The Samaritan Woman
Dear Friends in Christ,
Christ is Risen! Χριστός ανέστη!
We’ve passed through half of the Paschal season, and will soon be celebrating the Feast of Pentecost, which falls this year on May 23. Pentecost is the day when Christ sent His Holy Spirit upon His Apostles so that their souls would be illumined and they would be given the power and divine wisdom needed to convert the nations. In between these two great feasts, each Sunday has a special theme; in this message, I will address the Sunday of the Samaritan Woman.
The Gospel reading for this feast comes from John 4:5-42. Christ comes to a city in Samaria called Sychar, and encounters a woman there at about the sixth hour. The sixth hour, which would have been around high noon, was a very hot time of the day, and it is unlikely that many women would have gone to the well at this time. It seems that our woman was forced to go then, because of the social stigmas attached to her. When Jesus asked her to get her husband, she responded that she had none; and Jesus revealed that not only did He know that she had had five previous husbands, but that her current partner was not married to her.
read more…
Last night, my brother-in-law Mark and I watched the first half of the first episode of the new “Ancient Aliens” series on the History Channel. It’s an expansion of the documentary that came out a little while ago.
Not being a scientist, as my friend George P. can attest, I watched the program solely with my logical reasoning skills and historical research skills in mind, which I feel I am qualified to use, having completed a BA and an MDiv, and written over 100 papers during that time. I also feel that my exposure to ancient religious texts and how to interpret them, skills I also obtained during my days at seminary, qualified me to assess the claims. In other words, I was not paying attention to the scientific details at all–since I am wholly unqualified to comment on science (Mark is a college student studying chemistry and has taken several classes on physics, so he is, though)–I was simply assessing the soundness of the arguments, and looking at the background of the texts cited.
Well, I expected the program to be a little kooky. I have to say, it was a total joke. A sick joke, and a waste of my time. I could only watch 30 minutes of it!
Analysis of the Arguments Presented
1) Statuettes that look like planes are proof of ancient aircraft. Yes, they did not have a regulator device on the back (a rudder for planes?). But we see there is a marking on one of those statues, where something fell off, so we can assume there used to be one (even though that part was not found in the intact tomb…)
2) A golden statuette that looked like an insect to me was discounted as an insect because “insects don’t have wings in the front.” Yet it didn’t look like it was in the front to me, as much as in the middle. Mark remarked that it looked like the statue had eyes, and that they were holding it on the wrong side anyway. Still, this was proof to these “researchers.” On top of that, they “proved” that this was a viable plane, by making a model to scale and putting it in a wind tunnel. This is “proof” that alien aircraft visited, according to these “scientists.”
Could the Ancients have produced gliders? Why not? Even though I still maintain the thing looked like an insect, even accepting it is a glider, how does that prove anything? Does it really take that much brain power to look at say a dragonfly and say, “hmmm, well it obviously flies somehow. Given this is 2500 years before they figured out anything about physics, I have to go on my hunches here. And what I see is it has these wings and it has a a proportionate body and it does something with that tail” etc etc and try to recreate that? It doesn’t seem that much of a stretch to me. I guess it’s just too disappointing to believe that Ancient Egyptians invented a prototype hand-glider and then didn’t do anything with it. Alien visitations make so much more sense.
3) Historical text analysis starts here: they mentioned this “ancient text” called the Vaimanika Shastra. They said it was an ANCIENT TEXT. That this ANCIENT TEXT had aerodynamic instructions.
They didn’t mention that in fact, it was produced by a Hindu guru in a trance in the 20th century: “based on the linguistic analysis of the text, the review concluded that it came into existence sometime between 1900 and 1922” and that “A study by aeronautical and mechanical engineering at Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore in 1974 concluded that the aircrafts described in the text were “poor concoctions” and that the author showed complete lack of understanding of aeronautics.”
Sources listed here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaimanika_Shastra
4) One participant said (paraphrased): “Can we really say all this is a coincidence? And don’t coincidences after awhile seem to be more than coincidences?” (No, that is why they are called coincidences.)
