supporting a woman's decision to have a baby, the party platform moves away from a pro-abortion stance to a much more pro-life and pro-family stand, even though not denying reproductive choice.

It also seems to me that for Christians and for Pro-life organizations this is good reason to endorse policies not political parties.   We should be ever making the political parties come to us and seek our votes, and to make them come up with platform language and policies that we can vote for, rather than allowing any party to assume it has our vote in their pocket.  I am a professed cynic when it comes to political parties and I don't think churches do themselves any favors in giving blanket endorsement to a party, or even to a politician for that matter.  Make them work for your vote and for your endorsement.   See which of them is most willing to conform to our ideals and then vote accordingly.

Judith Warner is not happy with the Democratic Party shift in platform language.  She concludes her NY Times article with these words:

Sanctifying life - without care for the living - is little more than a morality play.

Supporting families is a moral choice.

She apparently does not believe that a human embryo or a human fetus is human or alive.   But a human embryo or a human fetus is alive, and certainly is human having the full human genetic code.  And certainly there are many ways to be pro-family that do not include abortion.

But she raises a tough and important issue for the Sanctity of Human Life Movement.  Are we saying that the life of the mother is unimportant or not worthy of full consideration or that a human embryo or fetus is more important than the mother?  Do we believe that women who bear the unwanted pregnancies (for certainly they and not the fathers do bear this burden in a particular way) do not have human rights regarding their own lives and bodies? 

Supporting families is indeed a moral choice as Warner affirms.  Supporting families means that Pro-life Voters need also remember that there are many pro-family issues which should be supported as essential corollaries to the Sanctity of Human life - issues of housing, hunger, health care, education and all human services are Pro-life and Pro-family issues.  Opposing abortion is just part of the Pro-Life agenda.   The Sanctity of Human Life also means that we should create a society which ensures support for families, including the working poor.   Without that kind of social support Warner's criticism has a stinging validity.  Sanctity of human life does mean defending and caring for the living - human embryos, fetuses, children, women, men, the disabled and the elderly.

Even though the dust is now beginning to settle, it's still difficult to know exactly what happened. One of the better summaries is probably Gwynne Dyer's article Russian triumph as Saakashvili's gamble fails:

The three-day war in South Ossetia is settled, and the Georgians have lost. There may be some more shooting yet, but it is now clear that Georgia will never regain control of the rebel territories of South Ossetia and Abkhazia...

Now Saakashvili is playing on old Cold War stereotypes of the Russian threat in a desperate bid for Western backing: "What Russia is doing in Georgia is open, unhidden aggression and a challenge to the whole world. If the whole world does not stop Russia today, then Russian tanks will be able to reach any other European capital."

Nonsense. It was Georgia that started this war. The chronology tells it all. Skirmishes between Georgian troops and South Ossetian militia were more frequent than usual over the past several months, but on the afternoon of Thursday, August 7, Saakashvili offered the separatist South Ossetian Government "an immediate ceasefire and the immediate beginning of talks," promising that "full autonomy" was on the table.

The same evening, however, he ordered a general offensive.

But Saakashvili is not the only one indulging in Cold War rhetoric. In both Russia and the USA the media have gone into a frenzy of nationalistic tub-thumping, calculated to drown out the voices of anyone trying to discover what is actually happening. No matter what is happening in Georgia, outside it the media seem to determined to jump-start the Cold War, stalled since 1989, and South Ossetia is the child in the Caucasian chalk circle, being pulled apart by rival "mothers".

I think Gwynne Dyer may be being over sanguine in concluding:

The Bush Administration's ambition to extend Nato into the Caucasus mountains is dead, which will please the French, the Germans and other Nato members who always found it bizarre and wilfully provocative.

Russians, who were the target of the provocation, will be quietly pleased with the speed and effectiveness of their Government's response. There is no great moral issue here. What Georgia tried to do to South Ossetia is precisely what Russia did to Chechnya, but Georgia wasn't strong enough and South Ossetia had a bigger friend. There is no great strategic issue either: apart from a few pipeline routes, the whole Transcaucasus is of little importance to the rest of the world.

In six months' time, we probably won't even remember this foolish adventure.

For people who live far from the Caucasus, it may be easy to forget, though perhaps some may still remember the siege of a school in North Ossetia by armed terrorists a few years ago. But the spin-off of all the media spin may indeed be the re-starting of the Cold War. And the question is then why are the media apparently so hell-bent on fanning the embers of the Cold War into a holocaust?

