I have recently returned from a long trip east to the West Coast. I guess you could call it a pilgrimage. One purpose of the trip was to get some rest and relaxation from the ennui of my life in Hawai’i. That’s not a joke. Ennui can set in no matter how swell your everyday paradise is. Go ahead; call me spoiled. However, the more pressing purpose of the pilgrimage was to find an answer to one nagging question. That is this:
Is it time for me to leave my parish in the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese?
My travels took me from Los Angeles to the Puget Sound and back again. About 2500 miles of driving through the desert – also known as the Central Valley of California – through the “smoky mountains” of No. Cal. and Oregon to the clear cool skies of Washington. My purpose was to ask the question and listen to the opinions of various laypeople and clergymen, both secular and cloistered, at various parishes and monasteries of several jurisdictions.
I didn’t get a straight answer. By that I mean that not everyone who opined had the same opinion. I boiled down the answers to four, from which I will have to choose one:
The Phanariot hierarchs are pursuing holy goals, so stay loyal to them;
Stay where you are and let God deal with the errors of the hierarchs;
As a layman, you’re free to come and go, so leave for the sake of your own conscience;
Leave because its the right thing to do.
Isn’t it wonderful that there is so much freedom of choice for the Orthodox layman? At the same time, isn’t it baffling that there is so much freedom of choice for the Orthodox layman? It would be easier if I had received one unequivocal answer and an easy way to walk it. As it is, I know that I’ll have to make my own decision – and soon, because I hope to do it before the end of the year. I’m in a position of responsibility at my parish, so I don’t want to fly by night and leave the others in the lurch. Timing is an important factor for all concerned.
The Phanariot hierarchs don’t appear to be pursuing holy goals at all. Patriarch Bartholomew’s meddling in Ukraine’s political and religious affairs is unconscionable. That bothered me more than a little until Abp. Elpidophoros’ recent antics took center stage. I was born an Episcopalian and was ordained an Anglican priest, so the commemorative Liturgy that Elpidophoros served at St. Bartholomew’s Episcopal Church on Manhattan caused me severe consternation. The fact that our archbishop entered under the rainbow flag on a day during Pride Month and celebrated the Mysteries in at that particular unOrthodox parish bothered me no end. And he later returned to St. Bart’s for a grip and grin with their rector bishop just to confirm his ecumenist interest in cavorting with the heretic.
(And then there’s the BIG QUESTION regarding the $100,000,000 price tag on little St. Nicholas Shrine at the World Trade Center. Where did all of that money go, eh? And why hasn’t the little structure been completed…after 20 whole years?)
Back to Elpi’s Pride Month circus. It’s been three months since that day. As far as I can tell, the archbishop has not walked back his abominable act of treachery. Nor has there been a “great and holy council” to defrock the patriarch. Will God ever deal with the hierarchs? Dunno. So, it’s getting close to the time when I feel that I need to act for my own sake.
Back in 1994, I felt compelled to leave the Episcopal Church. No, it would be more accurate to say that I wasforced to leave the Episcopal Church because I respectfully declined to accept the ordination of women, the marriage and ordination of homosexuals, and the abortion of the unborn. The “Church of What’s Happening Now”, aka the Episcopal Church, was embracing all three novelties. The diocese wrote me a letter saying that unless I renounced my “rigid views” – their words – they would not accept the transfer of my canonical residence. So I left, shaking the Hawaiian beach sand off my flippahs. It broke my heart to leave the Church of my ancestors, but it opened my eyes to the unsettling certainty that the world had worked its way into the Church that I so loved. Prof. Robert Arakaki has written about the “revolution within the form” in a previous blog posting. In 1994, the Episcopal Church was in the vanguard of the revolution. He and I will likely touch again on the topic as it concerns the Orthodox Church.
And now, the same revolution appears to be happening by stealth in the Greek Archdiocese. The signs are everywhere, not just in the actions of the patriarch and the archbishop. Let me offer an example. There is a well-married, yet unbaptized, unchrismated parishioner in my parish who has been given a “blessing” to receive the Holy Gifts. What’s up with that? The camel got its nose under the tent half a century ago when the Church blessed the marriage, even though one of the spouses was a cradle Orthodox and should have been directed to marry someone within the Church. Now the other spouse is able to collect $200 without passing “Go”.
Loose on sacramental controls, our parish has been strict on the protocols to prevent the spread of Covid-19. Sign up, mask up, take your temperature, answer the questions, follow the usher, maintain social distance. All of these directives have been followed to a “T” for the last year. But, on the other hand, there is no call for regular confession, adherence to the discipline of fasting, or frequent and timely attendance at the Liturgy. Is mine an Orthodox parish, or an agency of the local government, or a Greek social club? Sometimes it’s hard to tell the difference.
“Ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel.” Matthew 23:24
On my pilgrimage, I was counseled that it is imperative that I consult my spiritual father and stay where I am or find a parish where I can continue to work out my own salvation. That’s the most salient of issues here. Fortunately for me, our island is small. There is another parish not too far away to which I can repair for spiritual sustenance, if need be.
