Father Peter Heers: The Orthodox Ethos

 

I have probably sat down to write this particular article several times, however current events, and other topics within the church have led me to write about other things. Today, that all changes. Today we are going to highlight one of my favorite orthodox priests (outside of my own, Father Simon Thomas is a great man).

I am of course talking about Father Peter Heers. Father Peter is the head of the Orthodox Ethos, and someone I admire and strive to imitate. From his podcasts and lectures we discover the true Orthodox Ethos, how to obtain and it, and how to apply it to our lives. Father Peter’s insight into everyday life and church knowledge is informative and inspirational as well as educational. If you’ve never listened to him I highly recommend finding him on YouTube or Instagram and delving into the vast amounts of content he has produced over the past few years. For those who don’t know much about Father Peter, let’s discuss him and his life and see what we can gain from an understanding of the man behind some of the most important Orthodox content on the internet.

Father Peter Heers, like most of the west was raised outside of the Orthodox Church. However, he discovered Orthodoxy and of course the rest is history…no wait there’s more. Father Peter was raised Anglican, the son of an Anglican priest. Thus he was associated at birth with the Church of England in at least some capacity, seeing as Anglicans are the Church of England. His father and the parish in which his father served converted to Orthodoxy in 1992, so the year I was born.  Father Peter according to sources, then traveled to Mount Athos in 1996 and again in 1998 when he began seminary. Father Peter was ordained and received a bachelors, masters, and doctorate in theology. He has been very active in the Orthodox Church over the last two decades or so, being a parish priest in Greece for a time, and if my sources are correct now is in Arizona. Father Peter has been a lecturer at Jordanville, a very important place for American Orthodox Christians, and has written or translated several titles. As someone who is also interested in Church History, his knowledge of Church History and his fascination with maintaining the spirit of the Ecumenical Councils is something that has drawn me in.  He has five children and if they are half the person that he is, they will be pillars of orthodoxy. 

Father Peter’s lectures on YouTube is what really led me to discovering his knowledge.  From his Orthodox Survival Course which was written by Father Seraphim Rose, as well as his discussion on the New Russian Martyrs are all things I could watch again and again to glean information I missed the first few times of watching. The Orthodox Ecclesiology series is also a wonderful tool for both those inquiring into Orthodoxy and those who have converted like myself. He also sits down and explains modern problems within the church, as well as things that western people might believe are beneficial to them, only to explain why they go against the Orthodox Faith…see his comments on Yoga for that one. He doesn’t even use his own thoughts on topics, always referring to the Saints of the church to back up any claim that he makes. This therefore gives us the ability to see that without the Saints, we as a church would be nothing but filled with people’s opinions rather than the truth.

Father Peter may have his detractors, and those who disagree with him, but they are few. Every person I have ever came across has applauded Father Peter for standing for the truth in a world that is constantly trying to replace the truth with fallacy. Father Peter has defended the church and tried to maintain that we as Orthodox Christians must not falter in our beliefs. Changing the faith for the sake of change or going against thousands of years of tradition has only led to destruction and heresies. We see his love for orthodoxy in every lecture he gives, and his call for those outside the church to change their ways and return to orthodoxy.  Though he will never reach everyone, he has changed my life.  Just as Father Seraphim Rose’s book Orthodoxy and Religion of the Future gave me a perspective that I was never going to consider without having read the book, Father Peter’s way of approaching Orthodoxy was not something I was considering either. I have stated before that I was comfortable in my own little bubble within Orthodoxy and was not particularly concerned with the outside world or how to approach living in the world as an Orthodox Christian. From his lectures and his podcasts, I have changed once again and carry myself with a knowledge that I must proclaim Orthodoxy to the world as the only truth that matters. Pilate once asked, “What is truth?” I can safely answer that question. Truth is Jesus Christ, and Truth is founded in Orthodoxy.

Amen.

Ordination

 

Ordination. We’ve been discussing a lot on this particular medium about the bishops, priests and deacons lately and I wanted to honestly answer the truth about Orthodox ordination. First Ordination is one of the mysteries of the church, a divine calling. A calling that starts at the local level and eventually must reach the diocesan level and the bishop. So what exactly is Ordination and why is it important?

            Ordination begins in the parish. Obviously, this is because at its basic function, the orders of the church are those that help the priest and assist him every day in services. The Chanter or Cantor is the lowest of these orders and are those who chant the services. The Reader is the next highest rank of the minor orders. The Reader is one who performs a variety of tasks for the services at large, of course reading the epistle is one of them. The Reader is allowed to wear an inner cassock, and must from the time of his ordination, only appear in church wearing his cassock. This is to show, as with all orders granted the right to wear a cassock, that the man who takes upon this role has denied himself his own desires and sought to please God and God alone. He is ordained during the Third Hour service by the Bishop and must refrain from all marital relations and food until after the services are complete. It is tradition that he secludes himself away from all people and take the sacrament of confession (something I would love to discuss in a future post) during this time. He is given the foreshortened version of the phelon and eventually it is removed to be replaced by a Sticharion. After this he is allowed to wear the cassock and cannot remove it while in the church. The last of the minor orders is the Subdeacon. The Subdeacon as the highest ranking of the minor orders has a variety of roles within the service beyond those of both the chanter and the Reader. They are the ones who maintain the altar and are the highest-ranking altar server. They also take upon themselves the duties of the other orders if need be.  They are the ones who vest the bishop when present and can be the catechist in their parish. The Subdeacon is the only of these minor orders that must be married before their ordination or remain celibate. The reason is because the next highest rank, the deacon, must either be married before their ordination, or remain celibate. So let’s talk major orders