Another participant used the logical fallacy “argument from ignorance” (also called “negative evidence”) when he stated (paraphrased): “Some people say there is no proof these are models of alien spacecraft….but do we really have any valid argument that they are not?” Excuse me, but anyone with any training whatsoever in any discipline knows that that is a logical fallacy and that it is NOT POSSIBLE to make such an argument to “prove” ANY idea!
Some of the participants in this program:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Cremo : Convert to Hindu fundamentalism. No academic degrees completed.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Hatcher_Childress : No academic degrees, and no formal training in archaeology
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_Greer : Is a licensed physician in NY, but based off of medical training he obtained from the Maharishi Intl Univ, which anyone who was alive in the 1960’s knows is highly questionable.
Conclusions
1) Just because someone does not have an academic degree, does not mean he is unqualified to comment on things, on a certain level. One can become a master of a topic without a terminal academic degree, and sometimes these people can teach in universities, even. Knowledge is knowledge. However, having at least ONE degree proves that someone has the diligence to stick with a program that is monitored by people outside himself. It shows a certain credibility. So I would not immediately discount someone without a degree, but I would be suspicious until proven otherwise. When these people have their own publishing houses, and state things that are VERIFIABLY FALSE, then I start questioning the real reason they don’t have a degree.
2) There is no proof that aliens did “not” visit earth, but this is a logical fallacy to claim that this means something. There is no proof my dog does not talk when I leave the room. There is also no proof that these ancient aliens are not really demons. That is actually my personal take as an Orthodox priest, that if such aircraft are present in ancient texts or ancient paintings, they could be the product of demonic visitations (which I believe modern UFO abductions are–the stories are similar to demonic apparitions as described in the Church Fathers’ writings). That being said, I would never try to “prove” that such things are demonic as I have no way to measure it. Science doesn’t address that question. These apparitions could just as much be the result of schizophrenia, being high on some hallucinogen, mass hysteria, fantasy, or a productive imagination. Investigations by a religious official into cases of demonic possession are obtained by observation and spiritual analysis, which is impossible on ancient cases. It also makes about as much sense as some modern mental health professionals writing books about what disease might have affected various figures in historical texts that acted strangely.
That being said, whether one believes these alleged apparitions are aliens, demons, or hallucinations is irrelevant–none of us can prove it. This is beyond the scope of scientific or religious investigation, and is an abuse of our training. A discussion of these apparitions with reference to scientific or religious theories might be valid in some humanities field, cultural studies, etc., but the way this program was presented was as science, and that was very troubling to me.
3) The fact that a modern text was presented as ancient with no explanation struck me as deceptive.
Bottom line: 30 minutes of the program did not convince me that aliens visited Earth 3000 years ago. “But you should have watched the whole program!” might be the response. If after 30 minutes I was able to come up with the above analysis, do you really think it would be worth it? Again, I watched the program with no claims to know the science. I only responded to the logic used and how the evidence was presented. It was presented inaccurately, with fallacies, and deceptively in some cases.
If someone else comes up with a better quality program, I’ll watch it. But this was a travesty. Shame on you, History Channel.
“Christ at Heart’s Door” by Warner Sallman.
<disclaimer> This post will be a little more emotional and personal than what I usually post. Also, since this is a reflection, I will not be providing extensive citations. It’s kind of a tribute. Perhaps I will convert this in to a proper essay, after I’ve had time to let it sink in.</disclaimer>
Some people assume that because I converted to the Orthodox Church, that I rejected all of my past religious upbringing. It is certainly true that I rejected some things from my Protestant upbringing. Let me list a few of those ideas for illustration, before proceeding on with this essay, which is not about what I rejected, but what I benefited from and appreciate:
1) The idea that you say a sinner’s prayer and get saved, have a sure knowledge that it “worked,” and that nothing you do from that point on can jeopardize your eternal salvation. My Lutheran upbringing did temper this with an exception for apostasy.