The actual shooting may be far away in the Caucasus for many of us, but the media spin is in our homes and streets, on the radio and TV, in the newspapers and in the blogosphere.

Samuel Huntington in his book The clash of civilizations and the remaking of the world order described the post-Cold War world as one where there would not be a clash of ideologies, but rather a clash of civilizations. The civilizations are based on religion, rather than ideology. Instead of three worlds, Huntington postulated nine civilizations, though his Western civilisation corresponds roughly to the old First World, while the old Second World is divided between his Orthodox and Sinic civilisations.

The South Ossetia affair doesn't seem to fit Huntington's thesis. Georgia, Russia and South Ossetia all belong to his Orthodox civilisation. That is not to say that they are Orthodox countries, but within them Orthodox Christianity is the majority religion.

But when we look at the spin the Western media are putting on the events, we get a somewhat different picture; the Georgia/Russia conflict is being forced into a Cold War frame: :

U.S. corporate media frequently evoked the Cold War as a key to understanding the conflict between Russia and Georgia over South Ossetia. This was certainly true of the media themselves, which generally placed black hats or white hats on the actors involved depending on whether they were allied with Moscow or Washington.

On August 11, NBC Nightly News anchor Brian Williams referred to "what's being called the Russian blitz of the nation of Georgia, former Soviet republic that split away and is now threatening to split apart from within." NBC reporter Jim Maceda followed up: "The powerful Russian war machine is moving ever deeper into Georgia, and teaching all of us really a lesson about what makes Russia tick."

One could go on multiplying examples -- "Back in the USSR" is the title of one article in the Boston Globe -- but I think the point is clear. And this media propaganda barrage is having its effect. I participate in a couple of Orthodox Christian discussion forums, and in one of them one participant said "the Orthodox need to start remembering who the bad guys are and stop trying to cut them slack".

He's right there, but not, I suspect, in the way he thinks he's right. In Orthodoxy we should indeed remember who the bad guys are, and stop cutting them slack.

To remember who the bad guys are, as an Orthodox Christian one only has to look in a mirror.

Fr Seraphim Rose liked to quote Solzhenitsyn: "The line separating good and evil passes not through states, nor between classes, nor between political parties - but right through every human heart - and then through all human hearts."

My interlocutor replied that "some people are more evil than others", and that is indeed true, and something that as Orthodox Christians we need to recognise, as we say in the Divine Liturgy:

I believe, O Lord, and I confess that Thou art truly the Christ, the Son of the living God, who camest into the world to save sinners, of whom I am first.

So if we want to remember who the bad guys are, we need to look in a mirror rather than in the Boston Globe.

The Fathers did not ask us to believe and confess that the Son of God came into the world to damn sinners of whom Vladimir Putin / George Bush is the first (take your pick in a democratic vote).

He came to save sinners, of whom I am the first.

That is not to say that people like Putin and George Bush don't have bad policies, or that their behaviour is above criticism. We may criticise policies and their implementation. But when it comes to being a bad guy, I must acknowledge that I take the cake.

Most of the political evils and the wars and conflicts in the world today are caused by that very thing: "remembering who the bad guys are", and trying to assign white hats and black hats to all the actors in a conflict, and then thinking that whoever the guys with black hats are, they are not us. But that is not the Orthodox way.

What is the Orthodox way?

What is the Church doing in all this mess?

Well, here's one answer:

Appeal by His Holiness Patriarch Alexy II of Moscow and All Russia

Having learnt about the hostilities in Tshinvali and its outskirts, I call upon the warring parties to cease fire and return to the path of dialogue. Blood is being shed in South Ossetia and people are being killed and this makes my heart to grieve profoundly. Among those who have lifted their hand against each other are Orthodox Christians.

What is more, those who have come into conflict are Orthodox nations who are called by the Lord to live in brotherhood and love. I am aware of the appeal to peace made by His Holiness Catholicos-Patriarch Iliya of All Georgia. I also make my ardent appeal to those who have gone blind with hatred: stop! Do not let more blood be shed, do not let today's conflict be expanded many times over! Show common sense and virtue: sit at the negotiation table for talks with respect for the traditions, views and aspirations of both the Georgian and Ossetian peoples. The Russian Church is ready to unite efforts with the Georgian Church and help in achieving peace. May our God, Who `is not a God of disorder but of peace' (1 Cor. 14:33), be our Helper in this endeavor.