            Okay, so for a non-Orthodox reader, the distinction between minor and major orders might seem a little strange. For me as a convert, the entire idea of orders within the church seemed strange, but that was quickly put aside as learned and grew in my knowledge of the church. The major orders are those that people, especially here in the west are most familiar with, deacon, priest and of course, bishop.  The Deacon in the Orthodox Church performs practically the same role as the deacons of old in the early church. Their position is to help assist the priest within the everyday parish life. They are the ones who maintain the decorum of the church and draw attention to people who are not participating in the services. The Deacon’s main function within the liturgy though is to lead the people in prayer.  They do so throughout the service as the priest is concentrating on other prayers in the altar during worship. While now it may seem that most deacons are then hereafter almost immediately ordained to the office of priesthood, some see it as permanent position and will remain in it for life, as they wish to serve the church, but do not wish to take on the responsibility of the priest. The deacon performs all tasks that are set out by the priest and cannot do anything within the church without the blessing of the priest. It is here that I must make my point. Deacons, along with all the other orders that I have named in this article are strictly male.  The Church does not, nor never has ordained women. The role of Deaconess as it was in the early church did not function in the same way as ordination does today, nor was it seen in the same vein. Women have never nor will ever be ordained in the Orthodox Church. It is against church canon, against the spirit of the church, and in violation of the roles that God has placed on each sex. Yes I said sex. There are only two genders get over it. The deacon as a member of the clergy is allowed to wear the rassa and if the tradition allows the collar. But they are still under the authority of the priest. Which leads us to the priest. The priest is the most common of the orders that people are familiar with, as they are the leaders of the parish, the spiritual fathers of the faithful, and the ones who are allowed to consecrate the gifts. Most priests will have studied at seminary, and been taught the proper etiquette in which to conduct themselves. They will be taught how to perform the services, and other duties that they will need to carry out over the course of their ministry. The priest like the subdeacon and deacon before him is allowed to marry, so long as it happens before their ordination, not after. After their ordination they traditionally take monastic vows if they are not married and are referred to as hieromonks. From the hieromonks we get our last of the major orders, the episcopacy, or bishops.

The Bishops are chosen from the monastic class for a variety of reasons. While it is traditional that some of the early church bishops were married, the church determined that for the sake of its mission on earth that bishops were to remain unmarried for life. The reason being is that bishops being the head of the local church needed to be focused solely on the task of guiding their flock. As the spiritual father for the entire diocese, the bishop would need to oversee several parishes not just one, and this would cause him to need to devote time to each. Having a family and overseeing hundreds, sometimes thousands of parishes depending on the location, would not mesh well together, and either the church would be ignored or the family. As a married man, I am definitely aware that my wife needs my undivided attention at times and I would not be able to care for the needs of the people I served if I had both my wife and them to contend with. While there are different classes of bishops, like metropolitan, archbishop, and patriarch, they are all the same. They are the college of bishops. No one bishop is higher than the other, except in the function they serve within the church. There is no supreme head of the Orthodox Church, like the Latins. We do not have a Pope.  We currently have either 16 or 17 churches that are self-governing, depending on whether you count the Orthodox Church in America and the Orthodox Church in Ukraine as self-governing.  With Macedonian recently receiving Autocephaly, that brings us to 17 churches, but again there are some issues with that as well. I do not wish to give opinions on the matter, as that would just cause hard feelings on either side, so whichever side of the fence you’re on the matter then may God have mercy on us all. However, these self-governing churches are governed by either an Archbishop or a Patriarch, and there are currently nine Patriarchs of Orthodoxy, there were ten until the Latins decided they wanted to be the supreme governors of the entire church. The patriarchs are the oldest of the bishops, including Constantinople, Moscow, Sofia, Bucharest, Jerusalem, Antioch, Belgrade/Pec, Tbilisi, and Alexandria. The others are churches that have historical ties to one of the patriarchs listed.  The others are more recent even than that, and have been granted self-governance.  The bishops in turn are in communion with each other and share in the eucharist with each other.  Of course we do not share the eucharist with the Church of Rome, which does not have an orthodox head at the present time. One is not above the other, as stated, but work collectively to push the faith forward. The only difference in their rank is the eldest church is first and the other churches as they were established. Just as the eldest child is selected higher than his younger siblings in the will of their parents.

So while I have definitely laid the ground work of Ordination here, I have also opened the door to many new topics. Not the least of these the ongoing schism of the Church of Rome with the rest of the Christian world, as they have been the source of schisms and more schisms since their fall from the communion of the Church in 1054. While this looked solely at the ranks of Ordination, I would love to do an in depth dive in the ordination of women, and explain more fully why the church condemns the ordination of women as heresy.  May God bless you all and have a wonderful Memorial Day weekend!

Amen.

Violating the Canons- Why the Orthodox do not celebrate Pascha with the Jews

 

Okay, so after a chance to revise and look at all the data, this article has changed in its original form. We as Orthodox Christians along with all the Christian world, celebrate the Holy Resurrection of Jesus Christ. We celebrated Pascha this year on April 24^th, a week after the Western world celebrated Easter. The English-speaking world has completely abandoned the term Pascha for the celebration of the Holy Resurrection of Jesus Christ, instead referring to it by the name Easter. While this is not a bash towards the name, we as Greeks, still call it Pascha and I refuse to call it by any other name. However, we are here to discuss Canon 7 of the Church. Celebrating Pascha with the Jews. We as Orthodox Christians know that we are independent of the jews, and thus should not look to their calendar to celebrate Pascha.

