Upholding the 'Fundamentals', versus being 'Fundamentalists'

Dear Parish Faithful,

"Scientism on the one hand and well-meaning but naive religious fundamentalism on the other have hardened in recent years so as to widen the gap that exists between the two domains."

- Fr. John Breck, Beyond These Horizons - Quantum Theory and Christian Faith

 

During the post-Liturgy discussion on Sunday, when presenting a brief description of Fr. John Breck's new book from which the quotation above is taken, I was emphatic in saying that we Orthodox are not fundamentalists. I hold that position very strongly. However, I would like to just briefly discuss the terminology that we use today so as to avoid any confusion or misunderstanding as to what I was trying to get at. And this confusion can arise when we use, rather interchangeably, such words as "fundamental," "fundamentalist," and "fundamentalism." 

 

The word "fundamentalism" refers to a strong reaction and rejection, usually in consistently black and white terms, of any contemporary movements that challenge a received tradition, or simply a long-standing understanding of a faith's core beliefs/doctrines. This strong reaction is against what is loosely called "modernism," which usually stands for a critique or challenge to traditional teaching. 

 

Protestant fundamentalism arose in the early 20th c. precisely against "modernist" trends - often based on new scientific evidence or new critical apparatus that challenged the veracity or claims of what was believed to be the correct interpretation of the Bible (as mainline Protestantism understood it).  Science and the the emerging popularization of the "theory of evolution" were clearly, but not exclusively, a part of this dispute, captured above in the words of Fr. John. What seemed to be at stake was the "literal" truth of biblical revelation.  Avoiding that difficult topic for the moment, I am simply pointing out that the movement we now call Protestant fundamentalism arose as a protest against modernism. In other words, these Protestants wanted to affirm the "fundamental" doctrines of the Bible which they were certain were being challenged, if not dismantled. However, this also led to what is now a more-or-less exclusively "literal" understanding of Scripture from "in the beginning" to the end.

As Orthodox Christians, no matter how we may differ from Protestant fundamentalists, we too affirm the basic or "fundamental" doctrines of the Christian revelation - the Holy Trinity, the divinity of Christ, God as Creator, the deifying energy of the Holy Spirit, the Mysteries/Sacraments of the Church, to name perhaps the most core doctrines. (The Church knew, taught and proclaimed these "fundamental"doctrines well before Protestantism began to exist!). So, we can certainly employ the term "fundamental(s)" on that level.  

 

However, as Orthodox, we do not have a "fundamentalist" mindset, characterized by an almost slavish commitment to the "literal" meaning of the Scriptures. That is far too narrow and lacking in insight and inspired creativity. Though the Fathers accepted the "literal" meaning of a given biblical text, their simultaneous use of biblical typology and allegory point way beyond the approach of "fundamentalism." With the ongoing discovery of new "facts," be it from the discipline of biblical scholarship or science, the literalist approach keeps being driven into a corner from which it cannot honestly emerge intact. This type of fundamentalism severely undermines the credibility of Christianity. 

 

Of course, regardless of any attacks on the "fundamental" doctrines of our Faith as listed above, we steadfastly defend those doctrines with all our intellectual and spiritual energy, often quite brilliantly. But we cannot do that if we escape into a literalist fantasy imposed upon the Bible that fears any new discoveries. I do believe that there is an element of fear that drives fundamentalism: If the biblical text is not "literally" true in just about any instance, then it simply loses it claim to reveal Truth.

Thus, when I emphatically insisted that we, as Orthodox, are not fundamentalists, I was referring to the spirit of the reactionary movement that we now call Protestant fundamentalism dating back to the early 20th c. If that type of fundamentalism enters into the Orthodox Church from outside it will undermine our credibility and stifle our longstanding and profound theological legacy. I do affirm that we uphold the "fundamental" doctrines of the Church "fearlessly," if I may put it that way. Perhaps clarifying such words as "fundamental," "fundamentalist," and "fundamentalism" can be helpful for our own self-understanding as Orthodox Christians.

Appendix

Fr. John and I have been corresponding about this issue. In a recent email he offered a fine summary of how we approach biblical exegesis, respecting the "literal" meaning - i.e. "history" - but also going beyond it.  He offers some important insights beyond which I wrote about above. I am therefore sharing what he wrote as an appendix to my own reflections:

Allegory and typology began with the "literal" sense of the Scriptures ("what the biblical author intended").  But those methodologies presupposed that there is a "higher" meaning than the literal.  The "symbolic" or "spiritual" aspect of biblical writings leads above and beyond the literal, as much as prayer leads us beyond self-centered "reflection."  A basic patristic hermeneutic principle states that "the spiritual sense flows forth from the literal sense."  We need to begin with the literal sense — i.e., with *history.  