+ ALEXY
Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia

Tonight I will have officially been home for one week. Time really flies. I can't believe that the same amount of time that I have been home is the same amount of time we spent at each camp. A week at the camp seemed so short, but it also seemed so rich and drawn out. It really is hard to describe in words.
Our first camp was spent with teenagers in the mountains in the small village of Mărişel. The scenery was breathtaking and the accommodations were very nice. We had rented 2 big cabin-like buildings for the camp.

The first day or so I felt out of place. I felt like I didn't have a purpose. ASCOR (Association of Romanian Orthodox college students) did such a wonderful job of putting on the camp. A few of the Americans had hands-on workshops in the afternoon. Victoria (names have been changed) led a workshop on making macramé bracelets. Fr. Wayne led a workshop on making replicas of the cathedral made by St. Innocent in Alaska. Hope led a workshop of making "God's eye" a craft of the Mexican Indians. Vladimir and I didn't have a workshop to present I helped out Victoria in her workshop.

The Romanians ran the camps so perfectly without us that I was tempted to feel like I shouldn't have even come. However, Fr. Wayne reminded us what the OCMC had said in training. Our number one purpose was to love. That's it. If we did that, we would have a huge purpose. Fr. Wayne also talked to us about the ministry of presence. Sometimes just our presence can be ministry in of its self. I think that fact that American Orthodox made the effort to come to Romania was enough itself. Many Romanians don't even know that there are American Orthodox. It brought us together in solidarity.

This made me feel a lot better. I spent time just loving people. I talked with the campers. Many of them spoke English. I played and laughed with them. I also really enjoyed the opportunity at the first camp to stay up late and talk with the ASCOR students and to share my testimony. I felt like we really bonded.

I enjoyed many things about the first camp. I enjoyed the hike into the mountains and seeing the countryside dotted with the traditional Romanian hay stacks. I loved the skits the teenagers put on based on Bible passages. I loved seeing the eyes of some of them open up to God.

 However, I received more than I ever gave. I learned from the ASCOR students what it meant to be humbled and to serve others. I had been focusing a lot of Philippians Ch 2 that talks about "consider others better than yourself" and "do nothing out of selfish ambition." The Romanians really put it in practice for me. It was a beautiful witness to see Orthodox young people so active in their faith. It really humbled me.

There is one very special person that touched me more than anyone else. He was the Romanian priest working at the first camp. However, a whole blog will have to be devoted to him alone. Stay tuned for more...

But still, one may question the emphasis on independence as it is defined nowadays. "Independent living" and "self-determination" are all the rage now, especially in regard to residential issues. Its true, we must respect everyone's free will, including persons with disabilities- yes, especially persons with disabilities, given the "we know best" tendency to make decisions for them that has been the general rule.

But Orthodox Christian theology defines personhood according to Trinitarian life: the Divine Persons of the Holy Trinity, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, are three Persons, and yet One. This is personhood defined in terms of unity and openness to others, finding one's identity not in oneself alone, but in relation to others.

The term "Interdependence" expresses certain aspects of this understanding of personhood; but it does not seem to be an approach that is appreciated as it should be in American society or in the disability community at this time- surely because it is not understood according to its ultimate context, the Kingdom of God- which we are striving to realize in the Church. But if hard times come, perhaps more appreciation will grow for interdependence, life together, dwelling in mutual love- out of necessity.

Anyway, here are some online resources- far from complete, and admittedly lacking in residential options tailored to the specific interests of Orthodox Christians- on residential options for persons with disability:

http://www.medicalonline.com/disabled/residential/index.html

http://www.familyvillage.wisc.edu/general/residential.html

(independent living/ supported living): http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Woods/2869/links.html

An Orientation to Independent Living Centers: http://www.jik.com/ilcorien.html

Prayerful discernment, and consultation with one's spiritual father is crucial for a God-please use of these websites.

It would be great if I could give some websites of Orthodox Christian group home systems in America, but I think that may have to wait until the various Orthodox Christian jurisdictions can find a way to work together to create this kind of ministry. There is a great need for real movement toward united Orthodox Church jurisdictional governance in our country- for many reasons, and this is one of them.

