Orthodixie

I recently took my occasional detour into the world of the World. I bought a book by Steve Berry — who’d done such a cool job with The Romanov Prophecy — entitled The Third Secret. I know, I know. I KNOW! Okay?

Really … I know.

But, I bought it. I tried to read it. The presentation of matters theological was poorly done, totally illogical. But, I’d paid for the book, I was going to read it.

Y’all, I got about 30 pages from the end and tore it up. Literally. It was paperback, I’m a man. Rocks, Paper, Scissors … I won! I even tore the cover into little giblets and deposited them atop about twenty severed gum sided sections already in the trash can.

Let me spoil it for you: The real third secret of Our Lady of Fatima?

(Caution: It has been suppressed by the evil Roman Catholic Church.)

The “Virgin Mary” claims that God is not happy, pretty P-O’d in fact, because … women should have freedom of choice (as she did!) in carrying babies to “full term” … you should be able to love and marry whomever you wish (even same sex) … celibacy is not required of clergy … women should be ordained.

Okay, maybe the celibacy part needs to be revisited. But that’s no secret, really.

Now, I’m fully aware that in the few remaining pages I dissed there might have been some sort of correction. I doubt it. In fact, to sew the seeds of doubt in the hearts and minds of the faithful is a biggie.

I promise: No more Steve Berry.

Now, for something completely different (but a whole lot alike), here’s Subdeacon Seraphim writing in the style of Dave Barry about Dracula and an Icon.

The priest had prepared a wonder-filled lecture on Iconography for the growing Adult Ed Class. He’d done his research – looking through books, magazines, and the internet. His goal was to not only teach how icons were painted (or written) but also their history, including a brief synopsis of the Iconoclastic controversy of the 8th century, etc. He’d made charts, graphs & timelines.

Most of the participants in the class were Converts – who eat this sort of thing up – and Reverts, those Cradle Orthodox who had “rediscovered” their faith and were hoping to delve deeper. The class had been steadily growing.

In fact, there was a newcomer on this particular evening. It was his first visit to an Orthodox Church. He claimed he’d read some things about Orthodoxy on the internet.

During the presentation, the priest used his charts and graphs to explain the controversy over icons (Iconoclasm). He also spoke of the symbolic nature of the colors used in iconography and the meaning behind the distorted shadows and depth as portrayed in iconography.

Throughout the class period he’d appreciated the smiling and nodding faces of the regulars. Their questions and comments exemplified their great interest in Holy Orthodoxy and the subject at hand. He’d only scheduled one hour for the class, but their interest had encouraged him. Now, 90 minutes into the Class on Iconography, he asked: “Any questions?”

Slowly, reluctantly, a hand went up catching the priest’s attention. He looked to the back of the room, everyone looked toward the newcomer. “Yes?” said the priest.

The country boy said: “What’s an icon?”

After the laughter died down, the priest realized he’d been too smart by half. All the preparation, all the zeal, the accumulation of knowledge … was lost on the newcomer. (And, truth be known, probably on half the smiling – seemingly attentive – faces.) With all that preparation, the priest had forgotten to start with the basics, the fundamentals.

Quickly, everyone joined in in helping the newcomer to catch up to one of the “staples” of Orthodoxy: icons.

A few months later … PASCHA.

Let me tell you some backstage info about PASCHA for priests:

1) they’re tired … services, services, services … fasting, fasting, fasting … preparation of the church, etc.

2) priests want the liturgical experience of PASCHA to be special, awe-filled, in a word: miraculous

3) he desires this wonderment not only for himself and his family, but for the regulars, some-timers, one-timers, and even for the CEO crowd (Christmas, Easter & Other)

3) suffice it to say: TENSION IS HIGH

That night, the priest stood before the unusually packed church and cried out:

Christ is Risen!

The people responded:

Indeed, He is Risen!

Christos anesti!
Alithos anesti!

But over the crowd everyone heard a delayed:

— Haleleuia!

(Some nervous laughter.)

Khristos voskrese!
Voistinu voskrese!

— Praise the Lord!

El Messieh kahm!
Hakken kahm!

— Yeeeee – Haaaa!!!!


Amid the excitement, most probably didn’t notice but, the priest’s face had become as white as his vestments. (Or … okay, maybe as red as the eggs.) All that preparation … all the expectation … all the year long … waiting for this one moment.

He decided he would remedy this immediately. Discreetly, he sent a Server out to tell the man just to reply “Christ is Risen!” — “No matter what we say, just say ‘Christ is Risen!'”

Later, as folks shared their feasting foods in the hall, the man approached the priest and said:

“Sorry ‘bout that. But, I didn’t know what y’all were saying. I’m just happy to be here!”

Today, the Sunday after the Great Feast of the Ascension, the Sunday before the Great Feast of Pentecost, we remember the Fathers of the First Ecumenical Council.