 

* But history is merely a framework in which God works out the divine "economy" which by its very nature leads us beyond the empirical and draws us into the transcendent.  If this were not the case, Scripture would be nothing more than an outdated history book, and thus a dead letter.

I tried to deal with this in several places, the most accessible being, I suppose, the first section of the book Longing for God.  If any parishioners are really interested in the layers of meaning in the Bible, that might be a helpful place to begin.

 

 

 

Books to Deepen our Faith

Dear Parish Faithful,

At the Liturgy yesterday, the homily focused on one of the great Church Fathers, St, Ignatius of Antioch (+ c. 110). My purpose was to remind everyone of a homily preached back in July about the Church Fathers and my challenge then to everyone to choose the work of one of the Church Fathers and read it before the end of the year. I brought up St. Ignatius as one example among many together with his famous Seven Epistles. And during the post-liturgy discussion, I promoted the Popular Patristic Series from SVS Press. This series has now reached 50 volumes and counting. This is an outstanding resource that would give you an excellent collection to choose from. Therefore, I have provided a link to the Popular Patristic Series on the SVS Press website. 

https://svspress.com/categories/Popular-Patristics-Series/

I further promoted two more books, both dealing with the crucial and very contemporary issue of how science and religion can coexist and mutually support each other. Of course, there is a "dark side" to this relationship in which mutual and bitter conflict seem to be inescapable. Militant atheists have nothing but disdain for God and "religion" and they do not hesitate to "preach" this to a broad reading public ad nauseam. This is more scientism than science. On the other hand, defensive positions by "religious" people who do not trust the scientific community find strength in what is now being called "fundamentalism," a more-or-less literal interpretation of Scriptures. These both seem like close-minded systems of thought.

The two books I promoted present an open attitude to theology and science and understand them to be compatible within their spheres of competence and investigation. Their respective authors are Metropolitan Kallistos Ware and Fr. John Breck, two of the most prominent Orthodox theologians writing today.

I was surrounded by a large group of parishioners yesterday following the post-Liturgy discussion who were eager to get more information  of the two books I briefly presented. Many got out their phones are were taking pictures of the respective book covers  presumably in order to do some potential purchasing and reading. I further discovered this morning email requests from other parishioners for more information about these books.I have therefore provided two more links for your convenience. 

The first book is Met. Kallistos' Religion, Science & Technology - An Eastern Orthodox Perspective. The content of this short book is very accessible:

https://www.amazon.com/Religion-Science-Technology-Orthodox-Perspective/dp/1741282632/

Fr. John Breck's book Beyond These Horizons - Quantum Theory and Christian Faith is quite challenging on the level of content. But a careful and patient reading (and perhaps multiple re-readings)  can be deeply enlightening and rewarding. If you want to find a "lay" introduction to Fermions and Quarks and how they can possibly relate to God, then this book will do precisely that:

http://www.sebastianpress.org/product-p/sp-bk-ca-2019-002.htm

To Whom - or What - Do We Bow Down?

Dear Parish Faithful,

Whenever we venerate the Cross liturgically, as now during the Feast of the Exaltation/Elevation of the Cross, we sing that powerful hymn, "Before Thy Cross, we bow down in worship, O Master, and Thy holy Resurrection we glorify." 

That hymn, which is sung three times, is accompanied by our three prostrations, as we actually/literally bow down before the Cross in adoration of our Lord Who ascended the Cross for our salvation. This is an act of worship, in that we worship Jesus Christ - "One of the Holy Trinity" - as our Lord, God and Savior. 

The outward act of making a prostration is meant to be an expression of our inward faith precisely in Christ. The outward manifests the inward. The Apostle Paul writes of the "outer person" and the "inner person." (II Cor. 4:16) All of this is well and good, as this is all an aspect of our liturgical piety; this is what we "do" as Orthodox Christians.

Yet, once we leave the church, does the Holy Trinity remain the one reality that we actually worship? 

The question is a meaningful one, because the object of our worship is what we love and trust; what we desire to have enter into our lives and to direct our lives toward. What we worship is what moves us and inspires us. We could further say that what we worship is our "passion," so to speak. (I once heard Mother Ines from Guatemala say that a nun has a "passion" for God). Here is where we will gladly expend our resources of time and energy, and our actual "resources." 