Well, thank you for allowing me to use you, dear reader, as a sounding board. I would appreciate hearing your opinion before I make my decision. Leave a comment below, if you are so inclined.
I’ll be flying to the mainland soon, and I won’t be blogging while I’m off island. I need some time to be alone and to visit a monastery. Join me in praying for our Orthodox Church and our United States in these perilous times.
Take note of the irony, if you will, first of this date on the calendar. To us Orthodox, August 15 is the Dormition of the Theotokos. The date bears little significance to most other Americans, but it is remembered by everyone in Japan, not as the Dormition but as the first day of お盆 Obon, the three-day annual folk festival to commemorate the dead. Is there some cosmic connection between the two holidays? Maybe not.
Relevant to my point, however, is the fact that it was August 15, 1945 when the military forces of the Empire of Japan surrendered to the Allied Forces, led by the United States. The Germans had already surrendered in April, following FDR’s death. Then, barely a week after the second atomic bomb was dropped on Nagasaki, with its many Catholic citizens, the Second World War came mercifully to an end. It’s obvious why August 15 is not a national holiday in Japan. It is “a date which will live in infamy” to Japan’s few remaining fascists. It’s called 終戦記念日 Shūsenkinenbi, literally “End of War Commemoration Day”. Japanese cynics quip that it ought to be called 敗戦記念日 Haisenkinenbi, or to paraphrase, “The Day We Lost the War”.
Fast forward to today. On August 15, 2021, for all intents and purposes, the United States have lost our latest war – our longest war. Even those who generally supported our armed forces and agreed to the invasion of Afghanistan in October of 2001 will have to admit that we haven’t won this one. As we learned in 2019, the American generals had lied to us all along. They never completely routed the Taliban, nor did they pacify the country, nor did they establish a stable democracy in Afghanistan. Yes, Osama bin Laden and his Al Quaeda had orchestrated the atrocities of 9/11 from Afghanistan under the Taliban’s protection, so in the minds of almost every American at the time, the country needed to pay. And it did. Many more Afghans paid with their lives than did Americans or ISAF allies. In recent days, as our last forces have withdrawn, we have seen the Taliban sweep across the country with blitzkrieg alacrity. Today they have taken the presidential palace in Kabul. The capital of what one is hard-pressed to call a country has finally fallen. It’s August 15 all over again.
Notice the one photo that you see of a Chinook helicopter evacuating the last diplomats and their staff from the flat rooftop of the American Embassy. Isn’t it eerily reminiscent of a similar scene from April 1975, when the same desperate procedure was executed from our embassy in Saigon, South Vietnam? It was the end of my junior year in college when those scenes appeared on our televisions, burning into our retinas. They’ve been replayed thousands of times ever since. Here we are again, in the midst of another evacuation from the capital of another country to which we and our allies have dedicated too many years and too much money. Our casualties are, thank God, many fewer this time than were sacrificed in Vietnam. But, they are too many, regardless. My own son was deployed twice to Afghanistan. Thank God he came home unscathed.
President Trump had planned to exit from Afghanistan, so not all of the responsibility for the withdrawal can be placed at the feet of his weak successor and a liberal Congress. But those who remember our recent history must admit that the proverbial slot machine has come up three rotten tomatoes again. Pres. Gerald Ford was a weak, caretaker president dealing with a liberal Congress, too. No doubt his heart dropped as he watched the Hueys and Chinooks evacuate our people from the flat top of the embassy in Saigon and whisk them away to our ships offshore. In subsequent months, the Congress refused to fund the aid that they had promised to South Vietnam under Richard Nixon, so the republican (small “r”) regime, always corrupt, succumbed to the juggernaut of communism. The end game wasn’t at all pretty for too many Vietnamese citizens who had supported our troops while they were in country. We can only shake our heads and pray for the myriad souls who suffered unspeakable atrocities at the hands of the ruthless victors.
One cannot help but wonder what emotions Joe Biden is feeling right now as it is his fate to watch the Chinooks land on another of our embassies. Along with that comes our constant suspicion that, with his mental competency woefully diminished, Mr. Biden may not have the capacity to take it all in and comprehend it. Kabul is falling on his watch. What atrocities at the hands of the Taliban lie in store for the Afghans who helped us while we were trying to help them? A trillion dollars and two whole decades of another heretofore interminable foreign war are suddenly coming to an end before our very eyes. The $64,000 question for later is: Was it all worth it?
Is August 15 going to be our American Haisenkinenbi?
Your Royal Highness: Permit me to express my appreciation to you for taking part in this ceremony. Your participation lends special dignity to these proceedings.