First, we must understand that the calculation of Pascha has been established since ancient times, and that by Ecumenical Council decisions has been written down as a formula since 325AD. The Apostles and their successors the bishops had understood that Pascha had taken place after the vernal equinox, the spring equinox. It had also occurred on the first day of the week, called the Lord’s Day, or Sunday as we know it. Thus, Pascha should always be established after the spring equinox and on a Sunday. This date, the spring equinox changes from year to year, as the sun does not pass the same way through the sky from year to year, so a set date could not be determined.. Celebrating Pascha before the equinox, according to my sources, does not divide the calendar year into two halves, thus we would celebrate the Resurrection twice, which is against church teaching. More on this in a bit in relation to the Papists. We the Orthodox Church, the true church of Jesus Christ are announcing to the world that Jesus died once and for all, not twice. If we announce that Jesus died twice, then we are corrupting scripture, and in turn saying the Son of God has died multiple times. Because of this, the formula is simple…after legal Passover, and after the equinox. Any bishop, priest or deacon who changes this is to be deposed from office, simply because they are not professing the correct faith. It is the same for sects and heretics that refuse to celebrate Pascha at all. While in the West, Pascha has changed in its celebration with bunnies, and colorful clothing, and secular aspects, the East has maintained that it is to be a spiritual celebration. Those who refuse to celebrate the Resurrection of Jesus Christ are in turn also admitting that the scriptures are wrong, and that Jesus did not rise from the dead. They may offer lip service to the belief that Christ rose, but those that refuse to celebrate are not professing their faith by their actions. See the Book of James for more information regarding your actions as a profession of faith.

This now leads me to my next point of contention. I am about to ruffle a few feathers, but that comes with the territory when you speak truth. We know that the Julian Calendar was the calendar used by the people during the life of Christ. The Julian Calendar however was replaced as we know by the Gregorian Calendar, especially in the West. While Pope Gregory XIII was right to establish a calendar that was closer to the tropical calendar, he inadvertently changed the calculation of Pascha. So much so, that now the date in the West is skewed from the original date that is still calculated in the East. This causes the problem that I mentioned earlier, being before or right after the legal Passover of the Jews, thus breaking this Canon. Because legal Passover of the Jews can sometimes fall on a Sunday, due to the Jews celebrating on the 15^th day of the month regardless of the day of the week, the calendar Pope Gregory established violated the canons of the church. Not that it mattered to the Latins, as they had become schismatics and heretics some five hundred years earlier and were set on their path away from the faith of the Apostles. Thus, Western Easter and Orthodox Pascha now happen on separate dates of the year, though rarely they occur on the same day, this does not happen very often. Again, violating the celebration of the resurrection twice. Christ died once and for all, not twice, not thrice, but once. Therefore, the schismatic Latins caused division and a rift within the church again by their actions. This is not a discussion of the Great Schism, but the calendar is one issue I would love to see repented of if the Latins are to return to the Church and the Pentarchy restored as it was before 1054AD.

So what about the Canon? Well…look the Orthodox world celebrates Pascha on the same day across the board regardless if it’s the Revised Julian Calendar or the Standard Julian Calendar that the local church uses. The Orthodox Church of Finland is required by law to celebrate Pascha on the same day as every other church in the country, so an exception is made there as they will celebrate the Resurrection with the West. Our Bishops rarely if ever have violated this Canon, though I’m sure they have and have been reprimanded and deposed as they should be. With the pandemic changing the way the celebration of Pascha was conducted in both 2020 and 2021, many bishops did not have a choice in the matter and could have refused to celebrate as mandated by their governments. However, this would have caused strife and friction within these countries and was generally not worth the effort, even I personally believe that they should have. Celebrating the Resurrection according to the same formula that was established by the Church at its inception ensures continuity with the Apostles and with the Orthodox Faith. Deviating from this is schismatic and heterodox. We see this with the Latins and we see this with the Protestant Churches. Now, I will not bash the Prots as I have in the past, because on this particular issue its not their fault. They have celebrated it according to how they were raised and the traditions of their families for years. They were not the ones who established the difference, and certainly did not play a part in the formation of the Gregorian Calendar. That was the Latins. They had the same history for the first thousand years of the church and knew better. They knew that what they were doing violated church law, and rightfully are still out of communion with us. For their bishops to repent and turn back to the faith a renunciation of the calculation of Pascha based on the Gregorian Calendar would need to be made as well as conscience effort to not celebrate with the legal Passover of the Jews. An independent calculation based on the vernal equinox as established at Nicaea is the only viable way to celebrate Pascha because it proclaims one, holy catholic and apostolic church, as well as one death, burial and resurrection for the whole world.

I am not a priest, or a scholar. However I hope you have learned something from this dissertation on the 7^th canon of the Orthodox Church. Pascha as I have repeated (I do this to drive home the point) must be celebrated after the vernal equinox, after the legal Passover of the Jews, and on a Sunday as prescribed in the Bible. May God have mercy on us.

Amen.

