NAMB's Nasty Stab: "Turning Barriers of Belief into Bridges of Personal Faith"

"Ivan was frustrated. The more he tried to know God, the farther away God seemed. He wanted to read and learn more about him, but where should he turn? Should he look in his daily prayer book, talk to his priest, buy a Bible and read it? Which one would be the best source for showing him the way? He decided the best option would be to talk to the priest, Father Dmitri. At least you could trust the Church. It had been in his country for over a thousand years. The priest frustrated him even more. Dmitri told him not to worry about knowing God—he was a mystery and could not be known. But the missionaries who led a Bible Study where Ivan went to college seemed to personally know him. They think they do, Dmitri said, but what they really know is merely a system they have created to explain him who is without explanation." (p. 15)

Link: http://www.namb.net/atf/cf/%7BCDA250E8-8866-4236-9A0C-C646DE153446%7D/BB_E_Orthodox_Manual.pdf

NAMB (North American Missionary Board), a group sponsered by the Southern Baptist Convention, has made a bit of a major ecumenical error with a 70-something page guide to the conversion of Eastern Orthodox Christians. Granted, they have done this for numerous religious sects, the Hindu guidebook being most prominant in my mind due to one protest somewhere in the midwest. Although I personally have no issue with the concept of conversion -- being a convert myself -- the Baptist method seems to be more like "tactical brainwashing." The guide cites such modern theological "stars" as Lossky and Florovsky with little to no understanding of the concepts behind them. This is, of course, innumerated through their gross understanding of essence and energies on page 23. I'll briefly illustrate their figured:

God

ESSENCE
⎛   ⎞
  ⎟ ⎟
  ⎟ ⎟
  ⎟ ⎟
⎢  ⎟ ⎟
  ⎟ ⎟
  ⎟ ⎟
∨ ∨ ∨ ∨
ENERGIES

*Note the radioactive properties of these rays. God is gamma.

I'll give the some credit: that caption was not present. And, yes, it is correct to say that God's energies "radiate" in some manner of speaking. The problem here is more or less that the diagram over-simplifies the whole ordeal into some poorly-planned plot. They quote St. Basil the Great, which is all and well, but skew his words into this crummy diagram. Yes, St. Basil says God's energies decend upon us, and this quotation is quite obviously orthodox. But I do not believe St. Basil would describe God's "energies" as little arrows spewing forth from His essence, as this -- at least to me -- makes it seem as if His energies are "less" glorious and almost less holy. From an over-simplified understanding of the theology comes the obvious conclusion: God is too "unknowable" for "true" Biblical thought. This, they claim, causes people to fear personally experiencing God. To turn these barriers into bridges, a Baptist missionary is to emphasize the "branch" described in John 15:5 (e.g. the believer is the branch, and the vine is Jesus).

Isn't this a bit similar to the essence/energy idea? Evidently not, as it is also necessary for a missionary to preach on the known characteristics of God. Cataphatic theology is not alien to the East, as they seem to think. To wit, "Rather than list and explain the attributes of God (as Western theologians often do), an Eastern theologian looks for aspects of the world which show imperfection or incompleteness" (p. 22). God is, as Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite states, that incomprehensible mystical darkness upon Mt. Sinai, but there are nevertheless some positive characteristics that we can attribute to Him. Eastern theologians are not blind to this idea; rather, it is understood that too much cataphatic thought degrades God's infinite glory. There ought to be, again, as many Eastern theologians say, a healthy "balence" between the two. Even so, apophatic theology -- as again demonstrated by Pseudo-Dionysius -- is not simply "negations;" rather, God is noted as "hyper-essential" and "super-natural."

Given their understanding, the SBC would probably call Pseudo-Dionysius an "atheist" for his bit on the nature of God's existence. Oh well.

The sad thing is despite the obvious racial profiling (all the pictures are of a cliche Russian Orthodox believer), the semi-decent scholarship -- inasmuch as they quote prominant and important Orthodox scholars -- makes it seem as if the missionaries truly understand what they are discussing, at least on some level. It is not perfect, granted, but it is more appealing than a Chick tract -- and more convincing. I know they are doing work in Russia, which is obviously opportunistic, as many of the faithful there have just emerged from the underground to the public sphere.