This is the first time that the Templeton Prize has been awarded to an Orthodox Christian. With gratitude that our share in the religious life of the world has now been accorded notice, I remain acutely conscious of my personal unworthiness to receive this award as I look back upon the venerable line of outstanding Orthodox churchmen and of Orthodox thinkers from Aleksey Khomyakov to Sergei Bulgakov. And I am very much aware that Eastern Slavic Orthodoxy, which, during the 65 years of Communist rule, has been subjected to persecution even fiercer and more extensive than that of early Christian times, has had—and still has today—many hands worthier than mine to accept it. Beginning with Vladimir Bogoyavlensky, metropolitan of Kiev, shot by the Communists before the walls of the Kievo-Pechersky Monastery at the dawn of the Lenin era, the list would extend to the intrepid priest Gleb Yakunin, who is enduring torments today, under Andropov: Forcibly deprived of all outward symbols of his priesthood, and even of the right to have the Gospels, Father Yakunin has for months at a time been held in a freezing stone cubicle, without bed, clothes, or food.
In this persecution-filled age, it is appropriate that my own very first memory should be of Chekists in pointed caps entering St. Panteleimon’s Church in Kislovodsk, interrupting the service, and crashing their way into the sanctuary in order to loot. And later, when I started going to school in Rostov-on-Don — passing on my way a kilometer-long compound of the Cheka-GPU and a glittering sign of the League of Militant Atheists — schoolchildren egged on by Komsomol members taunted me for accompanying my mother to the last remaining church in town and tore the cross from around my neck.Orthodox churches were stripped of their valuables in 1922 at the instigation of Lenin and Trotsky. In subsequent years, including both the Stalin and the Khrushchev periods, tens of thousands of churches were torn down or desecrated, leaving behind a disfigured wasteland that bore no resemblance to Russia such as it had stood for centuries. Entire districts and cities of half a million inhabitants were left without a single church. Our people were condemned to live in this dark and mute wilderness for decades, groping their way to God and keeping to this course by trial and error. The grip of oppression that we have lived under, and continue to live under, has been so great that religion, instead of leading to a free blossoming of the spirit, has been manifested in asserting the faith on the brink of destruction, or else on the seductive frontiers of Marxist rhetoric, where so many souls have come to grief.
The statement of the Templeton Foundation shows an understanding of how the Orthodox spiritual tradition has maintained its vitality in our land despite the forcible promotion of atheism. If even a fraction of those words should find their way to my motherland past the jamming devices, this will bolster the spirits of our believers, assuring them that they have not been forgotten, and that their steadfastness inspires courage even here.
The centralized atheism before whose armed might the whole world trembles still hates and fears this unarmed faith as much today as it did 60 years ago. Yes! All the savage persecutions loosed upon our people by a murderous state atheism, coupled with the corroding effect of its lies, and an avalanche of stultifying propaganda — all of these together have proven weaker than the thousand-year-old faith of our nation. This faith has not been destroyed; it remains the most sublime, the most cherished gift to which our lives and consciousness can attain.
More than half a century ago, while I was still a child, I recall hearing a number of older people offer the following explanation for the great disasters that had befallen Russia: “Men have forgotten God; that’s why all this has happened.”
Since then I have spent well-nigh 50 years working on the history of our Revolution; in the process I have read hundreds of books, collected hundreds of personal testimonies, and have already contributed eight volumes of my own toward the effort of clearing away the rubble left by that upheaval. But if I were asked today to formulate as concisely as possible the main cause of the ruinous Revolution that swallowed up some 60 million of our people, I could not put it more accurately than to repeat: “Men have forgotten God; that’s why all this has happened.”
What is more, the events of the Russian Revolution can only be understood now, at the end of the century, against the background of what has since occurred in the rest of the world. What emerges here is a process of universal significance. And if I were called upon to identify briefly the principal trait of the entire 20th century, here too, I would be unable to find anything more precise and pithy than to repeat once again: “Men have forgotten God.” The failings of human consciousness, deprived of its divine dimension, have been a determining factor in all the major crimes of this century. The first of these was World War I, and much of our present predicament can be traced back to it. It was a war (the memory of which seems to be fading) when Europe, bursting with health and abundance, fell into a rage of self-mutilation which could not but sap its strength for a century or more, and perhaps forever. The only possible explanation for this war is a mental eclipse among the leaders of Europe due to their lost awareness of a Supreme Power above them. Only a godless embitterment could have moved ostensibly Christian states to employ poison gas, a weapon so obviously beyond the limits of humanity.
The same kind of defect, the flaw of a consciousness lacking all divine dimension, was manifested after World War II when the West yielded to the satanic temptation of the “nuclear umbrella.” It was equivalent to saying: Let’s cast off worries, let’s free the younger generation from their duties and obligations, let’s make no effort to defend ourselves, to say nothing of defending others — let’s stop our ears to the groans emanating from the East, and let us live instead in the pursuit of happiness. If danger should threaten us, we shall be protected by the nuclear bomb; if not, then let the world burn in Hell for all we care. The pitifully helpless state to which the contemporary West has sunk is in large measure due to this fatal error: the belief that the defense of peace depends not on stout hearts and steadfast men, but solely on the nuclear bomb.