Canons 4-6 of the Orthodox Church: A look into Church Law

 

Welcome back to the Corner today, and last week we started the series about the Canons of the Orthodox Church. The last time out we took the first three canons of the Orthodox Church and expanded upon them as a chance to learn the laws that govern the basic practices of the Orthodox faith. As you’ll recall there are eighty five canons. We have discussed three, so that leaves us with eighty two to go. Today I’ll expand on a few more, and see what we can learn from the Church in their explicit understanding of how to operate the faith and the parameters we as Orthodox Christians have set for ourselves to maintain perfect communion with God. So instead of a lengthy opening, lets dive right into the practices of the church.

Canon 4- Let all other fruit be sent home to the Bishop and Presbyters as first fruits, but not to the sacrificial altar. It is understood that the Bishop and Presbyters shall distribute a fair share to the Deacons and other Clergymen.

As you’ll recall the church doesn’t allow for anything that does not have direct correlation to the Eucharist or the services to be brought to the Church and the altar. The altar is a sacred space designed for Eucharist and the sacrifice of the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ. Being the most holy spot within a church, the altar should not and cannot be defiled by elements that are not worthy of God. In many aspects I see this as a correlation between the sacrifices of Cain and Abel. Cain did not bring a worthy sacrifice to God, where as Abel did. However there is another way of looking at this as well. With this being a first fruits offering, giving to the Bishop and the clergy as a sign of respect and honor is a noble thing. It is not right that it should be brought to the altar, as a gift to the clergy for their service is only right to give them at their home. As the spiritual father of the faithful, the Bishop therefore is only right to give to their clergy a portion of the gifts he receives, because as Christians we share in everything, we share as brothers and sisters in the faith and in doing so we show that Christ lives within us. As a spiritual father, just as biological father, the bishop therefore takes care of the needs of his children. Because eating a necessary part of life, sharing food with his clergy is a way to maintain the brotherhood but also provide for their earthly needs. The faithful therefore should offer those things that they have as first fruits of their gardens, farms and other things to the church to provide for those who take care of them spiritually.

Canon 5- No Bishop, Presbyter, or Deacon shall put away his own wife under pretext of reverence. If, however, he put her away, let him be excommunicated," and if he persist in so doing, let him be deposed from office

So, we know that Bishops these days are chosen from the monastic ranks as a way of ensuring their complete devotion to the task of being the spiritual father of the local church. However, many bishops in previous years were married and selected because they showed a good stable home environment and were Godly fathers. The Orthodox Church allows for married priests, and my own is married and has several kids. Divorcing your spouse for no reason, except for that of adultery, is looked upon with distain. Now we know that divorce happens within the church, and that people for a variety of reasons no longer wish to stay married. However, the clergy, whatever the rank, are the spiritual fathers of their parish, diocese and local church. They are to be upstanding members of the faith and to hold themselves with dignity. By not maintaining a healthy marriage by which the faithful can look to as an example, the priest, bishop, or deacon has therefore broken their trust with the laymen of the church and are deposed from their office because of their poor example. Leading the church is a matter of heaven or hell. Accounting for not just their own sins but the sins of the faithful they were entrusted with at the Awesome Judgement Seat of Christ at the Second Coming would be very difficult for those who have led others to fall away from the faith by their own actions. If a lay person were to divorce their own spouse because they saw a priest do it to theirs, it would cause irreversible spiritual damage to the faithful. This is why the church prescribes this particular canon here, so that it is known that those with spiritual authority must be upstanding members of the church to be chosen for leadership.

Canon 6-  A Bishop, or Presbyter, or Deacon must not undertake worldly cares. If he does, let him be deposed from office

Well I’ve gone and done it now by writing about this particular canon. As we have just seen being a bishop, priest or deacon within the church is a very important task. So much so that divorce among the clergy is forbidden. So too is partaking in worldly affairs. The leaders of the church are not political leaders, they are not to be seen as someone who has the authority of the people in an earthly sense. That is to be left to those who have been entrusted with political office, or in the case of the most conservative orthodox, in the emperor himself. Thus a member of the clergy should not be concerned with the daily goings on of the world, rather he should devote himself completely to the church, performing the services daily and praying for the souls of the faithful. This is also to remind the members of the clergy to not seek glory for themselves. We see politicians and other leaders outside of the church seek to become almost like God figures in their own right, leading massive rallies and parades that would seek to heap praise on themselves. God would rather those that serve him seek glory from Him, and not of the world. The clergy should be humble and seen as meek. Knowing that one day their reward is in heaven with the rest of the righteous. So many clergy in certain “churches” today seek to win the approval of the world, rather than God and it shows in the leadership of the church. I have yet to encounter a priest personally who does so, as the clergy and the bishops that I have encountered are all the most humble and righteous men I have met. I pray that we find more of these men to guide our lives than those in some “churches” who shall remain nameless but seek to heap glory on themselves and ruin the spiritual state of the faithful. (looking at you Pope Francis) May those who seek earthly glory and cares of this world repent and find themselves back within the home confines of the Orthodox Church.

While I would like to continue into the next canon of the Orthodox Church, the next canon is probably the most debated and most harsh cause of the Great Schism. The Great Schism saw the Roman Catholics lose their place in the Church of Jesus Christ as they became heretics after their falling away in 1054. The changing of the date of Pascha which has always been celebrated in the same manner in the Orthodox Church is a serious fatal error on the part of the Latins and deserves its own discussion. So instead of discussing it here, we will look it at next in a separate article, devoted solely to the date of Pascha and why we as Orthodox Christians do not and never will celebrate Pascha with the Jews.

May God bless you and welcome Macedonia to the ranks of autocephalous churches. May God have mercy on all of us.

Amen.