The issue is complicated, because there is so much to tempt us toward other objects of worship. Do we actually worship money, sex or power - an unholy trinity if ever there was one! Of course. we say that we don't, but what is working on the inside - the "inner person?" 

If those three are too crass, and if we are joyfully beyond the temptation to worship such obvious false idols, there is still more than enough to capture our minds and hearts. The choices are limitless, as we all know. And the more abstract - or "good" or "worthy" - the more subtle the temptation. Recall the words of the Apostle Paul, who gave us the classic definition of idolatry when he wrote about those who worship and serve the creature rather than the Creator. (Rom. 1:25) 

So, are we outwardly bowing down before the Cross as a nice "religious rite" because that is what is expected of us, while we are actually bowing down inwardly to something else apart from God. We certainly want to avoid a kind of "religious dualism" that manifests itself in a church life and a secular life, each with its own object of worship - the true and living God or the many gods of idolatry.

What a privilege to be able "bow down in worship" before the Lord Who was crucified, raised and glorified for our salvation! Not an empty idol that will ultimately disappoint us, but the Savior of the world! As we proclaim at each and every Liturgy: "For Thou art our God and we know no other than Thee!" 

Preparation and Vigilance

Dear Parish Faithful,

With the beginning of the Church Year well underway, I like to remind everyone of the importance of the Liturgy and Eucharist at the heart of our parish life. Yet, that also means that we need to be prepared to receive Holy Communion in a "worthy manner." I have therefore attached for everyone some basic pastoral guidelines as to how we can remain vigilant in that regard. Guidelines are not iron-tight regulations, but they can direct us in the right spirit, so that we always approach the Chalice "in the fear of God and with faith." Joy emerges from just such an approach - but not from a casual approach.

On the Eucharist, Fr. Alexander Schmemann to this day remains one of the most articulate and inspiring writers on the real depths of the Liturgy, and of our continual need to renew ourselves within it, in and through the Eucharist Gifts. He stresses our experience of the ecclesia - the Church - and our membership in the Church as an essential awareness when approaching the Eucharist in addition to any personal sanctification:

It is a well-known and undisputed fact that in the early Church the communion of all the faithful, of the entire ecclesia at each Liturgy, was a self-evident norm. What must be stressed, however, was that this corporate communion was understood not only as an act of personal piety and personal sanctification but, first of all, as an act stemming precisely from one's very membership in the Church, as the fulfillment and actualization of that membership. The Eucharist was both defined and experienced as "the sacrament of the Church," the "sacrament of the assembly," the "sacrament of unity." "He mixed Himself with us," writes St. John Chrysostom, "and dissolved His body in us so that we may constitute a wholeness, be a body united to the Head." The early Church simply knew no other sign or criterion of membership but the participation in the sacrament."

We want to do our best to continue in this spirit, but also to carefully prepared.

I have also attached an outline of the history, purpose and meaning of the Mystical/Last Supper. Please read them both carefully.

• Preparation for Holy Communion 
• The Meaning of the Mystical Supper

Please pass on any questions that you may have.

In Christ,
Fr. Steven

The Place of the Cross ~ in the Church, and in our Lives

Dear Parish Faithful,

 

The current Feast of the Elevation/Exaltation of the Cross allows us to go a long way in dispelling a stereotype that has developed concerning the Orthodox Church. This stereotype claims that the Orthodox Church is the Church of the Resurrection and/or Transfiguration of Christ at the expense of the Cross. Upon a closer and more balanced examination, this claim loses credibility. 

 

The Cross has a central and abiding place within the Orthodox Tradition - theological, spiritual, liturgical, iconographic, and more. For the sake of brevity, the terse expression of St. Gregory Palamas (+1359), synthesizes more than a millennium of the patristic tradition of the Christian East, when he declared in one of his homilies: 

 

“The Lord’s Cross discloses the entire dispensation of His coming in the flesh, and contains within it the whole mystery of this dispensation.”

 Liturgically, the focus on the Cross can hardly be described as minimal. 

 

Great and Holy Friday is at the very heart of the Church’s liturgical tradition, when concentration of the Savior’s death on the Cross is treated with the greatest of solemnity and pathos. The crucified, dead and buried Master is surrounded by the faithful in a series of services that are emotionally intense and theologically rich in expression. This day serves as the prototype of every Friday (and actually every Wednesday) within the Church’s liturgical tradition when the Cross is the “theme” of those days, reflected in the hymnography of the day. That connection is strengthened accordingly by designating Wednesdays and Fridays as “fasting days.” The Cross and fasting have been linked together from the very earliest days of the Church’s history. To this day, practicing Orthodox Christians are expected to fast on those days as an expression of honoring and calling to remembrance the Cross of the Lord.