Of course there are ministries like the Eastern Orthodox Foundation EOF Home Page & St. Matthew House and some others, such as the Raphael House in San Francisco which provide housing for people in need (the first two focus on or explicitly mention persons with disabilities in their mission statements) but they are widely scattered. And none of them focus on persons with developmental disability. I believe the Challenge Liturgy Ministry has mentioned a goal of working with an already existing group home system to provide a home specifically for their people but I don't know if they have realized this goal. All in all, these ministries show that a beginning has been made, but when the efforts are widely scattered, many Orthodox Christians who would like to participate in such ministries cannot. Even if they would move nearby, the ministries cannot handle the influx. Lord, my these good beginnings multiply! & the

]]> http://bloggingsbetter.wordpress.com/?p=573 Thu, 14 Aug 2008 14:05:25 +0000 Andrea Elizabeth http://bloggingsbetter.wordpress.com/?p=573 Continued from Book 2 of Plato's Republic,

Socrates and Adeimantus agree that traditional education "has two divisions, gymnastic for the body, and music for the soul." Literature, fiction and non, is included in the category of music, which should be taught before gymnastics. Socrates says that it is okay to introduce a child to fiction, as long as it is good, which is to be determined by censors. He says children are not to be told tales that misrepresent the gods. He gives the example of Hesiod describing a god who does bad things and then his son retaliates against him. This bad behavior, especially when enacted by gods, should not be given as a model to young children. They should be told that the gods, and citizens, never quarreled amongst themselves. He says that this is true in the case of the gods, and the stories of Zeus beating his wife and such are not true. Children do not understand allegory and will take these stories literally.

This confirms what C.S. Lewis said about the gods being used as allegories of human passions. However Plato and Socrates seem to still believe in their literal existence. Lewis said that the philosophers became monotheistic (?) and this seems consistent with what Socrates says next.

And is he not truly good? and must he not be represented as such?
Certainly.
And no good thing is hurtful?
No, indeed.
And that which is not hurtful hurts not?
Certainly not.
And that which hurts not does no evil?
No.
And can that which does no evil be a cause of evil?
Impossible.
And the good is advantageous?
Yes.
And therefore the cause of well-being?
Yes.
It follows therefore that the good is not the cause of all things, but of the good only?

Assuredly.
Then God, if he be good, is not the author of all things, as the many assert, but he is the cause of a few things only, and not of most things that occur to men. For few are the goods of human life, and many are the evils, and the good is to be attributed to God alone; of the evils the causes are to be sought elsewhere, and not in him.

I believe that the reason C.S. Lewis sounds different than most Protestants is because he respected human intuition. If not intuition, then that God sent prophets to the pagans before the Christians got there (not that they had full revelation). If Protestants close off their intuition and forsake anything a non-Sola Scriptura person says, then they will have a different view of God. Many strongly disagree if we say God is not an angry, vengeful God and that evil is not necessary. It is easy to back up a Reformed, Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God, Christianity by the Bible alone. The Traditional Church, who embraced the Bible, did not come to the same conclusions. I'm not going to speculate that they were influenced by pagan notions of God, though most of the Fathers of the early Church were classically trained. I cannot historically diagnose the root sources exactly, but I'd rather believe the above than the Calvinist version, and I trust myself when what gives me peace, joy and love for God is confirmed by Traditional Christianity.

Then we must not listen to Homer or to any other poet who is guilty of the folly of saying that two casks Lie at the threshold of Zeus, full of lots, one of good, the other of evil lots, and that he to whom Zeus gives a mixture of the two Sometimes meets with evil fortune, at other times with good; but that he to whom is given the cup of unmingled ill,

Amen.

He then discusses God's immutability saying that anything that is perfect does not fall prey to imperfect influences. Which leads me to think that it is a marvelous thing that God, joined to creation through the Theotokos, did not suffer change and become fallen as we did.

Next is a discussion on how God in addition to being perfect and changeless, does not lie or deceive. That men and God all hate lies, but that

a lie in words is only a kind of imitation and shadowy image of a previous affection of the soul, not pure unadulterated falsehood. The true lie is hated not only by the gods, but also by men?

Whereas the lie in words is in certain cases useful and not hateful; in dealing with enemies --that would be an instance; or again, when those whom we call our friends in a fit of madness or illusion are going to do some harm, then it is useful and is a sort of medicine or preventive; also in the tales of mythology, of which we were just now speaking --because we do not know the truth about ancient times, we make falsehood as much like truth as we can, and so turn it to account.

Oh, he's justifying fictitious literature as long as it portrays God correctly. I think C.S. Lewis liked Plato.

Thus concludes Book 2.