2) The idea that goes hand-in-hand with #1, namely, that it is impossible for someone to become truly righteous, but rather God adds the credits of Jesus’s life to you after you “accept him as your savior.” Sanctification is encouraged, but is a separate category. You’ll never really get clean though. States Luther: “I said before that our righteousness is dung in the sight of God. Now if God chooses to adorn dung, he can do so” (Luther’s Works, Vol. 34, page 184). No. God’s grace, which is truly part of Him (His uncreated energies) penetrate the soul and restore man to the condition He had before the fall. Man can be changed, truly, to the core. Man can become godlike. Holiness is possible for man, in this life.
3) The idea that there is a class of people that can’t be prayed for: namely, those who have already died.
4) The idea that God created some people knowing full well they would have no chance for salvation (i.e. all Native Americans created before 1492).
I could go on and on, but the purpose of this note is actually not to catalog why I rejected Protestantism, and ultimately became an Orthodox Christian. Instead, this post is a corrective to any impression or assumption one might have about me and my conversion, which might arise from the known doctrinal viewpoints of the Orthodox Church vis-a-vis non-Orthodox Churches (denominations).
Quite on the contrary, despite the theological errors that I was exposed to growing up, it was not those things which affected me more than the basic love of Christ found in my family did. The picture I have attached, “Christ at Heart’s Door” by Warner Sallman, illustrates perfectly what my parents, grandparents, aunts and uncles, some of my older cousins, got right. What their example showed me.
This beautiful picture (in a kind of odd 3-d rendition so reminiscent of the 1980s) was on the bedside table of the guest room in my grandmother’s home growing up. When I would spend the night there, or go over there, this image was next to me. Christ is knocking on the door. But look: there’s no handle. You have to let him in. I never noticed that; someone pointed it out to me. Beautiful, huh? He’s right there, and he wants to come in. He loves us. But he isn’t going to force us. Sallman was inspired by this quote from Revelation: “Behold, I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and eat with him, and he with me” (Rev. 3:20).
Yes, there are simplistic understandings of what that means. Yes, there is an overemphasis on making Jesus one’s “personal” savior. But there is a simple truth that is lived by many people who didn’t always understand all the doctrinal implications: Jesus is here. He’s ready. He’s waiting. He loves you. When you accept him and believe in him, that means you should do things differently.
My family was a Christian family. We went to Church, we put God first. It was the 1980’s, and gradually many of my family members experienced temptations and sinful influences. There were divorces and the like. Some of it didn’t seem to add up with what we had been eagerly agreeing with in the Church. Sometimes they didn’t do things differently (and I myself didn’t do things right, so many times!) But there was a reality there, a belief that God is in control and that ultimately things will be ok. That through faith, things will change.
I changed, and it was Christ that saved me from myself so many times. I got a good grounding in faith and the Bible in my Protestant days. The Roman Catholic Church, where I sojourned some years, taught me about personal repentance, confession, charity, and increased my love of neighbor. Ultimately, it all came together for me in Orthodoxy, where life changed completely. Where baptism in the Orthodox Church, by three full immersions, changed me forever. Sinful passions I could never conquer were destroyed. Everything is calmer–the ups and downs are there, but there is a regulator of sorts; it doesn’t sway too much one way or the other.
Would I have become Orthodox, which I believe is the original and True visible Church of Jesus Christ, if I had not been taught to love Jesus Christ by my family? Taken to Church by them regularly? Slept next to this beautiful picture of Jesus, and thought about him wanting to save me? Maybe, maybe not. But I got a good head start. I will never reject that, and I will thank my parents, grandparents, and other relatives who gave me this gift. My acceptance of Orthodoxy was not a complete rejection of my past. It did involve a rejection of some extremes, but those were extremes which didn’t really impact the day-to-day good examples shown me (for example, Grandma railing against Catholics for “worshiping Mary,” calling the Pope an Antichrist, and wearing orange on St Patrick’s Day did not affect my faith much, because I saw her lifetime of loving service to my grandfather and her service to the local Church, and this spoke more than the rough edges).
