Orthodoxy: Conservative or Radical?

The Fall 2008 issue of The Intercollegiate Review is dedicated in large part to the memory of the late conservative thinker William F. Buckley, Jr. Two passages from his writing cited in this issue particularly struck me. The first is from a speech given by Buckley in 1986, cited by T. Kenneth Cribb, Jr., in his memorial article. Attempting to define the true Renaissance man, Buckley writes:

He is not the man who, with aplomb, can fault the Bearnaise sauce at Maxim’s before attending a concert at which he detects a musical solecism, returning to write an imperishable sonnet, before preparing a lecture on civics that the next day will enthrall an auditorium. No: the Renaissance man is, I think, someone who bows his head before the great unthreatened truths and, while admitting and even encouraging all advances in science, nevertheless knows enough to know that the computer does not now exist, nor ever shall, that has the power to repeal the basic formulas of civilization.

The second quotation is from Buckley 1959 classic, Up From Liberalism:

The exhortations to go truth-seeking are deafening. They are perfectly intelligible when the quest is for a cancer-cure, or some such thing – but it is not over the cancer-hunters that the fusses… are made. Other truths than scientific and methodological ones have no objective existence, the liberals… contend, and therefore cannot be apprehended… As for the young scholars, they know, in their hearts, that the exhortation nowadays reduces to “Ye shall seek the truth as though it existed; and in the seeking of it, ye shall be made free.” … The conservative emphasis is different. Conservatives do not deny the existence of undiscovered truths, but they make a critical assumption, which is that those truths have already been apprehended are more import to cultivate than those undisclosed ones close to the liberal group in the sense that the fruit was close to Tantalus… Conservatism is the tacit acknowledgment that all that is finally important in human experience is behind us; that the crucial explorations have been undertaken, and that it is given to man to know what are the great truths that emerged from them. Whatever is to come cannot outweigh the importance to man of what has gone before.

These are profound and compelling thoughts, particularly in view of the dominant prejudice that the natural sciences alone provide the correct paradigm for apprehending the truth. (Much of Fr Andrew Louth’s classic Discerning the Mystery responds to just this.) I think Buckley is perfectly correct when referring to philosophy, and in particular to political philosophy. But I suspect that he words could not be taken to apply to theology (not that he himself intended them to be so taken). Orthodoxy cannot be made equivalent with conservatism, however that problematic term may be understood. Nor should it simply be called radical, although Fr Louth says as much in his Foreword to Fr John Behr's The Way to Nicaea: "Orthodoxy is radical, not conservative." Orthodoxy, it would seem to me, is at once conservative and radical (avoiding the political implications of these terms as much as one can). It is conservative in that it does indeed believe that the whole fullness of Truth has been revealed in the Person of Jesus Christ, and that a search for Truth must always, in a sense, be backward looking: above all to the Holy Scriptures and Holy Tradition. It is radical, though, in the sense that it is always returning to the root (Latin, radicalis) of things: Tradition maintains its validity only to the extent that it truly and accurately reflects the image of the Living Christ. Moreover, there is something finally important that is not in fact behind us: the return of the Bridegroom at the consummation of time. It is this that Bishop Atanasije characterizes, in a passage I posted some time ago, as "a future nostalgia, an eschatological nostalgia for the future." Conservatism is essentially reactionary and pessimistic (and rightfully so, much of the time); radicalism is often anti-historical and optimistic. Christianity, however, accepts both the fallenness of man and his deification in Christ; it accepts both that the Evil One is the prince of this world and that Christ has conquered evil. Orthodoxy contains within itself both the backward-looking pessimism of conservatism and the forward-looking optimism of radicalism. (What the political implications of this, however, remains another question.) Christ, indeed, is the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the ending... which is, and which was, and which is to come (Rev 1:8).

St John of San Francisco on Theologians

The following is my translation of a sermon by St John of Shanghai and San Francisco given during the Sunday Vigil service, following the reading of the Gospel, on September 21, 1936. A reflection on the qualities that characterize the true theologian, he speaks first of the three saints whom the Church has given the title of "Theologian" – the Apostle and Evangelist John the Theologian, St Gregory the Theologian, and St Symeon the New Theologian – before turning to a discussion of his own Abba, Metropolitan Anthony (Khrapovitsky) of Kiev and Galicia. It is worth noting, though, that the qualities he attributes to these true theologians – "purity of heart, a striving for God from earliest youth, and a complete giving-over of himself to Him" – can be taken to apply just as well to his own life of righteousness.