The Church and its Canon: Introduction to the Canon Law of the Church and Canons 1-3

 

Welcome to the newest set of posts on the Tsar’s Corner. We will be looking at the Rudder, which outlines Church doctrine and canons of the church.  This will give us an insight into the inner workings of the Church and why obeying the canons is important for us as Orthodox Christians. The Rudder was written by Saint Nicodemus of the Holy Mountain and I will attempt to convey as clear a picture as I can to church law and why the Orthodox Church is governed in this manner.

First, a little background on St. Nicodemus of the Holy Mountain.  Born Nicholas on the Isle of Naxos in Greece, the future St. Nicodemus, like many of the saints before and after grew in stature before the Lord at an early age. This future saint was extremely knowledgeable in all areas of the church life and fostered a sense of intellect that was found in few others. He eventually became the best friend of Marcarius of Corinth, who the church venerates on April 17^TH.  Besides compiling the Rudder and the explanation of the Canon Laws of the church, the Philokalia was also composed by St. Nicodemus and St. Marcarius to show the beauty of the Jesus Prayer of which we have discussed before on this particular venue but will probably do so again at some point.  Constantly persecuted by the Turks for his beliefs as an Orthodox Christian, St. Nicodemus decided to enter the monastic life to see the salvation of his soul and to produce the fruit of the spirit. He is a part of the Koliva Fathers and a well-respected member of the church having as stated been declared a saint by the Orthodox Church.

With that said, we will now look at the 85 canons of the church. This exercise will be undertaken for the benefit of us all. I am sure that there are Orthodox Christians who do not know the 85 canons and what they entail for us as Christians. Bear in mind I am not a priest, nor a member of the monastic community. While I will try to stay faithful to the mindset that St. Nicodemus laid out for us in his own explanations of the canons, I will also do my best to see the canons in my own light, and how we as Orthodox Christians can apply them. These canons are the life-bed of the church. They define the operational parameters that the church is governed under and in doing so, they must be adhered to not just when they were written but by the Church of today.

Canon #1- A bishop must be ordained by two or three other Bishops.

This is a straightforward Canon, as most are. From what we can glean from this canon is much actually. First, we understand that Jesus Christ is the ultimate bishop, the overseer, and head of the church. Jesus as our head has given the responsibility of the church to the college of bishops regardless of the jurisdiction of the church. The Church therefore explicitly gives charge the local bishops of an area to come together and ordain a new bishop when he is elected and called to the episcopacy.  It is a show of unity among brother bishops that this man (not a woman like some Protestant denominations) has been called by God to join their fellowship and to help guide the church. Because of the great honor that has been bestowed upon him, it is expected that as many bishops as can attend the service must do so. Yes, this is very important for us as Orthodox Christians because we are called to be the one, true church. By showing our unity as a church we can show the world that we are brothers in Christ. If only one, or none were to show up to ordain a bishop, then it calls into question the legitimacy of the bishop elected, and it also raises the question as to whether the Bishop was rightfully elected and rightfully chosen. Of course, as with anything there may be exceptions to this, especially in areas of persecution, where the ability to ordain a bishop is scarce. All in all, the church provides for our unity as well as our salvation, because we are called to be one in Christ. This also raises the point that it is Apostolic Succession that is taking place. The Bishops are the successors to the first Bishops, the apostles. Just as president is succeeded by the next man elected, or a king is succeeded by his son, the bishop is taking up the mantle of the apostles. While the apostles are interceding and leading the church from heavenly glory, the bishop is leading the church from earth and has been given the same calling that Jesus gave the Twelve. The canon provides for both unity of the church and for apostolic succession to take place, as the Church with over 2000 years of apostolic succession we must continue the traditions of the Church to select and ordain men who have been found worthy of this position and when two or three are gathered in Jesus’ name he will be there. This canon is simply following the scriptures.

Canon #2- A Presbyter must be ordained by a single Bishop, and so must a Deacon and other Clergymen.

            As such, along the same vein of the bishop, the Presbyter, or priest, must be ordained by a single bishop. Because of apostolic succession and the continuation of the church, anyone that has not been ordained by a priest has not received the blessing to be performing the sacraments and is uncanonical. Because ordination is reserved only for males, women cannot become priests, deacons, or any form of the clergy. The priest as the representative of the bishop in a parish, must have his blessing to perform the services. So to deacons must have the blessing of a bishop and readers, and so on. Priests are given the responsibility of guiding the flock. Deacons are called to assist the priest as they would have done in the days of the apostles, and the other clergy perform various roles within the church during the services, such as reading the epistle.

Canon #3- If any Bishop or Presbyter, contrary to the Lord's ordinance relating to sacrifice, offers anything else at the sacrificial altar, whether it he honey, or milk, or artificial liquor instead of wine, chickens, or any kind of animals, or vegetables, contrary to the ordinance, let him be deposed from office: except ears of new wheat or bunches of grapes, in due season. Let it not be permissible to bring anything else to the sacrificial altar but oil for the lamp, and incense at the time of the holy oblation.

