A Radical Critique of Selfishness

Lazarus and the Rich Man

Dear Parish Faithful,

“And as for what fell among the thorns, they are those who hear, but as they go on their way they are choked by the cares and riches and pleasures of life, and their fruit does not mature.”  (LK. 8:14)

There is an interior connection between the Parable of the Sower and the Parable of Lazarus and the Rich Man (LK. 16:19-31), heard yesterday at the Divine Liturgy.  For the “rich man” of the parable is the embodiment of a person who has been “choked by the cares and riches and pleasures of life,” as described in the Parable of the Sower.  Brushing aside the teaching of the Torah, and the Jewish emphasis on charity as one of the great acts of true piety, the rich man remained coldly indifferent to poor Lazarus who was clearly visible at his very gate.  Preoccupied with fine linen and sumptuous feasting (v. 19), the rich man was scarcely prepared in his heart to alleviate the sufferings of Lazarus, sufferings that were exemplified by the dogs that licked his sores (v. 20).  Such indifference is frightening when seen in the light of the many scriptural admonitions that either chastise the neglect of the poor: “He who closes his ear to the cry of the poor will himself cry out and not be heard;” or encourage his care: “He who is kind to the poor lends to the Lord, and he will repay him for his deed.” (PROV. 21:13; 19:17)  And the severity of the consequences of such neglect of the poor is vividly described in the parable’s “reversal of fortune,” with the rich man languishing in hades, unable to be relieved of his torment there. The contrast of his fate and that of Lazarus being carried into the “bosom of Abraham” by a heavenly escort is striking. (v. 22-23)

The Parable of Lazarus and the Rich Man was delivered with the Pharisees in mind, for right before Jesus proclaimed the parable, we hear this unflattering description of the Pharisees:  “The Pharisees who were lovers of money, heard all this, and they scoffed at him.  But he said to them, ‘You are those who justify yourselves before men, but God knows your hearts; for what is exalted among men is an abomination in the sight of God’.” (LK. 16:14-15)  Whatever or whoever may have prompted the words of the Lord during his ministry, our concern now is with our own attitude and treatment of the poor.  To think or believe otherwise is to fail to “hear” the parable as it is proclaimed today for our chastisement or encouragement. The words of the Lord – the “Gospel truth” – cannot be properly assessed within the narrow limits of any political allegiances – Democrat or Republican; nor even of a wider-scoped ideology – liberal or conservative.  The Gospel transcends these categories as something far greater and infinitely more demanding of our allegiance.  At a time when neither political parties nor even political ideologies existed or had any real impact on the prevailing cultural or social assumptions of the time, St. John Chrysostom (+407) delivered a series of brilliant homilies on the Parable of Lazarus and the Rich Man.  (These seven homilies now exist in English translation under the title on Wealth and Poverty).  With his impressive knowledge of the Scriptures; his unmatched rhetorical skills; but most importantly his profound zeal for the moral and ethical teaching of the Gospel; St. John offered a radical critique of selfishness and a radical exhortation to overcome such selfishness for the sake of the poor.  Challenging conventional notions of what theft is, he famously expanded its definition by meditating deeply on the parable at hand:

I shall bring you testimony from the divine Scriptures, saying that not only the theft of others’ goods but also the failure to share one’s own goods with others is theft and swindle and defraudation.  What is this testimony?  Accusing the  Jews by the prophet, God says, ‘The earth has brought forth her increase, and you have not brought forth your tithes; but the theft of the poor is in your houses.’ (MAL. 3:8-10)  Since you have not given the accustomed offering, He says, you have stolen the goods of the poor.  He says this to show the rich that they hold the goods of the poor even if they have inherited them from their fathers or no matter how they have gathered their wealth.  And elsewhere the Scripture says, ‘Deprive not the poor of his living.’ (SIR. 4:1)  To deprive is to take what belongs to another; for it is called deprivation when we take and keep what belongs to others.  By this we are taught that when we do not show mercy, we will be punished just like those who steal.  For our money is the Lord’s, however we may have gathered it.  If we provide for those in need, we shall obtain great plenty.  This is why God has allowed you to have more; not for you to waste on prostitutes, drink, food, expensive clothes, and all the other kinds of indulgence, but for you to distribute to those in need … If you are affluent, but spend more than you need, you will give an account of the funds which were entrusted to you … For you have obtained more than others have, and you have received it, not to spend it for yourself, but to become a good steward for others as well.  (On Wealth and Poverty, homily two)