Only the loss of that higher intuition that comes from God could have allowed the West to accept calmly, after World War I, the protracted agony of Russia as she was being torn apart by a band of cannibals, or to accept, after World War II, the similar dismemberment of Eastern Europe. The West did not perceive that this was in fact the beginning of a lengthy process that spells disaster for the whole world; indeed, the West has done a good deal to help the process along. Only once in this century did the West gather strength — for the battle against Hitler. But the fruits of that victory have long since been lost. Faced with cannibalism, our godless age has discovered the perfect anesthetic — trade! Such is the pathetic pinnacle of contemporary wisdom.
Today’ s world has reached a stage which, if it had been described to preceding centuries, would have called forth the cry: “This is the Apocalypse!”
Yet we have grown used to this kind of world; we even feel at home in it.
Dostoevsky warned that “great events could come upon us and catch us intellectually unprepared.” This is precisely what has happened. And he predicted that “the world will be saved only after it has been possessed by the demon of evil.” Whether it really will be saved we shall have to wait and see: this will depend on our conscience, on our spiritual lucidity, on our individual and combined efforts in the face of catastrophic circumstances. But it has already come to pass that the demon of evil, like a whirlwind, triumphantly circles all five continents of the earth.
We are witnesses to the devastation of the world, be it imposed or voluntarily undergone. The entire 20th century is being sucked into the vortex of atheism and self-destruction. This plunge into the abyss has aspects that are unquestionably global, dependent neither on political systems, nor on levels of economic and cultural development, nor yet on national peculiarities. And present-day Europe, seemingly so unlike the Russia of 1913, is today on the verge of the same collapse, for all that it has been reached by a different route. Different parts of the world have followed different paths, but today they are all approaching the threshold of a common ruin.
In its past, Russia did know a time when the social ideal was not fame, or riches, or material success, but a pious way of life. Russia was then steeped in an Orthodox Christianity which remained true to the Church of the first centuries. The Orthodoxy of that time knew how to safeguard its people under the yoke of a foreign occupation that lasted more than two centuries, while at the same time fending off iniquitous blows from the swords of Western crusaders. During those centuries the Orthodox faith in our country became part of the very pattern of thought and the personality of our people, the forms of daily life, the work calendar, the priorities in every undertaking, the organization of the week and of the year. Faith was the shaping and unifying force of the nation.
But in the 17th century Russian Orthodoxy was gravely weakened by an internal schism. In the 18th, the country was shaken by Peter’s forcibly imposed transformations, which favored the economy, the state, and the military at the expense of the religious spirit and national life. And along with this lopsided Petrine enlightenment, Russia felt the first whiff of secularism; its subtle poisons permeated the educated classes in the course of the 19th century and opened the path to Marxism. By the time of the Revolution, faith had virtually disappeared in Russian educated circles; and amongst the uneducated, its health was threatened.
It was Dostoevsky, once again, who drew from the French Revolution and its seeming hatred of the Church the lesson that “revolution must necessarily begin with atheism.” That is absolutely true. But the world had never before known a godlessness as organized, militarized, and tenaciously malevolent as that practiced by Marxism. Within the philosophical system of Marx and Lenin, and at the heart of their psychology, hatred of God is the principal driving force, more fundamental than all their political and economic pretensions. Militant atheism is not merely incidental or marginal to Communist policy; it is not a side effect, but the central pivot. To achieve its diabolical ends. Communism needs to control a population devoid of religious and national feeling, and this entails the destruction of faith and nationhood. Communists proclaim both of these objectives openly, and just as openly go about carrying them out. The degree to which the atheistic world longs to annihilate religion, the extent to which religion sticks in its throat, was demonstrated by the web of intrigue surrounding the recent attempts on the life of the Pope.
The 1920’s in the USSR witnessed an uninterrupted procession of victims and martyrs amongst the Orthodox clergy. Two metropolitans were shot, one of whom, Veniamin of Petrograd, had been elected by the popular vote of his diocese. Patriarch Tikhon himself passed through the hands of the Cheka-GPU and then died under suspicious circumstances. Scores of archbishops and bishops perished. Tens of thousands of priests, monks, and nuns, pressured by the Chekists to renounce the Word of God, were tortured, shot in cellars, sent to camps, exiled to the desolate tundra of the far North, or turned out into the streets in their old age without food or shelter. All these Christian martyrs went unswervingly to their deaths for the faith; instances of apostasy were few and far between.
For tens of millions of laymen access to the Church was blocked, and they were forbidden to bring up their children in the Faith: religious parents were wrenched from their children and thrown into prison, while the children were turned from the faith by threats and lies. One could argue that the pointless destruction of Russia’s rural economy in the 1930s — the so-called de-kulakization and collectivization, which brought death to 15 million peasants while making no economic sense at all — was enforced with such cruelty, first and foremost, for the purpose of destroying our national way of life and of extirpating religion from the countryside. The same policy of spiritual perversion operated throughout the brutal world of the Gulag Archipelago, where men were encouraged to survive at the cost of the lives of others. And only atheists bereft of reason could have decided upon the ultimate brutality — against the Russian land itself — that is being planned in the USSR today: The Russian north is to be flooded, the flow of the northern rivers reversed, the life of the Arctic Ocean disrupted, and the water channeled southward, toward lands already devastated by earlier, equally foolhardy “feats of Communist construction.”