Jesus stood knocking, and I accepted him. Maybe I went in a direction that some don’t understand. Maybe they don’t agree with it. I hope they will consider it, and yes, I hope everyone I know will become an Orthodox Christian. But I leave that in the hands of God. Seeing the image of Christ knocking, however, reminds me of the firm grounding I received, the love I was shown, the wholesomeness, the joy. It prepared me for where I am now. I will never disparage the simple faith that was present.
Thank you Jesus, for letting me be born where I was. Thank you family, for raising me to know Jesus.
Pascha: Our Renewal
Dear Friends in Christ,
Christ is Risen! Χριστός ανέστη!
I write you this message during Bright Week, the glorious week immediately following Pascha, the feast of the Resurrection of Christ. The theme of Pascha (Easter) is exemplified by the following hymn:
It is the day of Resurrection; Let us be radiant in the festival! Let us embrace one another! Let us call brothers, even those who hate us: And forgive all things in the resurrection; and therefore let us proclaim: Christ is risen from the dead, by death hath He trampled down death and on those in the graves hath He bestowed Life!
The Easter Bunny *Is* Welcome!
Greeks taught me that you are useful for more than being a pet or delivering chocolate eggs, Mr. Bunny.
Dear Mr. Easter Bunny,
Contrary to what you’ve been told, just because I converted to the Orthodox Church some years ago, you have not been banished from our holiday celebration.
In fact, you are welcome to come over on the joyous day. We can’t let you in for the service (animals, except for cats, are not allowed in Orthodox Churches), but we have a special way to make that up to you.
Around 1pm in the afternoon, you will be the guest of honor at our outdoor barbecue. You see, ever since I met Greeks, I discovered that you serve more than the purpose of just a) being a pet and b) giving little kids chocolate eggs once a year.
So around 1 pm on Sunday, [insert this year’s Pascha/Easter date], please feel free to hop on over to my backyard. If you arrive early, hop right on up to the grill and get a whiff of all the fresh vegetables we will have cooking already (we had plenty of them left over from Lent).
Please don’t be late though–we can’t start the party without you!
The Prayer of Saint Ephraim
Dear Friends in Christ,
As I write this message, we’ve already celebrated two Sundays of Lent, and the Sunday of the Holy Cross is approaching. Lent is thus almost halfway over. Lent is truly a time of joyful mourning, where we are reminded through fasting and penance of our sinful nature, while at the same time anticipating the joy of Pascha, where all things are renewed, and we experience a foretaste of the Resurrection that we all shall experience at the end of time.
During Lent, we add a special prayer to the end of our morning and evening prayers, called the Prayer of Saint Ephraim. This prayer is a succinct summary of the goal of our Lenten struggles. I’d like to quote it in its three sections, with some humble observations.
The Prodigal Son
Dear Friends in Christ,
We’re in the midst of the Triodion now, the service book which provides us with hymns for the four preparatory weeks before Lent, and the weeks of Lent itself, ending with Pascha, the feast of the Resurrection of Christ. Two weeks ago, we celebrated the feast of the Publican and the Pharisee (Luke 18:10-14), where we learned to ask forgiveness of our sins in humility, and not boast of any good works we may have done. Last week, we celebrated the feast of the Prodigal Son (Luke 15:11-32), where we heard the Lord’s parable of a man who took off with his share of the inheritance, wasted it on bad living, and then came back humbled, only to be completely forgiven and restored. Sunday we recall the Last Judgment, and finally, the following Sunday, the expulsion of Adam and Even from Paradise, at which point Lent begins.
read more…
The New Testament Church
When you sit down to think about it, there sure are a lot of Christian denominations: Baptists, Lutherans, Methodists, and Episcopalians, to name a few. Is this what Jesus wanted? The Bible says that Jesus is the head of the Church (Ephesians 5:23). Can a head be a head to more than one body? Some have come up with a theory that the Church must refer to all the saved Christians on the earth at one time. Yet the Bible also says that the Church is the “pillar and foundation of the truth” (1 Timothy 3:15). If the Church is an invisible group of all the saved Christians, then where is there a pillar or a foundation that we can look at for guidance? This would lead to a lot of confusion, for sure. We’d have to go and ask each minister we knew, and they might give different answers. In the end, we’d have to rely on our judgment: but what if we are wrong?