            Our last one for this first look at the ordinances may see strange to the non-orthodox reader. As there does not seem to be anything wrong with the items in question. However, Jesus gave strict orders to the apostles in their task to perform the sacraments of the church. The Holy Eucharist as the epitome of brotherly love and unity in Christ is a sacred tradition and sacred entity in the Orthodox Church. So much that partially the reason why the Catholic Church is now in heresy is that they began to offer unleavened bread on their altars instead of leavened bread. Not only this, but as a bloodless sacrifice the offering of animals and other living creatures on the altar of an Orthodox Church refutes the pagan practices that many participated in during the era before paganism was eradicated. While I will not go into much detail here, the 4^th canon does discuss the offering of first fruits that is practiced by the faithful and those even are not to be brought into the altar, but rather a bishop’s home. Oil of course is used at every divine service when the lamps are lit, and incense is used at every service as well. (If I may say so, smoking in church is quite okay as long as its incense) The Orthodox Church maintains that the altar is reserved for the sacrifice of the Eucharist and anyone wishing to defile the altar of a church must be deposed. Breaking sacred tradition is not something that cannot be forgiven, as all sins are forgivable, but the one who breaks the tradition is clearly not reverent enough to be in the altar and to be ordained. Now from my reading of this particular canon, I can say that it is likely the person will be tried in a church court and a decision will be made as to whether or not they may remain in their post, but it is a foolish and dumb decision to even contemplate the idea of defiling the church.

            Now that we have concluded the first three canons, we have eighty-two to go. Some will be short explanations as these were, and others will be long and examples of how they were broken in the past and the present will be given. Church law is important because it gives us the structure by which the church must adhere to as I previously stated. Allowing just anyone to perform the services, or for that matter to defile the church is a grievous error on the part of everyone. God is not mocked. Even those who unintentionally touched the Ark of the Covenant with their hands were struck down. While I do not believe that God has done that recently, it is not to say that those who’s hearts are in a state of opposition to God would not receive his wrath. We must be vigilant in our practices and when they are not in communion with the spirit of God, then they are outside the Church. May God bless all of you. Christos Anesti.

Amen.

The Macedonian Reunion

 

Now, that my tribute to Metropolitan Hilarion has been written, I must admit, the bigger news of the day was the Macedonian Orthodox Church. This schism had been decades long, one that was extremely difficult to fully grasp, but now with the healing of the schism, we have our brothers and sisters back in the church.

If we are to truly understand the Macedonian Orthodox Church-Ohrid Archbishopric as it is officially called, we have to understand the Macedonian Orthodox Church. While I could go on a rant about Macedonia being Greece, this is not the time or place to have this discussion. The first official declaration of the Ohrid Archbishopric was in 1019, within the confines and structure of the Byzantine Theme of Bulgaria by placing the Bulgarian Patriarchate under the Ecumenical Patriarch in Constantinople.  By 1767, the Turks had tried to destroy Orthodoxy and reorganized the Church under the Ecumenical Patriarch in Constantinople. As you can see, while the Bulgarian Patriarch was still under the jurisdiction of the EP, it was once again decided almost a thousand years later to do the same thing again by the Turks.  The Macedonian Church in 1874 agreed to join the Bulgarian Church under the Bulgarian Exarchate, which had been established to give the Bulgarian Church more freedom from the Greeks. In 1913, the Macedonian Church was taken over by the Serbian Patriarchate and treated as another episcopal see within their territory. During WW1 and WW2, the Bulgarian Exarchate, still not having been elevated back to the Bulgarian Patriarchate occupied the territory and governed it under their care. By 1943, the church was under the care of Serbia again and a synod was established by the Bishops of the Macedonian Church to help govern. They adopted a resolution to hand to the Serbian Patriarchate, which according to my sources, the Serbian Church rejected the resolution. In 1958, they were able to get a full synod under the care of Serbia established, The Ohrid Archbishopric was title of Ohrid Archbishopric at this time. This is where it gets complicated.

In 1967, the Macedonian Orthodox Church called a third synod, still under the title of Ohrid Archbishopric. Instead of pursuing a diplomatic discourse with their mother church in Serbia, the bishops of the synod unilaterally declared themselves autocephalous, breaking with communion with Serbia and setting themselves on a course of five decades of being out of communion with any Orthodox Church. The Ohrid Orthodox Archbishopric established by Serbia became its official arm within the country and the Macedonian Orthodox Church was left out of communion. There were attempts to restore the church to full communion, but these attempts were rejected by the government of the nation, and by the MOC at the time of their writing. Because of this all-canonical Eastern Orthodox Churches note that the MOC had broken canon law and service was not to be held with anyone in communion with them. From 2005-2009 a series of events led to the furthering of the schism between the two, as the Macedonian government and the Serbian government went back and forth over the control of area and the church. Macedonians were not allowed in Serbia, and Serbians were not allowed in Macedonia. In 2017 the Bulgarians considered becoming the mother church of the Macedonian Orthodox Church and it was debated within the synods and by the Patriarch himself. Because of this, the Serbian Orthodox Church was shocked and called into question this decision. It was ultimately declined. In 2018, the Ecumenical Patriarch said that they would take under consideration the granting of an autocephalous Macedonian Orthodox Church and would review the case as it was presented to them. The Ecumenical Patriarch at this time had also come under fire for its handling of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church and the schism that arose between Constantinople and Moscow. Thus, this leads us today.

On May 9, 2022, the Ecumenical Patriarch and the Holy Synod of the Ecumenical Patriarchate concluded their review of the situation in Macedonia, restoring between Constantinople and Ohrid the eucharistic unity that the two had shared decades prior. It was at this time however that they did state any final authority would be granted to the Serbian Orthodox Church and its own Holy Synod.  On May 16, 2022, which is as of this writing the current date, the Serbian Orthodox Church has agreed to restore communion between the two churches ending the schism that began in 1967. No further details are known as to whether the autocephalous nature of the church will be granted, but the Serbian church has restored their communion with Ohrid. The Patriarch of Serbia, Porfirije agreed that the schism was over and granted his blessing to restoration.