This is a radical teaching, though again not based on any particular social or political philosophy.  For St. John the “true philosophy” was adherence to the Gospel.  St. John is primarily concerned with uncovering the meaning and implications of what we discover in the Scriptures.  If that is challenging to the point of seeming “impossible’” or of least taking us way out of our “comfort zones,” then rather than “soft-pedaling” the Gospel message, St. John would continue in the hope of inspiring us to strengthen our efforts and to put on “the mind of Christ.”

The Holy Apostle and Evangelist Luke

Dear Parish Faithful,

The Holy Apostle and Evangelist Luke

“Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile a narrative of the things which have been accomplished among us, just as they were delivered to us by those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word, it seemed good to me also, having followed all things closely for some time past, to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Thoephilus, that you may know the truth concerning the things of which you have been informed.”  (LK. 1:1-4)

That, of course, is the well-known introduction by St. Luke the Evangelist to the third of the canonical Gospels that he compiled with great care and a determination to present the “truth” of the ministry and then the death and resurrection of Christ.  And it is the holy apostle and evangelist Luke that we commemorate today, October 18.  From the Menologion, or calendar of the year providing a brief account of the saints and feasts of the Church, we read this succinct entry about St. Luke:

This Apostle was an Antiochean, a physician by trade, and a disciple and companion of Paul.  He wrote his Gospel in Greek after Matthew and Mark, after which he wrote the Acts of the Apostles, and dedicated both works to Theophilus, who, according to some, was Governor of Achaia (i.e. Greece).  He lived some eighty-six years and died in Achaia, perhaps in Patras, the capital of this district.  His emblem is the calf, the third symbolic beast mentioned by Ezekiel (1:10), which is a symbol of Christ’s sacrificial and priestly office, as St. Irenaeus says.

The dismissal hymn in Tone 5 (troparion) to St. Luke praises him for his service to Christ and to the Church:

Let us praise with sacred songs the holy Apostle Luke,
the recorder of the joyous Gospel of Christ
and the scribe of the Acts of the Apostles;
for his writings are a testimony of the Church of Christ.
He is the physician of human weaknesses and infirmities.
he heals the wounds of our souls,
and constantly intercedes for our salvation.

And the kontakion in Tone 2:

Let us praise the godly Luke;
he is the true preacher of piety,
the orator of ineffable mysteries
and the star of the Church,
for the Word, Who alone knows the hearts of men,
chose him, with the wise Paul, to be a teacher of the Gentiles!

At Vespers yesterday evening, one of the apostikha stood out as an excellent summary of the contents of St. Luke’s Gospel, outlining some of the unique features of this particular Gospel and then moving on to mention St. Luke’s role as the Apostle Paul’s traveling companion.  Although highly rhetorical as usual, this particular aposticha remains as a good teaching tool:

Rejoice, blameless writer of the Gospel of joy;
you have recorded for us the conception and preaching of the Baptist;
the wondrous Annunciation to the Mother of the Lord;
the ineffable Incarnation and Birth of the Word Who came forth from her womb;
His temptations, miracles, and parables,
His Passion, Cross and death,
the glory of His risen body recognized in the breaking of the bread,
His glorious Ascension and the coming of the Holy Spirit.
As a faithful witness you compiled the Acts of the Apostles.
You were Paul’s companion in travel and his great consolation,
The beholder of divine mysteries and light of the Church.
Guard us all, O glorious healer!

Is everyone able to identify all of the references above?  Is everyone able to enumerate some of the miracles and parables that are unique to St. Luke, meaning that they cannot be found in any other of the remaining three Gospels?  Is everyone aware of some of the different details found only in St. Luke’s account of the death, resurrection and ascension of Christ?  Does everyone know the events compiled by the evangelist in the Acts of the Apostles?  As the years go by and as we continue to read the Gospels over and over, I believe that we begin to distinguish between Sts. Matthew, Mark, Luke and John – their style, their particular emphases and approach, and the material that is found in only one of the Gospels.  The point is not about “passing a test” concerning our knowledge of the “facts.” . (Though, periodically, the “Bible” as a category does shows up on Jeopardy). The point is rather to have a scriptural mind that is very familiar with the Gospels precisely because we turn to them on a daily basis for our immersion in the “joy” that is found there because they make Christ alive to us.