For a short period of time, when he needed to gather strength for the struggle against Hitler, Stalin cynically adopted a friendly posture toward the Church. This deceptive game, continued in later years by Brezhnev with the help of showcase publications and other window dressing, has unfortunately tended to be taken at its face value in the West. Yet the tenacity with which hatred of religion is rooted in Communism may be judged by the example of their most liberal leader, Khrushchev: for though he undertook a number of significant steps to extend freedom, Khrushchev simultaneously rekindled the frenzied Leninist obsession with destroying religion.
But there is something they did not expect: that in a land where churches have been leveled, where a triumphant atheism has rampaged uncontrolled for two-thirds of a century, where the clergy is utterly humiliated and deprived of all independence, where what remains of the Church as an institution is tolerated only for the sake of propaganda directed at the West, where even today people are sent to the labor camps for their faith, and where, within the camps themselves, those who gather to pray at Easter are clapped in punishment cells–they could not suppose that beneath this Communist steamroller the Christian tradition would survive in Russia. It is true that millions of our countrymen have been corrupted and spiritually devastated by an officially imposed atheism, yet there remain many millions of believers: it is only external pressures that keep them from speaking out, but, as is always the case in times of persecution and suffering, the awareness of God in my country has attained great acuteness and profundity.
It is here that we see the dawn of hope: for no matter how formidably Communism bristles with tanks and rockets, no matter what successes it attains in seizing the planet, it is doomed never to vanquish Christianity.
The West has yet to experience a Communist invasion; religion here remains free. But the West’s own historical evolution has been such that today it too is experiencing a drying up of religious consciousness. It too has witnessed racking schisms, bloody religious wars, and rancor, to say nothing of the tide of secularism that, from the late Middle Ages onward, has progressively inundated the West. This gradual sapping of strength from within is a threat to faith that is perhaps even more dangerous than any attempt to assault religion violently from without.
Imperceptibly, through decades of gradual erosion, the meaning of life in the West has ceased to be seen as anything more lofty than the “pursuit of happiness, “a goal that has even been solemnly guaranteed by constitutions. The concepts of good and evil have been ridiculed for several centuries; banished from common use, they have been replaced by political or class considerations of short-lived value. It has become embarrassing to state that evil makes its home in the individual human heart before it enters a political system. Yet it is not considered shameful to make daily concessions to an integral evil. Judging by the continuing landslide of concessions made before the eyes of our very own generation, the West is ineluctably slipping toward the abyss. Western societies are losing more and more of their religious essence as they thoughtlessly yield up their younger generation to atheism. If a blasphemous film about Jesus is shown throughout the United States, reputedly one of the most religious countries in the world, or a major newspaper publishes a shameless caricature of the Virgin Mary, what further evidence of godlessness does one need? When external rights are completely unrestricted, why should one make an inner effort to restrain oneself from ignoble acts?
Or why should one refrain from burning hatred, whatever its basis ― race, class, or ideology? Such hatred is in fact corroding many hearts today. Atheist teachers in the West are bringing up a younger generation in a spirit of hatred of their own society. Amid all the vituperation we forget that the defects of capitalism represent the basic flaws of human nature, allowed unlimited freedom together with the various human rights; we forget that under Communism (and Communism is breathing down the neck of all moderate forms of socialism, which are unstable) the identical flaws run riot in any person with the least degree of authority; while everyone else under that system does indeed attain “equality”― the equality of destitute slaves.
This eager fanning of the flames of hatred is becoming the mark of today’s free world. Indeed, the broader the personal freedoms are, the higher the level of prosperity or even of abundance – the more vehement, paradoxically, does this blind hatred become. The contemporary developed West thus demonstrates by its own example that human salvation can be found neither in the profusion of material goods nor in merely making money.
This deliberately nurtured hatred then spreads to all that is alive, to life itself, to the world with its colors, sounds, and shapes, to the human body. The embittered art of the 20th century is perishing as a result of this ugly hate, for art is fruitless without love. In the East art has collapsed because it has been knocked down and trampled upon, but in the West the fall has been voluntary, a decline into a contrived and pretentious quest where the artist, instead of attempting to reveal the divine plan, tries to put himself in the place of God.
Here again we witness the single outcome of a worldwide process, with East and West yielding the same results, and once again for the same reason: Men have forgotten God.
Confronted by the onslaught of worldwide atheism, believers are disunited and frequently bewildered. And yet the Christian (or post-Christian) world would do well to note the example of the Far East. I have recently had an opportunity to observe in Free China and in Japan how, despite their apparently less clearly defined religious concepts, and despite the same unassailable “freedom of choice” that exists in the West, both the younger generation and society as a whole have preserved their moral sensibility to a greater degree than the West has, and have been less affected by the destructive spirit of secularism.
What can one say about the lack of unity among the various religions, if Christianity has itself become so fragmented? In recent years the major Christian churches have taken steps toward reconciliation. But these measures are far too slow; the world is perishing a hundred times more quickly. No one expects the churches to merge or to revise all their doctrines, but only to present a common front against atheism. Yet even for such a purpose the steps taken are much too slow.