While it is not good to see brothers break communion with each other, the schism that was brought on by pride and greed has now been healed without further conflict. Canon law, which is a topic I would love to discuss further on this site was broken by the Macedonian Orthodox Church in 1967 but was forgiven here in 2022. Though the bishops were the ones who made the decision, it was the people who suffered, because of the break of communion.  These people, denied the eucharist by the majority of the Orthodox world could receive the basic sacraments that are given to us by God for our salvation. As I have stated before, discussion and dialogue will rule over any hotheaded shouting that may arise in the course of church politics. When the bishops of the church agree to sit down and discuss their issues good things happen. While it does not heal the pain that has been caused for five decades, it does give it a chance to.  The people are now able to freely practice their faith again without being in schism with the church and are brought back into the fold. Jesus said the good shepherd would seek out the 1 lost sheep over the 99 that remained. Today that verse rings true. The good shepherd sought out the 1 lost sheep and brought him home. May God bless the Macedonian Orthodox Church at this time and grant peace and prosperity to all who have now been brought home.

Amen.

A tribute to Metropolitan Hilarion of ROCOR

 

Very rarely do I discuss hierarchs and the church politics. However, two huge announcements have taken place recently that reserve their own right to have an entire article written about them. The later of which, has more recently taken place and therefore needs to be discussed first. I am of course discussing the recent repose of Metropolitan Hilarion of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia. I would like to give a background of Metropolitan Hilarion and his episcopacy and in turn give a tribute to a man who has guided ROCOR for 38 years.

            Like many of the people he served in the Orthodox Church, he himself was from outside of Russia.  He was born in Canada and given the name Igor. His parents were Alexei and Euphrosynia Kapral. He grew up in Alberta, which is not a huge hotbed for Orthodoxy, but does have a large Orthodox presence. The early stages of his life, by all accounts were one of piety and love for God. He spent many hours in the church and was drawn to the services and drawn to serving God. Igor grew in statue before the Lord, and while that may be a common phrase, it is definitely how Igor was and is viewed by the Church. It was during this time that the Bishop of Edmonton, Sava, took Igor under his wing and convinced the future Metropolitan of ROCOR to attend seminary. He became a novice under Jordanville in 1972, and was given the name Hilarion in 1974, upon tonsure. The then Father Hilarion, was ordained a hierodeacon in 1975, and on Lazarus Saturday 1976 (the day before Palm Sunday for my western and non-orthodox readers) was ordained to the Holy Priesthood. After this he was sent around the country to parishes to fill in as priest, especially in places like Cleveland and Pennsylvania.

            In 1984, less than ten years after being ordained, and around ten years after being tonsured as a monk, Hilarion was given the great honor of being called to the episcopacy.  He was appointed to the see of Manhattan and given charge over churches in Pennsylvania. Though retaining his residence in New York City, he was appointed to the See of Washington and eventually to the Diocese of Australia and New Zealand. While I do not know if he lived there during the time of his appointment, he was given charge to rectify the situation that had occurred and the struggles that the diocese was experiencing.

            From there he was eventually elected as the First Hierarch of the Russian Orthodox Church outside of Russia in 2008. This was met with the Moscow Patriarchate elevating him to the position of primate in the church.  On May 14, 2008 the Act of Canonical Union between the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia and the Russian Orthodox Church was approved, allowing for over 100 years of schism between the two churches to be healed. With ROCOR becoming an established member of the Russian Orthodox Church.  He was enthroned on May 18^th and has worked tirelessly to continue his goal of promoting Orthodoxy in America and abroad.

             Metropolitan Hilarion and the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia, did a wonderful job keeping the faith alive by ministering to the faithful during the dark years of communism in Russia. Without being in communion with their mother church  it must have been and was a difficult task as it meant that they were outside of communion with everyone in the Orthodox world. That does not mean that they do not have a strong history or have not had many saints, as St. John of Shanghai and San Francisco was the bishop in San Francisco during the ROCOR era. Metropolitan Hilarion was able to heal the rift that Metropolitan Sergius had instigated when he was appointed by the communists to become the head of Russian Orthodoxy.  He brought ROCOR back within the Russian church and led the church with dignity and grace.  I cannot say much on the man personally, I am neither a parishioner of a ROCOR church, nor have I met the man in person. However, what I see from ROCOR is a strong foundation of maintaining the faith as it was, as it is, and what it will be throughout all ages. Protecting Orthodoxy during the communism period must have been very difficult, especially for those who had fled Russia to practice their faith in peace. May his memory be eternal and may God place him in a place of repose with the righteous without sighing or suffering.

Amen.

 

           

The NPR is full of Idiots

 

The NPR this week has been making headlines, and not for the right reasons. After an absolute hit piece on the Orthodox Church, it is only fair that I respond. So please bear with me as I try to spell it out for the idiots at the NPR.