I recall many years ago an interview of William F. Buckley by Charlie Rose.  Buckley was asked what books and writers have had the greatest influence on him, and he unhesitatingly responded:  "Matthew, Mark, Luke and John."  An awkward silence ensued, and Charlie Rose quickly changed the subject!  So, who are the writers and what are the books that have most deeply influenced our thinking, our worldview, and our approach to life?

Consecration of the New Church at the Monastery of the Dormition

Fr Roman, Mother Abbess Gabriela (w/pectoral cross) and the sisterhood with the new church under construction in the background.

Dear Parish Faithful,

 The monastery was founded by three nuns from Romania, in a desire to pursue missionary work and spread Orthodoxy further into America. This vision had to be fulfilled through a monastic structure; not by importing or recreating a glorious past, but by drawing on the traditions of the past that keep alive the Orthodox faith.

(The nuns of the monastery)        

By the grace of God, presvytera Deborah and I, together with fellow-parishioners Jennifer Haynes and Amanda Wheelock, were able to travel to Rives Junction, Michigan, for the consecration of the new church at the Dormition of the Mother of God Monastery which has been located there since 1987.  Hence, the consecration of the new church coincided with the 25^th anniversary of the monastery’s establishment.  I am not able to estimate crowd sizes very well, but together we guessed that there were around five hundred faithful – clergy and laity – assembled together for the event.  It was a memorable event for the nuns of the monastery , and we rejoice that we were able to participate in the consecration/celebration together with them.  The beautiful natural setting of the monastery; the warm embrace of the mothers and sisters; and the spontaneous fellowship with one’s fellow pilgrims increased that sense of rejoicing threefold.  It was good to be there!

Having arrived well into the evening on Friday – just about when the Vigil was drawing to a close – we were up bright and early for the cycle of services that would  mark the consecration itself.  There was a definite splendor and liturgical fullness to the Service of Consecration and the Divine Liturgy to follow, for there were four bishops con-celebrating – led by Archbishop Nathaniel – about twenty-five priests and six deacons, and a host of sub-deacons and other servers. The mothers and sisters of the monastery provided the choir, together with other visiting nuns and monks.  From the initial procession of the holy relics from the old chapel to the courtyard of the new church, through to the dismissal of the Liturgy, the services stretched over a five-hour period.  Orthodox stamina, developed over years of liturgical experience, served everyone very well, for clergy and laity alike stood throughout the services.  I was invited to serve and brought along my vestments.  However, one thing caught me off-guard, so to speak, and tested whatever stamina I may have had to the full.  Except for the consecration of the altar table and the interior of the new church, we were outdoors for at least four of those five hours – and the temperature in Michigan probably did not reach 50 degrees on Saturday!  Clergy vestments can be burdensome on a hot summer day; but they provide scant protection from a chilly day outdoors.  Mercifully, it was not a windy day, but even the slightest breeze seemed to penetrate to the bone, and thus remained most unwelcome.  We were all in it together, and that collective effort was most helpful.
Still, it was indeed a challenge to remain attentive and prayerful, when thoughts of endurance impinged upon the mind!

However, in addition to the intense and expressive prayer that so characterizes Orthodox worship, the mind could find rest elsewhere on this crisp Fall day.  I briefly alluded to the beautiful natural setting of the monastery in south central Michigan, and it would be difficult to over-emphasize that beauty which is intensified precisely during the Fall.  Though located near a country road that has its periodic traffic, the monastery has a definite rural setting that already in itself is a relief from the urban setting most pilgrims briefly leave behind.  We fail to realize the extent to which one can miss a peaceful environment until you are in the midst of one. The clusters of magnificent trees that collectively stretch as far as the eye can see, resplendent with a variety of vivid and vibrant Fall colors – flaming red, bright orange and golden yellow - not only surround the monastery grounds but seem to enfold those grounds with a protective embrace.  In some mysterious manner, one can sense the participation of the natural world in the ongoing prayer of the monastery that in turn hallows those grounds.  With its well-tended gardens and flower beds thoughtfully placed throughout the monastery, the nuns manifest a deep respect and sense of stewardship for the world of nature that we can easily lose sight of. Here, that intuitive longing for the restoration of harmony between God, human beings and the natural world seems to be within one’s grasp.  “O Lord, how manifold are Thy works; in wisdom has Thou made them all!