Some claim that they are “Non-Denominational.” While the idea of not being a denomination is a good start, it’s pretty obvious that most Churches which claim to not belong to any denomination look a lot like your average Baptist or Evangelical Church. It’s very rare, for instance, to see a Non-Denominational Church that looks Roman Catholic. Changing the sign on the door doesn’t restore us to the original, pre-denominational Church. The question we might ask is then: what was the Church like in the early days right after Jesus, in the New Testament? And does that Church still exist?
Returning to the Bible, we see that the Church was started on Pentecost, when the Holy Spirit descended upon the Apostles and they went out to preach (Acts 2). 3000 people were converted and baptized that day. St. Paul travelled and converted many people. He wrote them letters, and those letters became books of the New Testament, the second half of the Bible. He also told them things verbally, and expected them to honor his oral traditions: “So then, brothers, stand firm and hold to the teachings we passed on to you, whether by word of mouth or by letter” (2 Thessalonians 2:15).
After the Apostles died, what happened next? For instance, if there was a problem or a dispute, who settled it? Correct doctrine was certainly important; leaving aside the correct teaching about Christ was considered to be leaving God (2 John 1:7-11). Did they turn to their Bibles for the answer? Besides the fact that most people could not read then, the Bible was not all together in one place at that time. Certainly, the Old Testament Scriptures were collected in scrolls, but the Gospels and Epistles were still being circulated and collected. There were also some false Gospels and Epistles that taught incorrect things about God. In fact, the Bible contains no divine “Table of Contents” at all! It was only in 393 AD at the Council of Hippo that the bishops assembled agreed on the official list of books of the Bible! The criteria they used was comparing what Epistles and Gospels had been collected in each local Church they served, and which had been read in the Sunday service continuously. An ancient saying went, “what you pray, is what you believe.”
To people used to the idea that the Bible is the only source of authority for the Christian, this fact might seem scary at first. But it really isn’t: as we mentioned above, the Bible says that the Church is the pillar and foundation of the truth. Looking at history, we see that the Apostles selected overseers (bishops) to succeed them and maintain order. A well-known example mentioned in the Bible is Timothy. These bishops continued to select people to succeed them, as an early Christian writer recorded (Ireneus in his work Against Heresies in the second century, for instance). This is referred to as “apostolic succession”: the apostles chose successors who chose successors down to the present day. As each bishop was selected, he made a public profession of faith, and was entrusted with the written letters of the Apostles and the oral traditions that had been passed down to his predecessor, and which had been publicly taught in the assembly of prayer. This public succession prevented people from claiming they had a secret teaching about God or that they had secretly been made bishops. When there were regional problems, the bishops of each local church would meet together in councils, such as Hippo in 393 which confirmed the proper list of books of the Bible.
This succession of bishops continues to this day: in the Orthodox Church. All Orthodox priests and bishops have been ordained by bishops that can be traced back to the Apostles. Apostolic succession is an important link confirming that the New Testament Church is alive today, because the succession of bishops is older than the Bible itself! The Orthodox Church has not been founded by any individual, such as Lutherans being founded by Luther, or Baptists being founded by John Smyth. These Churches do not have proper apostolic succession. The Roman Catholics have a physical line of bishops, but they have changed doctrines over time, and separated from the majority of other bishops in 1054 over the issue of the Pope.
The Orthodox Church is the original Christian Church, which has faithfully preserved the doctrine and practices of the Early Church. In this day, many are looking to rediscover the New Testament Church, and are often surprised to learn that it has been there all along. Orthodoxy is not just another denomination, but is pre-denominational. If you’ve ever wondered what happened after the Apostles or what the Church looked like in 200 AD, 500 AD, or 1300 AD, come worship with us and get a glimpse at the Church as it has existed throughout all ages.
Christ Is Born! Glorify Him!