In the Gospel that was just read, we heard how two of Christ’s disciples went to the Lord’s grave, but returned from it with different feelings. John saw, and believed (Jn 20:8), but Peter, as it says in another Gospel, departed, wondering in himself at that which was come to pass (Lk 24:12). Whence such a difference in disposition? Why does Peter, who always tries to surpass the others in expressing his devotion to Christ, the first of all the apostles to confess Christ as the Son of the Living God, now not try to be the first in proclaiming the Resurrection, but instead marvels and doubts, when John already believes? The reason for relating so differently to what they had just seen is found in the different feelings that arose in them when remembering Christ and their own behavior during the time of His Passion. Peter is tortured by the recognition that he had denied Christ. The denial that he had uttered stood between him and Christ; the weight of the sin is crushing, darkening the mind, and not allowing the spiritual eyes to look on high. Peter remained in doubt and difficult thoughts until Christ Himself comforted him by His appearance and forgiveness.

The matter was entirely different with John. He did not sin before Christ. A pure youth, loving Christ with the flame of pure love, and beloved by Christ more than any of the apostles for the purity of his heart, he remained faithful to Christ in his love. He did not leave Christ when they seized Him in Gethsemane, but followed Him to the High Priest’s palace and stood at the Lord’s Cross on Golgotha, when everyone else had already left Christ, except for him and the women who had followed Christ from Galilee. John did not leave Christ before His last breath, he did not doubt in Christ, his conscience was pure before Christ. His conscience did not waver in any other actions or thoughts that would have separated him from Christ. The pure one loved the All-Pure One, he gave Him his heart and remained faithful to Him. That is why John, still during the days of Christ’s earthly life, lay on His breast at suppers, was adopted at the Cross by His All-Pure Mother, the Virgin Mary, and after the Resurrection immediately received into his heart the mystery of the Resurrection. He awaits a meeting with the Resurrected One not with doubt, but with joy, and is found worthy of this. Receiving along with the others knowledge of the mysteries of God through talks between Christ and the apostles before His Ascension to heaven, and confirmed in these through the sending down on him of the Holy Spirit, John even afterwards continues to receive revelation from God. The other apostles received illumination from the Holy Spirit, and mysteries were revealed to them, but the highest of mysteries were revealed to John. All the apostles preached to the people of the Incarnation of the Son of God, all the Evangelists described for all time the days of His earthly life among men, the revelation of His Divine power, His Passion, and His conquering of death. But only John openly reveals Christ’s divine genealogy. The other Evangelists begin their Gospels by recounting events that took place on earth, while John raises us immediately to heaven.

The other apostles, who came to Christ already in mature years, or who did not immediately and decisively follow Him in the days of their youth, were more strongly tried by the weight of the spiritual flesh, and only by many labors did they attain to the ascension to the third heaven. John, who from his earliest youth strove diligently towards purity of heart, gave his heart to Christ as soon as he saw Him, although he himself was not free from the attacks of sinful thoughts and temptations, but easily deflected and conquered them. Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God (Mt 5:8). With a clean heart, John, while still in the flesh on earth, was raised in his spirit to the very Throne of God and, seeing His beloved Lord Jesus sitting on it with the Father, proclaimed with a loud voice to all the word: In the beginning with the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God (Jn 1:1). In his Gospel he lays the foundation for the dogmatic teachings of the Church, and discloses the primary foundation of Christian life: the commandment of love. Being filled with love for the Creator of all, the Word, he is full of love for His creation, and thereby comes to know the Divine Nature and Divine Providence, to the extent that this is possible for man. Thus John, “full of this love, and being full of this theology,” and proclaiming the universal and most-elevated doctrine of the Word of God, was made the “founder of our pure faith” (verse on “Glory”), or the foundation-layer of Orthodox Christian theology.

John is called the Theologian, inasmuch as it is he who chiefly uncovers and proclaims the doctrine of the Word of God, and along with it all the lofty Christian doctrine of God.