The new church now stands at the very center of the monastery grounds as it will be at the center of the spiritual life of the community, filled with daily prayer rising to God as incense in His sight. Further, it is now at the center of that protective embrace of the natural world described briefly above.  In that setting there is a real grandeur and beauty about it. The new church at the Dormition Monastery was designed in that unique style that is characteristic of Romanian Orthodox church architecture, I believe going back well into the medieval period of that country’s Orthodox Christian history. This is a beautiful temple truly raised to the glory of God.  It has been constructed and adorned with great care and love.  The interior is decorated with fine examples of classical Byzantine iconography. It is that “sacred space” that is consecrated – offered to God – as the dwelling place of God that also serves as a foretaste of the beauty of the Kingdom of Heaven.  It is thus a fine example of that Orthodox intuition of the saving power of beauty.  There are some “finishing touches” yet to be completed, so I eagerly anticipate my next return visit to the monastery to see the church in an even more completed form.

The consecration of a new church can be a rare experience for many of the faithful.  It is an elaborate service that is comprised of processing around the new temple three times with the holy relics that will eventually find their resting place in the new altar table, accompanied by prayer and scriptural reading before actually entering the church.  Once inside the church, the concentration is on the new altar table that is essentially “baptized” – or “consecrated” - by being washed with holy water and anointed with blessed oil.  The holy relics are then sealed with a hot wax into the new altar table and the altar table is “robed” or “vested” with a beautiful new cloth prepared for that purpose.  The walls of the church are also anointed with a blessed oil and sprinkled with holy water.  But there was one very special event that was certainly a splendid “surprise” for many of the faithful.  According to what I was told was a Romanian tradition, every person present at the consecration – men, women and children – were blessed to enter into the sanctuary behind the iconostasis, and encircle the newly-consecrated altar table.  Since women are not usually blessed to enter the sanctuary – except for those with a special blessing, usually within a monastic community – this was indeed a unique opportunity. Presvytera Deborah was deeply moved by the experience.  It was the first time she had been blessed to enter the sanctuary in her entire life. 

At the banquet to follow, Fr. Roman spoke of the role of the monastery within the life of the Church at large.  He reminded us that the monastery is not “owned” by the nuns.  Their names do not appear on any of the property deeds.  The monastery is open to any of the faithful, or to any interested inquirers into the Orthodox Faith or monastic tradition.  As the beautiful new brochure that serves to introduce the monastery to the outside world simply states:  “The first major activity of the monastery after prayer is hospitality.  St. Paul says:  Do not forget to entertain strangers, for by so doing some have unknowingly entertained angels.” (HEB. 13:2)  The monastery thus belongs to the Church – the living and breathing People of God who comprise the one Body of Christ, in service to the one Head – our Lord Jesus Christ.

This is the perfect place to retreat to even if briefly.  The Dormition of the Mother of God Monastery will remind of us are calling and vocation as Christians in a world filled simultaneously with both temptations to abandon our vocation and inspiration to fulfill that vocation with ever-greater commitment and intensity.  Our parish of Christ the Savior/Holy Spirit Orthodox Church has established a strong bond with Mother Gabriela and the other mothers and sisters of the community.  We are fully committed as a parish to continually strengthen that already-existing bond.  Participation at this last weekend’s consecration of the new church there by a representative group from our parish was one more step toward that goal.

The Coptic Fragment: Much Ado About Nothing?