There does exist an organized movement for the unification of the churches, but it presents an odd picture. The World Council of Churches seems to care more for the success of revolutionary movements in the Third World, all the while remaining blind and deaf to the persecution of religion where this is carried through most consistently — in the USSR. No one can fail to see the facts; must one conclude, then, that it is deemed expedient not to see, not to get involved? But if that is the case, what remains of Christianity?
It is with profound regret that I must note here something which I cannot pass over in silence. My predecessor in the receipt of this prize last year — in the very month that the award was made — lent public support to Communist lies by his deplorable statement that he had not noticed the persecution of religion in the USSR. Before the multitude of those who have perished and who are oppressed today, may God be his judge.
It seems more and more apparent that even with the most sophisticated of political maneuvers, the noose around the neck of mankind draws tighter and more hopeless with every passing decade, and there seems to be no way out for anyone — neither nuclear, nor political, nor economic, nor ecological. That is indeed the way things appear to be.
With such global events looming over us like mountains, nay, like entire mountain ranges, it may seem incongruous and inappropriate to recall that the primary key to our being or non-being resides in each individual human heart, in the heart’s preference for specific good or evil. Yet this remains true even today, and it is, in fact, the most reliable key we have. The social theories that promised so much have demonstrated their bankruptcy, leaving us at a dead end. The free people of the West could reasonably have been expected to realize that they are beset by numerous freely nurtured falsehoods, and not to allow lies to be foisted upon them so easily. All attempts to find a way out of the plight of today’s world are fruitless unless we redirect our consciousness, in repentance, to the Creator of all: without this, no exit will be illumined, and we shall seek it in vain. The resources we have set aside for ourselves are too impoverished for the task. We must first recognize the horror perpetrated not by some outside force, not by class or national enemies, but within each of us individually, and within every society. This is especially true of a free and highly developed society, for here in particular we have surely brought everything upon ourselves, of our own free will. We ourselves, in our daily unthinking selfishness, are pulling tight that noose.
Let us ask ourselves: Are not the ideals of our century false? And is not our glib and fashionable terminology just as unsound, a terminology that offers superficial remedies for every difficulty? Each of them, in whatever sphere, must be subjected to a clear-eyed scrutiny while there is still time. The solution to the crisis will not be found along the well-trodden paths of conventional thinking.
Our life consists not in the pursuit of material success but in the quest for worthy spiritual growth. Our entire earthly existence is but a transitional stage in the movement toward something higher, and we must not stumble and fall, nor must we linger fruitlessly on one rung of the ladder. Material laws alone do not explain our life or give it direction. The laws of physics and physiology will never reveal the indisputable manner in which the Creator constantly, day in and day out, participates in the life of each of us, unfailingly granting us the energy of existence; when this assistance leaves us, we die. And in the life of our entire planet, the Divine Spirit surely moves with no less force: this we must grasp in our dark and terrible hour.
To the ill-considered hopes of the last two centuries, which have reduced us to insignificance and brought us to the brink of nuclear and non-nuclear death, we can propose only a determined quest for the warm hand of God, which we have so rashly and self-confidently spurned. Only in this way can our eyes be opened to the errors of this unfortunate 20th century and our bands be directed to setting them right. There is nothing else to cling to in the landslide: the combined vision of all the thinkers of the Enlightenment amounts to nothing.
Our five continents are caught in a whirlwind. But it is during trials such as these that the highest gifts of the human spirit are manifested. If we perish and lose this world, the fault will be ours alone.
(Delivered by Alexander Solzhenitzyn when he was awarded the Templeton Prize for Progress in Religion in London on May 10, 1983.)
On 11 June 2021, Archbishop Elpidophoros, primate of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America (GOARCH), presided over the Divine Liturgy at St. Bartholomew’s Episcopal Church in Manhattan. The venue and the timing of the liturgy, the feast day of Saint Bartholomew, were intended to honor Elpidophoros’ superior in Constantinople, Patriarch Bartholomew. He was joined by several other GOARCH hierarchs and by Archbishop Michael of New York and New Jersey of the Orthodox Church in America (OCA). This liturgical celebration was controversial in light of the fact that this particular parish church and the Episcopal Church as a whole have been on the forefront of promoting the LGBTQ agenda. This event caused consternation among the Orthodox both within GOARCH and within OCA, leading many to wonder what had just taken place. The Orthodox website Monomakhos.com reported that one member of OCA wrote to Abp. Michael and received this response:
Let me be clear and state unambiguously the following: The fidelity of the Orthodox Church in America to the faith and moral teaching of the Church is unchanged. The concelebration of His Eminence Archbishop Michael with His Eminence Archbishop Elpidophoros and other bishops of the Greek Orthodox Church was exactly that, a concelebration of Orthodox hierarchs and clergy. No texts, statements, or gestures were undertaken, made, or even proposed with respect to any moral issues. In no way should this event be taken by anyone as a modification in any way of the Church’s moral teaching, or as laying the groundwork to modify it in any way. (Emphasis added.)