Besides John, the Church has given the title of Theologian only to the great Church Father, St Gregory the Theologian, and also recognizes St Symeon the New Theologian. What distinguishes St Gregory the Theologian? Again, the same qualities as John the Theologian: purity of heart, a striving for God from earliest youth, and a complete giving-over of himself to Him. Similar to him were other great holy hierarchs who opened for us true Orthodox doctrine. Saints Athanasius the Great and Basil the Great also strove for God from their earliest years and, preserving themselves in purity, and with the illumination of the Holy Spirit, laid out in their works the dogmas of Christ’s Church. But the depths and heights of Christian teaching are opened up with special clarity in the works of the compiler of remarkable works on the Word of God, St Gregory the Theologian. Even as a youth he betrothed himself to spiritual and bodily purity, vigilantly watching every movement of his heart and reacting strictly to the appearance of the weakness of human nature in him. He suffered from the observation in himself of inadequacies and zealously studied the way to the perfection of the human spirit, in order to make himself a habitation of the Holy Spirit. “For having searched the depths of the Spirit, eloquence was also bestowed upon him” (troparion). Having by his spirit-bearing words elevated the mind of man to the very loftiest truths, St Gregory has received from the Church the name Theologian and “supreme mind of theology” (kontakion), and he now contemplates the Holy Trinity, Whom he loved from his youth.

St Symeon, who was subsequently called the New Theologian, also distinguished himself by the special purity of his heart, which raised him to the knowledge of the mysterious spiritual life of man and the activity thereon of the grace of God, about which he proclaims in his edifying works. The Holy Fathers explained “in words of reason” the teaching that was spread through the power of the Spirit by the fishermen, who were called from the catching of fish to the catching of people – Christ’s apostles.

The works of the Holy Fathers led the Church’s children to the understanding of Divine truths and instructed them in the fulfillment of Christ’s commandments, educating a large assembly of holy God-pleasers. Over the course of centuries, however, these sacred works, written by divinely-illuminated men, began little by little to be forgotten, and in later times were known by only a very few. Even those who studied the theological sciences drew wisdom not so much from these pure sources, as from mines dug by human reason alone. But in our days a luminary of the Church has shown forth, who has opened wide the gates of true theology anew. Striving from his youth towards God, and at the age of seven decisively dedicating himself to the service of Christ’s Church, the young Alexei preserved the purity of his heart and strove not only to learn, but also to fulfill Christ’s teachings in all things. Hungering and thirsting for God’s righteousness, he desired to see the same purity of heart among those around him. While still a youth, he directed his peers on the good path. When he, decisively renouncing the world, became the monk Anthony, he completely cast away from his heart all passionate attachment to everything wordly. His mind was always striving for the eternal, and he purified his heart through unceasing compunction and deep humility. He desired salvation above all, and only that which led him to it was of value to him. But he did not wish salvation only for himself. He suffered in spirit when he saw the vices of others, and zealously tried to correct every sinner. Being himself pure of heart, he did not fear defiling himself by being with sinners. He, as it were, entered their souls, illuminating and purifying them, leaving them clean, as a ray of light illumines dark and defiled places. Everyone was dear to him: both the old and the young, both the righteous man and the sinner. His all-loving heart embraced everyone. He was zealous for bringing to Christ those who did not know Him, for the correction of the erring. Saving his own flock, he did not forget about other sheep. Placed on the lamp-stand of the bishopric, he showed himself to be a universal hierarch, not only carrying on his shoulders the weaknesses of his own flock, but also looking after the entire world. Like Paul, he had “concern for all the Churches,” and like this apostle who labored more than any other, he could say: Who is weak, and I am not weak? who is offended, and I burn not? (2 Cor 11:29).

Studying all the questions of human life, he, being a spiritual man, judged everything spiritually. He evaluated everything from the point of view of the highest truth and, being filled with veneration for the entire world, he himself remained in spirit outside this world. He deemed it a loss for the excellency of the knowledge of the Lord Jesus Christ; he deemed it a loss that he might win Christ, in order that he might know Him and the power of His Resurrection, to partake of His suffering and be conformed to His death (cf., Phil 3: 7-8, 10). Humbly regarding himself as nothing, he never considered himself to have attained it and, forgetting those things which are behind, and reaching forth unto those things which are before, I press toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus (Phil 3: 13-14). He was filled with desire to depart, and to be with Christ (Phil 1:23), considering that to be much better for him. Realizing, however, that he was needed in the flesh for the sake of his flock, he patiently waited for the end of his course, although while still living on earth he could say: yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me (Gal 2: 20). He spiritual vision was set on the Throne of the Holy Trinity, for Whom he prepared himself as a dwelling-place, to Whom he gave all his heart, all his soul, all his mind, and all his strength. With a pure heart the holy hieararch Anthony contemplated the Holy Trinity purely and, full of love, was “filled with theology.”