Why? It’s simple … really.

There was confusion in St Constantine’s empire over the basic truth of the Catholic Faith:

Was the Son of God co-equal and co-eternal with God the Father?

Or, was the Son of God created later?

A great teacher at the time, Arius, claimed the latter. He taught that there was “a time when the Son of God was not” – thereby making God the Son a creature and not the Creator.

By now, most of you veteran-Orthodox know that Arius was condemned, even slapped by St Nicholas for his blasphemy, and the Council consisting of 318 Fathers were united in the Holy Spirit in proclaiming that the Son is co-equal, co-eternal with God the Father. To this end, they developed a sort of “Mission Statement” about the True Faith at the Council of Nicea.

What you may not know is that the heresy, known as Arianism, remained all the rage for over a hundred years after the First Great Council. In fact, the Fathers never intended for their Mission Statement to become part of the worship services of the Church. But, since the heresy persisted, it became necessary to define the communities of True Worship by inserting the Mission Statement – or, the Creed – into the service of the Divine Liturgy. In other words, just before Communion, “I believe in one God …”

In essence, it’s simple … what we believe. This Creed, the first part of which was fashioned in the year 325 in Nicea, though full of mystery and majesty, is a simple statement of belief. THIS is what we believe.

In today’s Gospel lesson (John 17:1-13) we once again hear our Lord’s high priestly prayer for unity – that all may be one – even as He and the Father are one. This, brothers and sisters, is simple. Our Lord prayed that his gathered disciples would be one as He and the Father are one.

Though hard for us to comprehend: God is simple.

As we enter this new phase of the Church Year, approaching the Great Feast of Pentecost, let us be mindful of the basics, the fundamentals, of our Faith. When we talk to others about Orthodoxy, let us be mindful to keep it simple.

We often hear reports and rumours of union — between Rome and Orthodoxy; among the American Orthodox jurisdictions; between the separated Russian Orthodox, etc. But such talk and possible union is bound for failure if not based on the fundamentals, the essentials, the basics.

Father, Son, and Holy Spirit: God is one. Love God, love your neighbor. God is simple.

Keep it simple.

After all, even heretics can make it all complicated.

Much is made these days when Catholics and Orthodox agree or even play nice.

Some may ask: What happened to the unity of the Church? Was it ever united?

There are currently over 2,600 Christian groups in North America — all claiming, in one way or another, to be “the Church.” So, instead of studying the “Church of What’s Happening Now,” we must look back to the “Church of What Actually Happened” for clues, answers, the truth.

The Church originated with Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit. Scripture tells us that on the day of Pentecost, fifty days after the Lord’s Resurrection, some 3000 souls were baptized into the Kingdom. The Faith soon spread throughout Judea, to Samaria, Antioch and the Gentiles. Within a few years after the Resurrection, there were Christian communities sprouting up all over the Roman Empire. This period of the Church’s history is recorded in the Acts and Epistles of the Apostles.

Then what? What happened to the Church after it leapt off the pages of Holy Scripture into the second century and beyond?

Persecution. For nearly 300 years the early Christians were seen as a threat to the religion and politics of the Empire. Thousands were murdered — martyred — for the Faith.

In the year 313, the Emporer Constantine granted Christians freedom of worship. Not only did this signal the end of the persecutions, it showed that the Church had survived to become, and continue to be, a significant force in the Empire.

During the next six centuries the Church determined and authorized the content of the New Testament, formalized the framework of the worship services, saw the development of theology and doctrine by great pastors and theologians known as the “Fathers” of the Church. It was also during this period that Saints Cyril and Methodius exported the Faith — which eventually made its way to the Slavs (Russia).

The fourth through the tenth centuries were also a time of struggle. The Byzantine Empire was on continual “red alert” against the Persians and Muslims. There were also many grave heresies within the Church. The greatest of these was the heresy of Arianism which taught that Christ was not truly God. This wind of error swept through the Church for centuries and is even present in some “denominations” to this day.

To battle such erroneous teachings, the Church convened councils. It was during what’s known as the Seven Ecumenical Councils that the Church, by way of refuting the heretics, also proclaimed and defended the fundamental doctrines of the Faith. Bishops from around the world gathered at these councils to affirm the authentic teachings on the Incarnation and the Holy Trinity. Instead of creating new teachings, these gatherings proclaimed what the Church always believed and taught. The conciliar spirit and collegiality expressed within these authoritative gatherings are an important aspect of Orthodoxy. Five cities were sanctioned as centers of Church organization: Rome, Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem. Each center had its own theological style, customs, and liturgical traditions. Yet they all shared in the unity of the Faith.