Dear Parish Faithful,

You may be aware of a recent news item concerning a fragment, written in Coptic, that purports to make a claim that Jesus had a wife.  This is probably a good example of “much ado about nothing.”   Or a good example of how anything that challenges traditional Christianity is immediately newsworthy.  As I was going to comment a bit about this new “find,” I came across this recent article that summarizes the Vatican’s take on the issue together with that of many New Testament scholars.  Here is the article for you to read at your convenience.  As this article makes abundantly clear, a great deal of research needs to be done on the authenticity of this fragment before any other analysis can be made.

Fr. Steven

'Gospel of Jesus' Wife' papyrus is a fake fragment, Vatican says
By Naomi O'Leary
NBCNews.com

An ancient papyrus fragment which a Harvard scholar says contains the first recorded mention that Jesus may have had a wife is a fake, the Vatican said Friday.

"Substantial reasons would lead one to conclude that the papyrus is indeed a clumsy forgery," the Vatican's newspaper, L'Osservatore Romano, said in an editorial by its editor, Gian Maria Vian. "In any case, it's a fake."

Joining a highly charged academic debate over the authenticity of the text, written in ancient Egyptian Coptic, the newspaper published a lengthy analysis by expert Alberto Camplani of Rome's La Sapienza university, outlining doubts about the manuscript and urging extreme caution.

The fragment, which reads "Jesus said to them, 'My wife...'" was unveiled by Harvard Professor Karen King as a text from the 4th century at a congress of Coptic Studies in Rome last week.

Her study divided the academic community, with some hailing it as a landmark discovery while others rapidly expressed their doubts

"It's really pretty unlikely that it's authentic," University of Durham Professor Francis Watson told Reuters after he published a paper arguing the words on the fragment were a rearrangement of phrases from a well known Coptic text.

Watson, who has previously worked on identifying forged gospels, said it was likely to be an ancient blank fragment that was written over in the 20th or 21st century by a forger seeking to make money.

Watson argues that the words on the fragment do not fit grammatically into a larger text.

"It's possible to get hold of an old bit of unwritten-on papyrus and write some new stuff on it," Watson said. "There is a market for fake antiquities throughout the Middle East ... I would guess that in this case the motivation might have been a financial one."

Academic debate

Manuscript experts who heard King's presentation quickly took to their blogs to express doubts, noting that the letters were clumsy, perhaps the script of someone unused to writing Coptic.

Writing from the conference, early Christian scholar Christian Askeland said specialists there were divided between two-thirds who were extremely skeptical, and one-third convinced the fragment was false.

"I have not met anyone who supports its authenticity," Askeland wrote from a session of the Tenth International Congress of Coptic Studies, where King gave her paper.

In an email to Reuters after the conference ended and before the Vatican editorial, King said: "Whether, in the end, the fragment will be shown to be authentic is still to be finally determined, but the serious conversation among scholars has begun."

During the conference King stressed that the fragment did not give "any evidence that Jesus was married, or not married" but that early Christians were talking about the possibility.

AnneMarie Luijendijk, associate professor of religion at Princeton University, said she concluded that the fragment was indeed an authentic, ancient text, written by a scribe in antiquity.

"We can see that by the way the ink is preserved on the papyrus and also the way the papyrus has faded and also the way the papyrus has become very fragmentary, which is actually in line with a lot of other papyri we have also from the New Testament," Luijendijk told Reuters during the conference.

The idea that Jesus was married resurfaces regularly in popular culture, notably with the 2003 publication of Dan Brown's best-seller "The Da Vinci Code," which angered the Vatican because, among other things, it was based on the idea that Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene and had children.

Christian tradition has long held that Jesus was not married and the Catholic Church, by far the largest in Christendom, says women cannot become priests because Christ chose only men as his apostles.

Source.