Being not only a successor to the throne and a rightful communicant of the holy apostles, he was one with the great Holy Fathers of the Church, he was spiritually born of them and was a continuer of their preaching. With his mind illumined by the Holy Spirit, he understood the profound meaning of their writings and the loftiness of their teaching, and his spiritual experience opened before him the path to active knowledge of God. Metropolitan Anthony showed himself to be a new great Theologian. He extols the Holy Trinity, explaining not only how to believe in the Trinity, but also why this is essential for our salvation. He explains why the Second Person of the Holy Trinity is named the Word of God and, after the Incarnation, the Son of Man. He indicates the path to induction into His suffering and Resurrection, and explains the grace-filled action of the Holy Spirit in the world. The Most Blessed Metropolitan Anthony of Kiev opens for us the understanding of the Holy Scriptures and the commentary of the Holy Fathers with a new power.

The peculiarity of his work is that he always shows the connection between dogma and life, and from doctrine deduces moral teaching. He himself having striven to study the truths of faith not through cold thinking, but rather through spiritual rebirth and communion with the Divine nature, he calls all those who desire to know the mysteries of God to do the same. Especially loving and commenting on the God-inspired writings of the beloved disciple of Christ, John the Theologian, he, like him, received the gift of theology for the purity of his heart and his limitless love for God and His creation. By his life and work he showed us the path to God’s glory, alight with which he now approaches the Holy Trinity, praying that the darkness that is now above our peoples be dispelled, and that his flock be given great and abundant mercy.

How Can God Increase?

The Gospel reading for the Feast of the Meeting of the Lord concludes with these words: And the child grew, and waxed strong in spirit, filled with wisdom; and the grace of God was upon Him (Lk 2: 40). Twelve verses later, the chapter ends with these words: And Jesus increased in wisdom and stature, and in favour with God and man (Lk 2: 52). What could these verses possibly mean?

St Cyril of Alexandria has left us a homily which deals in part with precisely this question:

TO say that the child grew, and waxed strong in spirit, being filled with wisdom, and the grace of God was upon Him, must be taken as referring to His human nature. And examine, I pray you, closely the profoundness of the dispensation: the Word endures to be born in human fashion, although in His divine nature He has no beginning nor is subject to time: He Who as God is all perfect, submits to bodily growth: the Incorporeal has limbs that advance to the ripeness of manhood: He is filled with wisdom Who is Himself all wisdom. And what say we to this? Behold by these things Him Who was in the form of the Father made like unto us: the Rich in poverty: the High in humiliation: Him said to "receive," Whose is the fulness as God. So thoroughly did God the Word empty Himself! For what things are written of Him as a man shew the manner of the emptying. For it were a thing impossible for the Word begotten of God the Father to admit ought like this into His own nature: but when He became flesh, even a man like unto us, then He is born according to the flesh of a woman, and is said also to have been subject to the things that belong to man's state: and though the Word as being God could have made His flesh spring forth at once from the womb unto the measure of the perfect man, yet this would have been of the nature of a portent: and therefore He gave the habits and laws of human nature power even over His own flesh.

Be not therefore offended, considering perchance within thyself, How can God increase? or how can He Who gives grace to angels and to men receive fresh wisdom? Rather reflect upon the great skill wherewith we are initiated into His mystery. For the wise Evangelist did not introduce the Word in His abstract and incorporeal nature, and so say of Him that He increased in stature and wisdom and grace, but after having shewn that He was born in the flesh of a woman, and took our likeness, he then assigns to Him these human attributes, and calls Him a child, and says that He waxed in stature, as His body grow little by little, in obedience to corporeal laws. And so He is said also to have increased in wisdom, not as receiving fresh supplies of wisdom,----for God is perceived by the understanding to be entirely perfect in all things, and altogether incapable of being destitute of any attribute suitable to the Godhead:----but because God the Word gradually manifested His wisdom proportionably to the age which the body had attained.

The body then advances in stature, and the soul in wisdom: for the divine nature is capable of increase in neither one nor the other; seeing that the Word of God is all perfect. And with good reason he connected the increase of wisdom with the growth of the bodily stature, because the divine nature revealed its own wisdom in proportion to the measure of the bodily growth.