The current Feast of the Cross – one of the Twelve major fixed Feasts of the liturgical year - is one among others that again will focus our attention on the Cross throughout the year. The mid-point of Great Lent, the third Sunday, is called the Sunday of the Veneration of the Cross. As on this current Feast, the Cross is decorated with flowers, brought into the center of the church by means of a solemn procession, and then venerated with the same hymn – “Before Thy Cross, we bow down and worship, O Master; and Thy holy Resurrection, we glorify” - accompanied by prostrations. At the end of the service the faithful approach and kiss the ‘life-giving wood” of the Tree of the Cross. Another feast on August 1, though not as observed, is called the “Procession of the Cross.” Neglected or not, the same rite of procession and veneration is prescribed for this feast as for the other two we are describing here.

Another practice, which comes to the Orthodox so naturally, but may strike the outside observer as strange, is that at the end of the Divine Liturgy all of the faithful approach the bishop or priest, and reverently kiss the hand-held Cross that is presented to them. (I am unaware of this practice outside of the Orthodox Tradition, but I could simply be ignorant about this). Each person then receives a piece of “blessed bread” – the antidoron in the Gk. – before leaving the church. 

 

Again, for someone raised from childhood in the Orthodox Church this is so natural that it remains indelible in the minds of those who grew up Orthodox even if they leave the Church at some point in time. The point here is that it is one more clear expression of the over-all role of the Cross within the life of the Church. Our last gesture before departing from the Church back to our daily lives is venerating the Cross and committing ourselves in the process of remaining loyal to Christ crucified.

Of course, “making” the sign of the Cross over oneself is another perfectly natural practice for Orthodox Christians – and shared by other Christian traditions, as this is one more practice that can traced back into Christian antiquity. In fact, it is about as natural as breathing! 

 

The reason behind this practice is clear yet profound. As I have written elsewhere: The Church and our personal lives are placed under the sign of the Cross, both as an emblem of victory and of our willingness to bear our personal crosses in our daily struggles against sin, temptation, the devil, and all manner of evil. Throughout the entire Liturgy, whenever we glorify God, we make the sign of the Cross over ourselves, revealing our faith in Christ, the “Lord of Glory” (I COR. 2:8) crucified for our sakes according to the will of the Father and “through the eternal Spirit” (HEB. 9:14).

Non-Orthodox Christians who visit an Orthodox Church, and who may be aware of this practice, will still comment on the frequency with which Orthodox believers will make the sign of the Cross over themselves during the services. Of course, the naturalness of this act should never take away from the concentration and care that needs to accompany this outward sign if it is to have any meaning.

Perhaps we should finally mention the fact that most Orthodox Christians wear a cross. This is not meant to be one more piece of “matching jewelry” or displayed in an ostentatious fashion. Rather it is a humble practice of again recognizing the place of the Cross in the divine dispensation and in our personal salvation. It also implies the “self-denial” that we need to practice as true disciples of Christ. Our vocation is not simply to be "cross-wearers," but "cross-bearers."

Reflecting upon this summary of the place of the Cross in the life of the Church and in our personal lives, one may not only come to the conclusion that the Orthodox do not neglect the Cross, but that their devotion to the Cross may be a bit excessive! But that is hardly the case. 

 

What needs to be remembered is that a holistic approach to the Christian Faith combines the “outward” and the “inward.” Feast Days, processions, prostrations, veneration, signings, etc. are the outward manifestations of the Church’s inner vision of the literally cosmic and then deeply personal dimensions of the Cross. This vision based on faith, is then proclaimed to the world in a variety of ways, each of which tries to capture something of the greatness of God’s love revealed in the Cross. For the Cross is the “mystery” of God’s will for the world and its salvation. (cf. EPH. 1:3-10) For the Cross is believed to be “breadth and length and height and depth” of “the love of Christ which surpasses knowledge, that you may be filled with all the fullness of God.” (EPH. 3:18-19)

Religion, Science & Technology: An Eastern Orthodox Perspective

Dear Parish Faithful,

"You may love your computer, but your computer does not love you." 