*sigh*

Monks and the Environment: Love the Trees

Archbishop Ladar Puhalo on Ecology. I'll post all five parts.



Part 1







Part II






Part III






Part IV






Part V






Enjoy! And thanks to the All Saints Monastery in Canada for making this possible. :-)

A Brief Rant About the Capital Punishment

I would like to begin with a short letter from Bishop Seraphim of Ottawa and Canada:



I am saddened whenever I hear Orthodox Christians defend capital punishment, even though I know that there are, were, and always will be various and opposing opinions in our Church, and that these opinions may be justifiable within their own systems of logic.



I cannot square capital punishment with any of my Christian experience. The Old Testament may be quoted, but I do not see it in the New. I cannot square it with the introduction to the Ten Commandments. I cannot square it with the Gospel. I cannot square it with the words of the 'Our Father.' I cannot square it with 'The Beatitudes.' I cannot square it with my knowledge of our canonical tradition. I cannot square it with my knowledge of the teaching of the Fathers. I can not square it with my reading of any one of our saints. And most certainly I cannot square it with the teaching of Saint Silouan, that the real test of a Christian is being able to forgive one's enemies.



Since we Christians stand for repentance, and are called to live this daily, it is perhaps our responsibility to help the persons incarcerated for serious crimes to move in that direction also.



Perhaps we Orthodox Christians should at last take seriously our call to visit those in prison, to become qualified for a prison ministry, even, and to bring some hope, consolation, and witness of something better to these persons who otherwise could well die without knowing anything else except misery.



We always say 'Talk is cheap.' Perhaps it's time we proved we are Christians by doing something instead of philosophizing.

+ Seraphim

Bishop of Ottawa and Canada

(The Orthodox Church, January 1999).



Various attitudes towards the alignment of Christianity and the death penalty have appeared throughout the ages as political, religious, and cultural developments shaped the public's general attitude towards Christ's teachings as documented in the books of the New Testament. In the mess of denominations that exist today -- each of which claim to be "the One True Church" -- it can be difficult, if not practically impossible, to discern what is the True Christian message. The issue of concern here, as is apparent from Bishop Seraphim's beautiful letter above, is, obviously, the moral rational behind the institution of capital punishment. Although I will probably not get too deep into the subject at the moment, I hope to at least get some message across.



Like Bishop Seraphim, I too am saddened to see not only Orthodox Christians in favor of the aforementioned institution but also the American population as a whole. When most individuals hear the phrase "pro-life," the concept of abortion often comes to mind far faster than an opposition to the death penalty and/or the abolition of poverty. This is not to say, of course, that the pro-life community is not concerned with these issues; as a matter of fact, they are. Similarly, it is not to say that issues such as abortion are not to be a major political concern. Rather, all of these are part of what Pope John Paul II titled "the culture of death." The term was used during a speech made on December 25th, 2000, in which the pope warned Catholics and the rest of the world population against the countless aggressions we are forced to face in society today (e.g. violence against women and children, abortion, euthanasia, etc.) (25 December 2000, "Pope Warns Over 'Culture of Death,'" CNN.com). Despite the depressing list, he leaves us with one hopeful message: "'However dense the darkness may appear,' the pope said, 'our hope for the triumph of the light which appeared on this holy night at Bethlehem is stronger still.'" (CNN.com). I am certain Bishop Seraphim would agree.