The simple answer, then, to the question we posed is that Jesus "increased in wisdom and stature" according to His humanity, but not according to His divinity. But there is more in this rich passage that is worthy of consideration. St Cyril bids us first to examine the profundity of Christ's self-emptying. He Who always gives is now, for the first time, on the receiving end. The saint then asks that we "reflect upon the great skill wherewith we are initiated into His mystery." The Evangelist, as St Cyril points out, introduces first not "the Word in His abstract and incorporeal nature," but rather Christ the human child, subject as He is to the laws of growth and maturity. We are here first given the flesh, and only then the spirit; first we are given the fact, and only then are we given the paradox. Special note should also be taken of St Cyril's words that "God the Word gradually manifested His wisdom proportionably to the age which the body had attained" and that "the divine nature revealed its own wisdom in proportion to the measure of the bodily growth." Bearing this point in mind should help us resist the facile temptation of thinking of the young Christ as a sort of adult trapped in a child's body, amusing Himself by playing tricks on His childish companions – an image we find both in early paracanonical writings and in such modern books as Anne Rice's unfortunate Christ the Lord series. It is in fact a measure of the depths of Christ's kenosis that He, being omniscient, should require a human education.

"I Desire Oversight Over My Own Heart"

A great deal has taken place in our Church world in the six months since I last posted. I'll make note of a few moments that have had special significance for me.

On September 7, 2008, Archimandrite Theodosius (Ivashchenko) was consecrated Bishop of Seattle.

He began the address following his nomination with these words:

After the resolution of the Council of Bishops of the Russian Church Abroad concerning my election as candidate for the episcopal ministry, the first things that occurred to me were the words of the holy and righteous Job the Much-suffering: that which I feared, the same hath overtaken me (Job 3:25).

Having nothing wherein to boast save my infirmities alone, how will I bear the responsibility I will now receive from you? At this time, my soul is seized with great trepidation. This state is like that which I experienced twenty years ago, when I received the monastic tonsure in the cradle of Orthodoxy, the Far Caves of the Lavra of the Caves of Kiev. I studied much while I was within the walls of that ancient monastery of Holy Russia, one of the estates of the Mother of God. The clergy and elders of the Lavra, who had survived persecutions and the liquidation of the monastery, served as its living chronicle. The accounts they related confirmed me in my faith, and their wounds bore witness to their struggles and the recent era of persecutions.

I am also grateful to the Kiev Theological Seminary, which opened at that time on the grounds of the monastery, and where, through the efforts of the instructors, the seed of the divine Truth was sown in our souls.

I desired to serve the Lord in that place, to which He had called me. But while our intention suggests one thing, life determines otherwise. Well did Bishop Barnabas (Belyaev), one of the blessed hierarchs of our Church who struggled in the last century, say: "Man chooses the path, but the Lord directs his steps."

And so, even though I envisioned this path of service to the Lord, He set for me one such as is described by St John of the Ladder: "I desire ovesight [episcopacy] over my own heart" (Discourse 28:51).

On December 5, 2008, His All-Holiness, Patriarch Alexy II of Moscow and All Russia, reposed in the Lord.His Eminence, Metropolitan Hilarion of Eastern America and New York, First Hierarch of the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad, wrote the following heartfelt message of condolence following the Patriarch's repose:

It was with heartfelt pain that I learned of the repose of His Holiness Patriarch Alexy II of Moscow and All Russia, and on behalf of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia, I express our condolences to the Holy Synod, my brother archpastors, reverend fathers, brethren, sisters and children of the Russian Orthodox Church.

In truth, as St Symeon the New Theologian, says, “The beginning of life is the end, the end, the beginning, and I know not whence I come, where I am, I know not where I will go tomorrow.” Such is the lot of each mortal. And now, in our common funereal prayers, we see the bright image of His Holiness Patriarch Alexy, who was truly a kind and selfless podvizhnik [ascetic struggler], working for the rebirth of the Russian Orthodox Church, which arose from ruin after so many years of godless persecutions. The newly-reposed Patriarch was a preacher of repentance and the return of the Russian nation to its historic roots, its Holy Russian ideals.

I call upon my brother archpastors, clergymen and flock of the Russian Church Abroad to pray for the soul of His Holiness Patriarch Alexy.