- Metropolitan Kallistos Ware

I more-or-less accidentally found a new book by Metropolitan Kallistos Ware while searching/surfing the internet(!). The book is entitled, Religion, Science & Technology - An Eastern Orthodox Perspective. 

Actually, at 36 pages, it is hardly a book, but rather something of a booklet. Yet, in such a slim volume a writer and thinker such as Metropolitan Kallistos can say a great deal.

So, this "book" is arranged in the form of 20 interview questions coming from M.G. Michael and Katina Michael. The credentials of this married couple, listed at the end of the book, are quite extensive and impressive. Briefly, M.G. Michael holds a PHD in theology, and Katina in information and communication technology. 

The 20 questions that they pose to Metropolitan Kallistos are arranged under these various headings: 

• Religion, Science and Technology,
• Creation, Innovation and Technological Progress,
• Morality and Technology, and
• Mortality and Technology.

In other words, pressing and unavoidable issues for the Church in the 21st century.

Each response is quite compact, and not one is over a page long. But, as I said, Met. Kallistos always has something of significance to bring to the discussion. Significantly, the book begins by citing the story of the Tower of Babel from GEN. 11:1-6. By no means does this mean that Metropolitan is "anti-technological," but it provides a cautionary call to vigilance about the potential dangers and distortions about the careless use of technology.

It was Question #18, that the quotation above brought to an end Met. Kallistos' response. I will here reproduce the entire question and answer found on p. 26:

Q. What is so unique about our spirit which we cannot imbue or suggest into future humanoid machines?

A. The uniqueness of the human person for me is closely linked with our possession of a sense of awe and wonder; a sense of the sacred, a sense of the divine presence. As human beings we have an impulse within us that leads to pray. Indeed, prayer is our true nature as humans. Only in prayer do we become fully ourselves.

And to the qualities that I just mentioned, awe, wonder, a sense of the sacred, I would add a sense of love. Through loving other humans, through loving the animals, and loving God, we become ourselves, we become truly human. Without love we are not human.

Now, a machine however subtle does not feel love, does not pray, does not have a sense of the sacred, a sense of awe and wonder. To me these are human qualities that no machine, however elaborate, would be able to reproduce. You may love your computer but your computer does not love you. (emphasis added)

I will periodically share more of the wisdom of Metropolitan Kallistos from this thoughtful little book. For those who prefer their own copy:

https://www.amazon.com/Religion-Science-Technology-Orthodox-Perspective/dp/1741282632

The 'Two Ways' and the Church New Year

 

Dear Parish Faithful & Friends in Christ,

“The Spirit of the Lord is upon me … to  proclaim

the acceptable year of the Lord.”   (LK. 4:18-19)

 

The beginning of the Church New Year occurs on September 1.  This is also referred to as the Indiction, and there are both religious and political reasons behind this date, as the Church was accommodating itself to the realities of a Christianized Roman Empire by the fourth century. Though hardly commemorated today with much attention, the fact that it fell on the Lord’s Day this year may bring to the ecclesial New Year a bit more attention than usual.  

 

Living as we do in a completely different and secularized society from the Roman/Byzantine world in which our church calendar was more-or-less fully developed, we have a difficult time conceiving of any new year commemoration other than that of January 1.  Be that as it may, if we want to understand the liturgical year with its developed rhythm of feasting and fasting, we will need to embrace “the mind of the Church” to some extent to make that understanding attainable.  

 

As Orthodox Christians we live according to the rhythms of two calendars – the ecclesial and the secular – and often enough we are caught up in a “battle of the calendars.”  That is a struggle that can strain our choices and possibilities when we make decisions that affect the use of our “time, talent and treasure.” The appointed Gospel reading for the Church New Year is LK. 4:16-22, from which the scriptural text above is taken.  Every year is potentially “the acceptable year of the Lord,” but from our all too-human perspective that will be determined by how we approach each year as it comes to us in our appointed time in this world. 

Recently, but with a more focused intention, I applied two contrasting terms toward our approach to the Dormition Fast that occupied us at the beginning of August for two weeks. Those contrasting terms were convenience and commitment.  I said that our approach to this recent fast was  determined by our choice of seeking the way of convenience or of making a commitment.  A choice of convenience will lead to being uncommitted and thus negligent of whatever discipline is set before us.  