The OCA hierarch made a point of stressing that nothing had changed, and that OCA remained committed to the historic teaching and worship of Orthodoxy. But, is that indeed the case?
Transforming Historical Institutions
OrthodoxReflectionsalso published an article on the same event. The article contained an insightful paragraph about what the author labeled “revolution within the form.”
Given the peculiarities of Orthodoxy, our Orthodox revolutionaries have to be smarter than those in other “Christian” traditions. They must introduce changes slowly and incrementally. All the while, Orthodox revolutionaries must convince the “unenlightened” that nothing of any great importance is actually happening. In many ways, this stealth method of revolution is more dangerous than overtly challenging the existing norms as the potential opposition can’t decide if there is even a threat. Called a “revolution within the form,” this method of transforming historical institutions has been stunningly successful at winning the battle before most of the victims even notice they are under attack. …. (Emphasis added.)
The strategy of revolution within the form has been used in other Christian denominations with quite a bit of success. Incremental changes were made that ostensibly were inconsequential but in the long run were irreversible. If one looks over the American religious landscape in the twentieth century, especially in the mainline Protestant denominations and in post-Vatican II Roman Catholicism, one cannot but be struck by the massive changes that took place in just a few decades. As liberal Christianity took over many mainline denominations many of the conservative members fled to the Orthodox Church. They believed they had found safe harbor in historic Orthodoxy. Many former Episcopalians and Anglicans are dismayed that what they have fled is now showing up in Orthodoxy, especially with the apparent acceptance shown by these two archbishops towards the Episcopal Church.
5 Centimeters Week by Week
Lawrence Wheeler, the administrator for this weblog, Handwritings on the Wall, told me a somewhat amusing anecdote about an Anglican seminarian in Japan who attempted change by stealth. Each seminary student was assigned to weekend duty at a nearby parish. This particular student’s job was to clean the church every Saturday in anticipation of Sunday services. In his enthusiasm for liturgical innovation, he took the opportunity to move the church altar five centimeters closer to the people every week. The goal was to create space behind the altar so that the priest could celebrate the Eucharist facing the people rather than maintaining the traditional position of keeping his back towards the congregation. The change was done gradually to avoid detection by the parish priest and avoid giving offense to the conservative congregation. The intent was to present the congregation with a fait accompli–a thing that has already happened. By the time the change might be noticed by observant lay people, it would be too late for them to demand a return to the more traditional posture. Moreover, by speaking out, they would be viewed as trouble makers who were unnecessarily opposed to the new status quo. The anecdote would be amusing if it were not for the fact that it involved unauthorized tampering with the holy things of God.
The Orthodox Church is known for its conservatism. There is a popular light bulb joke: “Q: How many Orthodox Christians does it take to change a light bulb? A: Change? What is this thing called change? We’re Orthodox! We don’t change!” Those who wish to promote false ecumenism—union with the heterodox without the renunciation of heresies and innovations contrary to Holy Tradition—are aware that they need to bring about change within American Orthodoxy very slowly. The basic strategy is to retain the outward forms of Orthodoxy, but to slightly alter the context or content of these outward forms.
In the case of 11 June 2021, many of the outward forms of Orthodoxy were kept: the well-respected hierarchs of GOARCH and OCA met on the Feast Day of Saint Bartholomew to concelebrate the Liturgy of Saint John Chrysostom. What changed was the venue. The Orthodox hierarchs met at an Episcopal parish church which is well-known for its liberal theology. The hierarchs entered the Episcopal cathedral through an entrance which was draped with the rainbow flag symbolic of the LGBTQ movement. Nothing appeared to change that day and yet everything changed, given the context. What changed was the apparent toleration by Orthodox hierarchs of the Episcopal Church’s heterodox teachings and morality. Rather than shun a church building associated with non-Orthodox views, our hierarchs acted as if the external settings did not matter. Apparently, for the hierarchs the outward, visible settings did not count for much. But this would be similar to a man taking off his wedding ring before entering a bar. Nothing has changed and yet everything has changed.
By sending the mixed message “nothing has changed, but everything has changed,” the Orthodox hierarchs set the stage for further desensitization of the Orthodox laity and clergy to heterodoxy. Silence on the part of the clergy and laity signals compliance and acceptance, and they create an opportunity for other mistakes that push the envelope of Orthodoxy. The way out of this mess is for the hierarchs to admit openly that a mistake has been made and that they are committed to avoiding this mistake in the future.
What the Orthodox Laity Can Do
The first thing Orthodox laity must do is to be grounded in Holy Tradition. In these perilous times when so many assumptions and beliefs are being questioned and challenged, it is imperative that Orthodox laity become knowledgeable about what comprises the Tradition. They must stand, not on their own personal opinion, but on the historic Apostolic Faith. If it appears that our clergy and hierarchs are in danger of compromising that Tradition, it will fall upon the Orthodox laity to step up to the plate and defend Orthodoxy. We encourage Orthodox laity to commit themselves to keeping the daily rule of prayer and to daily reading of the Bible. We also encourage the laity to commit themselves to attending the Sunday Liturgy every week. Beyond that, it would be good for Orthodox laity to become acquainted with the Church Fathers, church history, and the lives of the saints. In this time of crisis, the laity need to be informed by Holy Tradition and not act out of reactionary conservatism.