On December 17, 2008, Archimandrite George (Schaeffer) was consecrated Bishop of Mayfield.

Bishop George gave the following interview shortly after his consecration:

Your Grace, you lived for almost five years on Mount Athos. How has this reflected on your ecclesiology and on your perception of other Orthodox Churches?
Before I went to Athos, my life here in the monastery was isolated from people of other jurisdictions. That changed when I arrived there, not only because I was living among so many Greek monastics, but I was able for the first time to meet monks from Russia at St. Panteleimon's Monastery, as well as many pilgrims from all over the world. Because the monks in our kellion all spoke English, the Greeks would often send English-speaking pilgrims to us, the 'Americans'. Consequently, even though we were living in the forest, on a remote peninsula in northern Greece, we would hear stories about Church life all over the world. I was also edified by the high level of monastic life in the monasteries there and saw how the so-called zealots had a completely different spirit. All of this helped me see various Church issues in a different light, and I saw that everything isn't just black and white.

What would you consider the first priority in the missionary work in America? That is, what measures should be taken for the successful preaching of the Orthodox faith in this country?
I have been living in a monastery for some years now and it will take a little time to evaluate the situation. First of all I need to actually visit the various parishes and meet the priests and get their suggestions. I don't presume to know what needs to be done, other than working on the level of spiritual life in the parishes which already exist. We must have a healthy spiritual life if we expect to bring anyone to the Orthodox Faith. If we have this, people will see it and their souls will be attracted to it.

In Russia people of all walks of life used to go to Optina Hermitage in order to find answers to their questions. Is it possible in America, or perhaps is it better for lay people to bring their problems to 'white' (married) clergy who might better understand their daily struggles?
The Optina Elders and St. Seraphim had no difficulty understanding the daily struggles of the people who came to them, simply because they were inspired by the Holy Spirit. The same Holy Spirit is active in the Church and the clergy today. In every case it depends both on the priest and on the faith of the people. So many times in the Gospel Christ speaks about a miracle happening because of the faith of the people involved, and in the Gospel it also says that in Capernaum Christ did not work many miracles because of the unbelief of the people. If people have faith, Christ will speak to them and guide them through their confessor, no matter who he is.

What is the role of monastics for the Orthodox mission, if any?
The role of monastics is simply to be good, sincere monastics, striving to live a life of repentance and self-denial. Just the sight of humble monastics, their bearing, their gait, is enough to edify people... but it can also scandalize them, if they are behaving shamelessly and improperly. Monastic sobriety is more than abstaining from alcohol.

You have been to Russia several times. What have you brought home, and how has your attitude toward the Church there changed?
The first time that I traveled to Russia I had no idea what to expect. One hears so many different stories, both good and bad. I was very favorably impressed, and I was amazed by the vastness and variety of the Russian land. I saw the immense task that the Church there has in rebuilding the actual church structures and in establishing normal church life, catechizing millions of people. I saw many rebuilt churches and monasteries, along with photos of the ruins that they had stood in their place just ten years previously. And everywhere there were more churches and monasteries being renovated. I saw how there is a wide range of opinions within the Church there. Some people abroad tend to judge the entire Church according to the actions or statements of a few. I guess that this would be like judging all Americans according to the behavior of small minority. Some people focus on everything negative, meanwhile overlooking everything positive. We are not used to seeing everything on such a huge scale.

We often hear about a negative impact of a consumer society on the life of Orthodox Christians. Are there any positive aspects of the American culture that may benefit the life of the Russian Church?
Many Americans are very philanthropic, generous, and self-sacrificing, even some people who aren't particularly religious. Many churches in America have charitable organizations, and the people devote a lot of time to helping the poor and the sick. This altruism is very common among American converts too, and I think they are surprised that it is not so common among the Orthodox. I have seen it in some parishes, and I think it is something that we need to work on more.

Some wonderful photographs from Bishop George's life can be viewed here. Below is a photograph of the future Bishop George while living on Mt Athos.