 

I believe that we can expand the use of these terms to now embrace our approach to the Church New Year or even beyond to our very approach to life as Christians.  As we approach the Church New Year we can ask ourselves:  Do I choose convenience over commitment when these terms apply to my relationship to God and with the Church?  Is my first concern when the “distribution” of my time, talents and treasure is under consideration reduced to a matter of convenience; or do I first think in terms of my commitment to the Lord?   Am I therefore trying to “fit” the Church into my life rather than trying to “fit” my life into the fullness of life offered in the Church?  At the beginning of the Church New Year on Sunday – a beginning that not only implies, but offers the gifts of repentance, renewal and regeneration – these may be questions worthy of our heartfelt and serious consideration.

It may seem too simplistic to ask these questions in a stark “either/or” manner.  Life is a bit more complicated than that.  The choices of convenience and/or commitment – made consciously or unconsciously - can be seen as relative terms that often overlap and get entangled in ways that only further accentuate life’s complexities.   

 

Nevertheless, with the utter seriousness with which the Scriptures confront us with the “God question” we do find set before us a rather stark choice between “two ways:”  and that would be between life and death.  These are not choices that impinge upon our biological well-being.  Rather, “life” and “death” are choices that depend upon our commitment to not only believing in God’s existence, but of our willingness to live according to the commandments of God.  That is why the choice is presented in a very straightforward, unambiguous manner.  The stakes are that high.  It is not as if the teaching found in the Scriptures lacks an awareness of the difficulties of life; or of what we like to refer to as life’s “nuances.”  But in the Scriptures we find the “ultimate questions” presented with a clarity that, again, demands a clear choice with a full understanding of just what is at stake.  For ultimately, there is an “either/or” distinction when it comes to our decision for or against God.

The term “Two Ways” was from the beginning of the Church’s life even a technical term found in the earliest Christian literature.  Although not a part of the New Testament, this is perhaps best illustrated by the very early document (1st. c.) known as The Didache.  This document opens with a classic expression of this teaching:

 

There are two ways: one is the Way of Life, the other is the Way of Death; and there is a mighty difference between these two ways. 

The way of life is this:  first, that you shall love God who created you; second, your neighbor as yourself; all those things which you do not want to be done to you, you should not do to others. (Didache, 1:1-2)

This clearly echoes the direct teaching of Christ found in the Gospels, of course.  And in the Gospel According to St. Matthew, we hear the Lord’s own versions of this choice of the Two Ways:

 

Enter by the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the way is easy, that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many.  For the gate is narrow and the way is hard, that leads to life, and those who find it are few. 

Every one then who hears these words of mine and does them will be like a wise man who built his house upon the rock; and the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and beat upon that house, but it did not fall, because it had been founded on the rock.  And every one who hears these words of mine and does not do them will be like a foolish man who built his house upon the sand; and the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and beat against that house, and it fell, and great was the fall of it.  (MATT. 7:13-14;24-27)

Yet, the Christian teaching of the Two Ways finds its first and most definitive expression in the Old Testament.  There, as something of a final summation of the lengthy discourse of Moses to the people of Israel before they enter the Promised Land, the following is recorded in the Book of Deuteronomy:

But the word is very near you; it is in your mouth and in your heart, so that you can do it. See, I have set before you this day life and good, death and evil.  If you obey the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you this day, by loving the LORD your God, by walking in his ways, and by keeping his commandments and his statutes and his ordinances, then you shall live and multiply, and the LORD your God will bless you in the land which you are entering to take possession of it.  But if your heart turns away, and you will not hear, but are drawn away to worship other gods and serve them, I declare to you this day, that you shall perish; you shall not live long in the land which you are going over the Jordan to enter and possess.  (DEUT. 30:14-18)

The Church calendar with its New Year commemoration on September 1 can be more than a quaint and antiquated remnant from the past.  And it can even be more than a formal reminder that we will begin the annual cycle of feasting and fasting by celebrating the great Feasts of the liturgical year – important as this is.  

 

The Church New Year, perhaps coming after a long and “busy” summer, can remind us with a biblical urgency that the choice of the Two Ways may not be a once-in-a-lifetime decision; but one that needs annual renewal that can only be accomplished through repentance and that “change of mind” that directs us toward God with all of our heart, soul, mind and strength (MK. 12:30).  

 

Let us search our hearts about this carefully.  This deserves our time and attention more than anything else.  This is not an inner examination that can be postponed to a more “convenient” time.  Rather, it is a time of “commitment” to the really essential question that shapes our lives decisively.  As the Lord asked the Apostle Peter, so the Lord asks us if we love him. Are we able to answer Him as did St. Peter: “Lord, you know everything; you know that I love you.”  (JN. 21:17)