THE GREAT SCHISM

The splitting of the Church into Western (Roman Catholic) and Eastern (Orthodox) which took place in the year 1054 is known as the “Great Schism“. There were many factors — political, doctrinal, economic and cultural — that fueled the division. However, two issues emerged above all others: Papal supremacy and an addition to the Creed.

The addition to the Creed, known as the Filioque (Latin for “and the Son”) affirms that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son. Unlike the Creed which was authenticated and affirmed by two Ecumenical Councils (Nicea in 325 & Constantinople in 381), the Filioque was added at a local council in Spain in the year 589. The King, Reccared, claimed that “the Holy Spirit also should be confessed by us and taught to proceed from the Father and the Son”. Although Kind Reccared may have meant well, his addition was not in accord with the Apostolic teaching about the Holy Spirit. The local Spanish council unfortunately agreed with his erroneous proposal.

For the East, this unilateral action (noted above and over the centuries repeated in various regions) was seen as a flagrant violation of the conciliar collegiality that was manifest and maintained by the Ecumenical Councils. It represented a major departure from the Orthodox doctrine of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church. [For more on the Filoque controversy go HERE.]

The other major issue that finally brought about the Great Schism was the superior claims of control and power by the bishop of Rome. Although the bishop of Rome had always been viewed as “first among equals,” he began to assert more and more unilateral and authoritarian control upon the rest of the Church. The ultimate “slap in the face” came in the year 1054 when a Cardinal, sent by the Pope, slapped a document of excommunication on the altar of the Church of Holy Wisdom in Constantinople during the Sunday worship. From then on the Western Church, centered about the Pope of Rome, and the Eastern Church, centered about the Patriarch of Constantinople, went their separate ways.

Although attempts were made in the years 1274 and 1439 to restore unity, no lasting communion was achieved. For certain, there are many factors — political, cultural, and emotional — that are involved in the continued separation of the East and West. However, the Orthodox Church believes that the two main reasons for the continued schism are the papal claims of universal jurisdiction and infallibility, as well as the addition and meaning of the Filioque to the Creed.

The centuries that followed the Great Schism saw the Western Church embroiled in the Protestant Reformation and the Roman Catholic Counter-Reformation. The Church of Rome became increasingly bogged down in political and theological problems. Martin Luther inadvertently ushered in the Reformation with his famous Ninety-Five Thesis. Though not his intention, his actions ultimately resulted in the Protestant body known as Lutherans. Hundreds of others across Western Europe also sought reform with the Church of Rome. The Reformation soon spread like a wild fire throughout the West. The Western Church’s artificial unity was replaced by massive division.

There was also trouble raging across the way in England. Henry the VIII, in the midst of marital problems, decided to replace the Pope of Rome with himself as the head of the Church. Soon, the English Church would also be torn apart by division.

Some of these Protestant bodies, such as the Lutherans and Anglicans, held on to basic forms of Liturgy and Sacraments. Others, such as the Anabaptists and their descendents rejected many biblical ideas of hierarchy, sacrament, historic tradition, and other elements of Christian practice — regardless of when and where they appeared in history — thinking that in so doing they were freeing themselves from Roman Catholicism.

Thus, even though Protestantism and Roman Catholicism can each claim to have retained portions of foundational Christianity, neither group can lay historic claim to being the one true Church of the New Testament. [No doubt, some might say similar things about the Orthodox … on their own blogs.]

We should all rejoice that steps are being made to reconcile differences and to heal this breach. Yet we must also be realistic. After centuries of separation, the way toward unity will not be an easy one. I am reminded of an old Anglican prayer: “Lord, revive Thy Church …beginning with me.” If each of us start there — with ourselves, working out our own salvation with fear and trembling — the path toward unity will be more God-pleasing. There’s much good we can all do together in the meantime. The rest is on God’s time.

For a timeline of Church History, go H E R E.

For further views on Primacy, Unity & Ecclesiology, go H E R E.

Revised from June 2005; not intended as exhaustive, nuanced, or final. Comments are moderated 🙂

Quite possibly the wittiest thing you’ll read today …

H E R E.

Save, maybe, this:

My wife heard someone say that a co-worker had gone to see The Da Vinci Code and is now totally confused about Jesus marrying Mona Lisa.

I asked God for strength that I might achieve,
I was made weak that I might learn to humbly obey.
I asked for health that I might do greater things,
I was given infirmity that I might do better things.
I asked for riches that I might be happy,
I was given poverty that I might be wise.
I asked for power that I might have the praise of men,
I was given weakness that I might feel the need of God.
I asked for all things that I might enjoy life,
I was given life that I might enjoy all things.
I got nothing I asked for — but everything I had hoped for.
Almost despite myself, my unspoken prayers were answered.
I am among all men most richly blessed.

I had posted this prayer back in March, 2005, from an email. Yet, today, I googled the first line and find a timely [Orthodox] reference here.

Also worth a look: Prayers for Enemies.