Each of these events has, as I mentioned above, affected me in a deeply personal way. The new Bishop Theodosius served patiently as my father-confessor for a few years when I was an undergraduate and he was living in the Skete of the Resurrection of Christ near Minneapolis, MN. He is a very dear man, an exemplary monk, and a dedicated pastor. I first encountered the late Patriarch at the Holy Trinity - St Sergius Lavra in 2006, and had the great honor of serving with him, in 2007, during the first service he conducted in a parish of the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad. I worked daily over the course of several years with the new Bishop George in the printshop of Holy Trinity Monastery, of which he was for years the supervisor. Later we were neighbors when I returned to teach in Holy Trinity Seminary. Bishop George has served for many years as a spiritual father both for the community in Jordanville as well as for the monks of the Hermitage of the Holy Cross in West Virginia, where he will have his official residence. It is wonderful to see the ranks of the hierarchy filled by such dedicated monastics as Bishops Theodosius and George.
I haven't the slightest doubt at that Bishops Theodosius of and George – as well as the newly-consecrated Bishop John of Caracas (pictured below, with the two Metropolitans) and Bishop Jerome of Manhattan (pictured above; known to most of you as Fr John Shaw) – will worthily continue the rich spiritual traditions of their predecessors. I was likewise very much heartened to learn of the election of His Beatitude, Metropolitan Jonah, as the new Primate of the Orthodox Church in America. I hope and pray that he will bring peace and reconciliation to that troubled Church. (Metropolitan Hilarion's letter of congratulation is especially noteworthy.) I likewise pray that the newly-elected Patriarch Kirill of Moscow and All Russia may serve the good of the Church.
May God grant them all many years!

The Meeting of the Lord in the Temple

Tomorrow we celebrate a (rather unusual) double commemoration: the Feast of the Meeting of the Lord in the Temple and the Sunday of the Prodigal Son.

Links for the Feast of the Meeting (or Presentation) of the Lord:

• Epistle reading; Gospel reading.
  
• Liturgical service (translated by Archimandrite Ephrem).
• St Cyril of Alexandria, commentary on Luke 2: 21-24; 2: 25-35; and 2: 40-52.
  
• Entry from The Prologue from Ochrid.
• Archbishop Dmitri of Dallas and the South, The Meeting of Our Lord.
• Fr Victor Potapov, sermon.
  

Links for the Sunday of the Prodigal Son:

• Epistle reading; Gospel reading.
  
• Liturgical service (translated by Archimandrite Ephrem).
• Synaxarion.
• St Cyril of Alexandria, commentary on the Gospel reading.
  
• St John of Shanghai and San Francisco, A Word to the Youth.
  
• Archbishop Andrei (Rymarenko) of Rockland, sermon.
  
• Metropolitan Anthony of Sourozh, sermons from 1967, 1984, 1990, and 1991.
• Fr Sergei Sveshnikov, sermon.
  
• Fr Andrew Phillips, sermon.
• Fr Dimitri Tsakas, sermon.
• Deacon Matthew Steenberg, reflections from 2001 and 2009.
• Entry from the Nastol'naia Kniga.
  
• My own reflection from last year.

Return of the Prodigal

It is perhaps only appropriate that my first post in nearly half a year should come on the eve of the Sunday of the Prodigal Son. I was finally released from the hospital after a seemingly endless stay of nine months. My computer died at the end of August; only just today did we manage to get it in something like working order, although it stands in desperate need of further repair (rather like me in that respect). I haven't had access to my email accounts since before my admittance to the hospital, so I must ask forgiveness of all those who have written and received only an automated away message in the interim. I have several hundred unread emails, so I hope you will all be patient in awaiting replies to your messages. It may also take me some time to reply to new messages.

I do hope, God willing, to return to regular posting - if indeed my laptop holds out. I hope to reward your patience!

Please continue to remember me in your prayers!

Choose Life

Deuteronomy 30: 15-20 (KJV):

See, I have set before thee this day life and good, and death and evil; In that I command thee this day to love the LORD thy God, to walk in his ways, and to keep his commandments and his statutes and his judgments, that thou mayest live and multiply: and the LORD thy God shall bless thee in the land whither thou goest to possess it. But if thine heart turn away, so that thou wilt not hear, but shalt be drawn away, and worship other gods, and serve them; I denounce unto you this day, that ye shall surely perish, and that ye shall not prolong your days upon the land, whither thou passest over Jordan to go to possess it. I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live: That thou mayest love the LORD thy God, and that thou mayest obey his voice, and that thou mayest cleave unto him: for he is thy life, and the length of thy days: that thou mayest dwell in the land which the LORD sware unto thy fathers, to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, to give them.