The Sign of the Son of Man, Part 2

Dear Parish Faithful,

I wrote earlier of living by and under the “sign” of the Cross, and practically about how we make the sign of the Cross over ourselves – a practice which clearly goes back to the ancient Church.  We belong to Christ – the crucified Lord of Glory.  However, we need to maintain a certain vigilance, because there are other “signs” competing for our loyalty – and even for our time, talent and treasure.  Although I admittedly do not encounter this much in my life today – though I believe a daily horoscope can still  be found in the newspaper - you may perhaps find yourself answering the question one day:  “What is your sign?” or “What sign are you under?”   This is all about the strange world of astrology, still a lucrative – if not ludicrous – enterprise in today’s sophisticated and highly-technological world.  (Astrology affirms my dreary conviction that people will believe in anything!).  Basically limited to vague and affirmative predictions concerning  romantic relationships and financial speculation  - at least on the popular level - the claim is made that your birthday determines the Zodiac sign under which you live and which has some mysterious way of determining your personality and your destiny.  This was popular in the time of the early Church, even among emperors and highly-placed officials, and has retained its hold to this day.  Many of the Church Fathers contributed devastating critiques of the claims of astrologers that are still effective to this day.  (There is an old joke that I am tempted to share here:  A person came to Confession and acknowledged to the priest that he periodically checks his astrology chart.  And the priest responded: “ Oh, and what does it say?”)    Referring to the bizarre world of astrological signs here is simply to point out one of many examples of the concept of a “sign” as a powerful and potent “symbol/representation” of an underlying reality to which human beings will devote themselves - often with heart, soul, mind and strength.  To place oneself under the sign of the Cross is to offer one’s heart, soul, mind and strength to God in a consciously  Christocentric manner.  (MK. 12:30)

The more marginalized signs, like those of the zodiac, are assumedly easy for Christians to ignore.  But the one pervasive “sign” that impinges upon everyone and which demands our attention is none other than: $$$!    The “dollar sign,” or, as we may say, the “almighty dollar” is an integral part of our lives.  For many, it “makes the world go ‘round.”  Questions and concerns about money loom large in our lives. However, with a reeling economy, we should be deeply sympathetic to all persons who have lost their jobs and who are suffering great anxiety concerning the future of their families. Many well-intentioned and hard working people find themselves facing financial hardships that are determined by factors well beyond their control.  Admittedly, it is difficult to reflect upon “ultimate questions” of God and salvation when one is uncertain about the most primary – if not primal – needs of food, shelter and clothing.  When this reaches the point of genuine hunger for one’s “daily bread” then the world is facing a crisis that is both economic and moral.  Wretched and pervasive poverty is not just God’s problem (“Why and how does God allow this to happen?”); but also our problem (Why and how do fellow human beings allow this to happen?”). This should awaken a sense of sympathy, compassion and support from those who are blessed with ample resources.  As St. John Chrysostom said:  “What you do for the poor and to the sick and to prisoners you do Christ.”  That is perhaps one crucial dimension of the place of money in our lives.

But we know that the “$” can awaken a myriad of enticements and temptations that can tightly grip the heart, soul, mind and strength of just about anyone who consciously or unconsciously succumbs to its lure.  And then the “$” becomes the “sign” that one lives by or under.  This “passion” can exist under a legion of expressions:  acquisitiveness, greed, conspicuous consumption, consumerism, materialism, avarice, etc.  We can begin to measure the meaning of life, or that allusive “pursuit of happiness” based upon material wealth – and judge others accordingly –  primarily, if not exclusively.  The quest for the virtues can be eclipsed by our quest to accumulate material wealth as the supreme virtue.  To live under the dollar sign can shrink one’s heart and squeeze the virtues of sympathy and compassion right out of it.  There can be a Scrooge hidden within all of us once the lure of the “$” becomes pervasive.   Jesus understood the nature of this struggle perfectly well: “No one can serve two masters; for either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and mammon”  (MATT. 6:24).  And the Apostle Paul reinforces this in equally strong language:  “For the love of money is the root of all evils; it is through this craving that some have wandered away from the faith and pierced their hearts with many pangs” (I TIM. 6:10).  We are thus meant to use money, but not to serve or love money.   Christian Stewardship is about the vigilant use of time, talent and treasure, embracing these gifts both with a sense of gratitude for the blessings that ultimately derive from God; and an openness to share our treasure beyond our immediate and essential concerns.

We may have the best of intentions to place ourselves under the sign of the Cross, but then somehow drift off and find ourselves under the sign of the dollar –  or under any other sign that is foreign to the meaning of the Cross of Christ.  We are surrounded by endless temptations to shift our loyalties away from Christ to some other “lord” or “god.”  But if the “sign of the Son of Man” is the Cross, then challenging though it may be, this is the sign we want to live by and under as Christians.

.