Dear Friends in Christ,
Christ is Born! Glorify Him! Χριστός Γεννάται! Δοξάσατε!
Christmas is upon us again, the Nativity of Our Lord, God, and Savior Jesus Christ! St. John Chrysostom, who lived in the 4th and 5th centuries, and for whom our most common Divine Liturgy is named, composed a sermon for this feast from which I will draw a few quotes upon which to reflect.
I behold a new and wondrous mystery!…All join to praise this holy feast, beholding the Godhead herein…He who is above now, for our salvation, dwells here below; and we, who were lowly, are exalted by divine mercy!
read more…
Spiritual, but not Religious
Dear Friends in Christ,
We sometimes hear people say that they are “spiritual, but not religious.” In our present age, it is fashionable to champion some type of spiritual relationship with God, while rejecting all the formalities and dogmas of organized religion. Such people view these formalities and dogmas as things that inhibit spirituality, a spirituality that is highly personal and individualistic, and is concerned with being a good person, perhaps with some borrowings from existing spiritual traditions such as yoga, meditation, and centering prayer.
While not wanting to denigrate others’ personal experiences, we Orthodox Christians must take issue with the false dichotomy between being “spiritual” and being “religious.” Religiosity is something that is under fire in our age, as being dogmatic is considered a fault akin to being biased or inflexible. Certainly, there are intransigent ideologues, and there are those who follow a religion because it’s what they grew up with, without ever taking the time to examine their presuppositions. This is not what we Orthodox are championing, for sure. Religion can be used as a crutch. The answer, however, does not lie in a retreat to a generic, individualistic, and self-created spirituality.
When we undertake a road trip, we gather our map or GPS, we plot out our course, prepare some snacks and other provisions, and set out on the journey. Along the way, we travel along a road with guardrails, signs, and interchanges. Hardly anyone, except perhaps an urban planner, would stop his car and marvel at a well-constructed highway interchange, pondering the complexities of bringing three or four highways together in one place. Nor would most people ponder the maps or GPS devices they use and marvel at the cartographic skill of the engineers. These things are tools that we take for granted. Yet if we did not have the maps or the highways, we would not arrive at our destination.
It is the same thing with those who are “spiritual, but not religious.” When one sets out along a self-created route, there is no external thing against which to measure progress. In such a vague, self-created system, one must ultimately rely on his or her feelings and secular notions of progress and success. As new techniques and philosophies are discovered, one adjusts along the way. The effect is often akin to driving down the highway not knowing where one is going. Joyriding can be fun, but not forever. Religious traditions and practices such as reading the Scriptures, attending Divine Liturgy, keeping the fasts, and saying our daily prayers are the maps and guardrails that keep us on the path to Jesus Christ.
That’s not to say there isn’t a treasure trove of spirituality in our Church, though. Anyone familiar with Orthodoxy knows the vast amount of spiritual literature that is available; the Sayings of the Desert Fathers; the Philokalia; the Lives of the Saints. The Liturgy itself contains many hymns which provoke our repentance and augment our spiritual joy. These profound texts provide all one could ever need for a lifetime of growth. But these resources only work in our lives when we keep them in the context in which they were written: the Church. They were not written by people who were independent, but rather by people who while they maintained a deep, personal relationship with God, also maintained an equally close relationship with their fellow men and women. Love permeated everything they did, a love that is not expressed vaguely with nice sentiments, but in a community.
In my last message, I mentioned that we always have things to be thankful for, even in times of difficulty. It’s been my great joy to baptize five people at our mission since I wrote those words. These five people, along with others whom I have received in to our Church this year, have come from diverse backgrounds, but all had a common objective: to have a life with Jesus Christ in the most authentic way possible. They found our Orthodox Faith, which has maintained the proper balance between religious observance and personal spirituality. Some of them travelled a great distance to come to our Church, in fact. As we approach the celebration of the birth of our Lord Jesus Christ, I encourage you to attend liturgy with us and find the framework to support your spiritual journey.
Yours in Christ,
Fr Anastasios