There are three ways that the laity can defend Orthodox Tradition: (1) with their voice, (2) with their pocketbook, and (3) with their feet.
Speaking out – In light of the excerpt from Archbishop Michael’s communication to the OCA layperson above, it seems that His Eminence made light of the event, saying that nothing really happened, that everything remains the same. But if the revolution within the form hypothesis holds true, then something of immense consequence happened that day and that the OCA laity need to speak out to their clergy and hierarchs. Rather than inquire timidly as to why something happened, they should take a firm stance, saying that what happened was inappropriate and a mistake, and they should request that the OCA go on record saying that the mistake will not be repeated. But first, what is needed is an admission from the OCA and the GOARCH hierarchs that what took place on 11 June 2021 was a mistake for which they are remorseful. OCA laity should also ask their respective clergy to speak out, saying that what took place on 11 June 2021 at St. Bart’s was a mistake and contrary to Orthodoxy. The same thing applies to laity within GOARCH. If a mistake is made and if those responsible own up to it, then the response of the Orthodox laity should be that of joyful forgiveness.
Orthodox laity in other jurisdictions should ask their respective clergy and hierarchs to speak out about Elpidophoros’ actions at St. Bart’s. What happened at St. Bart’s on 11 June affects all of American Orthodoxy.
Voting with the Checkbook – The next incremental step to take if the hierarchs do not admit their error, is for Orthodox laity to inform the local priest that they are withholding their giving in protest. Financial giving is for the kingdom of God. It is not a tax obligation that the laity are under obligation to provide the local parish. An offering in the plate is an act of a free conscience. Withholding financial support is a serious step and must be undertaken after prayer and careful consideration.
Voting with the Feet – Here the anomalous American situation of multiple jurisdictions may offer an unexpected blessing. The OrthodoxReflections article was written by a former member of GOARCH who migrated to the Antiochian archdiocese. Leaving a parish should be considered only as the last resort. And if done, should be done out of love and compassion, not anger and bitterness, or in a spirit of triumphalism. Leaving a parish over an issue like this should be done out of love for Jesus Christ and his Bride whom he redeemed with his Blood.
Heating Up the Kettle
There seems to be certain individuals and/or groups within American Orthodoxy who favor assimilating Orthodoxy into the American religious establishment. They support closer ties with Roman Catholics and Protestants while avoiding the awkward points of divergences from Holy Tradition. They are very aware that Orthodoxy is about Tradition and that anything too openly radical will cause the laity to flee, taking their checkbooks with them. This would explain why they are taking tiny baby steps in ecumenical relations with Roman Catholicism and with the Episcopal Church. They are counting on the Orthodox laity to be complacent or too unwilling to rock the boat. The advantage of the clergy has over the laity is that of time. Religion is their livelihood, meaning they can devote more time and attention to the ecumenical agenda than busy lay people. This brings to mind the analogy of the kettle full of frogs that was heated gradually so that all the frogs ended up cooked to their unwitting demise.
However, the advantage of the laity is their sheer numbers and their checkbooks. The advantage of the Orthodox converts, laity and clergy, is that we have experienced firsthand the revolution-within-the-form strategy in our former mainline Protestant churches and in Roman Catholicism. Many cradle-Orthodox Christians, who have little firsthand experience with mainline Protestantism or Roman Catholicism, often have little knowledge of how far non-Orthodox denominations have strayed from historic Christianity. At present the American Orthodox laity are in an undeveloped state of national solidarity. We need to reach out to one another and build strong networks based on personal friendships and collaboration. Here, the Internet can be a useful means of organizing the laity. An awakened Orthodox laity united in defense of Holy Tradition can stem the liberal tide.
It is time for American Orthodox laity to stand up for Orthodoxy and to hold fast to the Pearl of Great Price in the face of false ecumenism. (More will be said about this Pearl of Great Price in a future article.) We need to guard against complacency or the fear of rocking the boat. Silence signals tolerance or acceptance of the recent scandal. Our silence opens the door for other transgressive actions against Holy Tradition. Vocal opposition to heresy in these troubling times is an act of love for Christ and his Church.
A grave mistake was made by the Orthodox hierarchs on 11 June 2021 at the St. Bartholomew’s Episcopal Church. However, there is still time for a course correction. This error needs to be corrected before it leads to other more serious scandals. At present (summer 2021), we are in the early stages of the crisis. The Orthodox laity need to speak out, saying that what happened on 11 June 2021 was contrary to Holy Tradition. That for Orthodox hierarchs to use a well-known place of worship associated with heterodox beliefs and practices is an error to be shunned in the future. We, the Orthodox laity, are waiting for the Orthodox clergy to address the matter. If they do not speak out, then it falls on the Orthodox laity to speak out loudly and clearly on the matter.