In August of 1989, the Orthodox Church in America released a statement regarding the morality of the death penalty, proclaiming the immorality of such a practice and henceforth calling for an abolition to the practice. The Ninth All-American Council of the Orthodox Church in America (the group which published the statement), noted that "in all such questions involving life and death the Church must always champion life" in light of the "redemptive nature of the Gospel of Jesus Christ" ("Resolution on the Death Penalty," 1989). While those who commit crimes against the people/government ought to be punished, it is recognized that "there is no humane way to execute a human being," asserting that a life in prison without parole is the preferred method of punishment for those who would normally be subject to said penalty. The brief statement closes with a proclamation of support by the Orthodox Church to those organizations -- political or otherwise -- that plan to rid the country of the immoral legislation. Chapter 8, verses 3 through 11 of the Gospel of St. John – AKA the Pericope Adulterae (Latin: the pericope (passage) of the adulterer” – is cited in favor of Christ's opposition to the practice. Here, notes the Council, Our Lord prevented the "legal execution of a woman" as to make way for a chance at her "rehabilitation, reconciliation, and redemption" ("Resolution on the Death Penalty," 1989).



So, then, why do so many Christians claim to support the institution? Pastor and possible Republican Presidential candidate Mike Huckabee, for instance, said: "'Interestingly enough,' Huckabee allowed, 'if there was ever an occasion for someone to have argued against the death penalty, I think Jesus could have done so on the cross and said, "This is an unjust punishment and I deserve clemency."'" (Arkansas Times, 22 Jan 1997). Democratic candidates are often more supportive of the abolition of the death penalty, but even this assertion is not consistent with all, as there are a small bundle of potential candidates who claim to the for the use of the punishment. Republicans and conservatives are easily bothered by the use of abortion, but they have tended to be more supportive of the penalty; meanwhile, Democrats are more prone to pro-choice legislation, but they tend to be more supportive of its abolition. There are, surely some politicians who are consistently pro-life in their voting record, but they are often less popular. As Jim Wallis points out in his book God's Politics, the "Left" and the "Right" -- at least as a whole -- have missed the point.



Although the execution of Christ is the center of the Christian cosmological timeline, it is, many ways, the antithesis of what is today considered the “orthodox” interpretation of capital punishment. Christ’s “sacrifice” was a metaphysically unique event, for, unlike the traditional usage of the penalty, the goal of the Godhead was not to administer justice per se (n.b. “justice” is used in the purely legal sense of the term) but to uplift the souls of all humanity viz. a cosmological event that would give way to the purification of man’s once-perfect noetic faculties. As the Physician of Souls, God’s “goal” was to heal the noetic wounds upon all of mankind and therefore not to punish. Christ’s death on the cross is eternal; it is repeated every Sunday in the liturgy, and, likewise, is supernaturally crucified each time we sin. To say Christ’s crucifixion is the same in nature as the execution of a criminal under the law is, thus, inherently erroneous. It was, perhaps, the same in form, but to henceforth assert it is the same in nature would be to degrade the divinity of the sacrifice as well as, at least to a degree, Christ’s infinite freedom.

(To be continued...)

Greetings!

The title explains it all.

My names Hannah, and, as you can plainly see depending on the mood of your internet browser, this is a blog. I'm sorry if you have arrived here arbitrarily; I do apologize for wasting your precious time.

Now to cut to the chase.

I don't have much to post here at the moment, though I plan on excavating and/or constructing more material. As for today, however, I shall leave you with a brief introduction via a small, crummy poem I attempted some time ago. The theme is fairly, erm, easy to comprehend. It doesn't try to be subtle, really.

Hearken unto me, O Jerusalem,
Thou who art my life, my light, my savior eternal.
Hearken unto me, O Jerusalem,
And hear these cries of we, who hath forgotten
Our tongues cloven to the roofs of our mouths.
Hearken unto me, O Jerusalem,
“Hearken unto the voice of my cry” (Ps. 5.2).
I shall hang my harp upon the door of thy sepulcher,
As to praise thy unnamable name.
Pleading thee, O Jerusalem, am I,
For thine lovingkindness, thy mercy, thy saving grace,
That hast sanctified the souls of our forefathers.
Hearken unto us, O glorious Zion,
We, once begotten, return wearily to thy bosom.

(By me).

I leave you with this in hopes that eventually an essay or some other piece (e.g. random discourse) will make its way on to this pathetic sight. But, in the mean time, שָׁלוֹם