            First, the NPR suggests that all Orthodox Christians are white supremacists. I can tell you from personal experience that is not the case. As an Orthodox Christian myself, I have been surrounded by people who love you no matter the color of your skin or the country of your birth. In this day and time the majority of Greek Orthodox Christians in America are first or second generation Greek-Americans. Many have immigrated from Greece in an attempt to provide for their family, or to escape the hardships that have befallen Greece since WW2.  They have seen atrocities that Americans have never even thought of, nor have ever experienced. Yes, I would believe that these first- and second-generation Americans are different than those who have history dating back to the American Revolution or even in the immigrations that took place during the first part of the 20^th century. Just because their experiences are different than those of other Americans does not make them white supremacists, but it does make them leery of the way current American politics are run. They are afraid that the same mistakes that were made in Greece will be made here. The same could be said of those fleeing the former Soviet Bloc, where they have seen the gulags, the murder of innocent children and people, and the persecution of Christians. Remember, the Soviet Union was the largest persecutor of Christians in the history of the world. No one discusses it, but it is true. There is no definitive answer as to the number of Christians killed in the 20^th century because the records kept by the Soviet Union do not have the truth. We may never know what the true number is, but God does.

            This leads me into the second point that was made by the NPR hit piece, in that Orthodox Christians see Vladimir Putin as a savior, or even as a king like figure. I won’t deny that Orthodox Christians prefer monarchy to democracy, with even this particular blog named after one of the greatest saints of the 20^th Century. However, a majority of Orthodox Christians in this country do not agree with Vladimir Putin or his actions. I personally have had many conversations with people on both sides of the aisle. On the one hand, some agree that Vladimir Putin is a hero for standing up to those who seek to destroy Orthodoxy.  On the other, he is seen as someone who does not have the values of diplomacy and discussion that is very prevalent in the Orthodox Church. The Orthodox Church as a synodal church, values discussion and councils above outright action. Thus when an issue between churches boils over into a political and spiritual dispute, it is better that a council is called than for war to break out between nations.  While I do believe that he is doing what is best for his country, I cannot say that it is best for Orthodoxy. Thus whether right or wrong, the actions taken by Putin in regards to Ukraine or any other situation, must be viewed from both sides of the coin, not from just the one side, as the NPR has done.  I do believe that Putin himself is a Christian and that he is defending Orthodoxy against the wiles of the devil. The method by which Putin is achieving his own personal agenda, while also taking advantage of the spiritual situation between the two autonomous churches of Russia and Constantinople is not the most efficient way of achieving unity within the Church. Regardless of any actions that he takes as a political leader, he is not seen in the Church as a spiritual leader in any sense.  Thus his authority on any matters regarding the Church are non-existent, because only the bishops as members of the synodal nature of Orthodoxy are allowed as the final authorities within the church.

            Seeing fake Orthodox Christians be interviewed by the NPR this week accusing priests, bishops and others of abusing the power of the pulpit is a typical attack on Christians. Our values will never align with those of the world. We cannot stand by and allow injustice, or sinful nature to rule the day. We must stand up for those things that we believe in. I have seen firsthand many protestant churches, of which I was a member, back down and change their very core to accommodate and to promote heresies and sin in their churches. I have seen the darkness that is spreading across America infiltrate the churches of our people and seek to destroy them because they stand for Christ. The Orthodox Church may have grown smaller in the years between 2010 and 2020 as the NPR article so prominently points out, but those who have fallen away are still welcomed home. We still seek the salvation of the world, and still seek those who are sinners. If the church stops being a hospital for sinners, and a social club for perfect people, then we have lost the church. That will never be the case with Orthodoxy because Christ says even the gates of Hell cannot overcome us. Yes the NPR has laid a hit piece on us this week, trying to stir the population against us that we might lose a few. However the truth is, that those that remain in the Church, will be strengthened by God to continue the mighty work that he began at the dawn of time. I have to admit that Tsar Nicholas, of whom I have adopted as the Patron Saint of this blog, would be heartbroken to see the Church attacked like this. He defended the Church brilliantly during his final hours against the communists, and I want to believe that I have taken up this sword that he relinquished on his repose and am now carrying it into battle. We will not fail. The Church will stand. Nothing will defeat us.

Amen.

The Holy Fire-Mystery and Miracle

 

Okay, by now you have probably seen at least if you’re in Orthodox circles, the news that Facebook has been refuting the Holy Fire of Jerusalem and taking down and practically banning anyone who claims the Holy Fire to be a miracle. For those of us who have been around the miracle for years or decades now, we know that the Holy Fire is one of the most sacred and important miracles in the Orthodox world and one that we do not take kindly to those who try and refute the 2,000-year history of this tradition. I had plans to write this earlier in the week, but like all things I took my time in trying to decide how and best to approach a miracle that both Muslims and Jews have witnessed and confirmed that God is at work. For me, as a historian at heart the best way to talk about the Holy Fire is to tell its history, to tell the story and to put to bed those sadistic fact checkers over at Menlo Park.

                First, we understand that the Holy Fire is a miracle, that has been attested to for over a thousand years and most likely longer than that. While documented examples of the Holy Fire can only be traced to 1106 A.D., there have been references to it well before that. The Holy Fire itself is easy to explain, in that it is a flame. Yes, an actual fire. If you want, there are numerous YouTube videos showing the flame and even the current 2022 flame was broadcast on the airways of YouTube. The flame descends every Holy Saturday, shortly before the Paschal Vigil later that night. The Greek Patriarch of Jerusalem enters the Holy Sepulchre every year to the crowd chanting Kyrie Eleison. As he enters the church, he is stripped of his garments and searched for any sort of material that might be used to light a flame within the Tomb of Jesus Christ. He is allowed a candle to receive the flame, but that’s it. An unlit Candle. Now if memory serves, it was once conducted by the Muslim authorities, who at the time were the rulers of the Ottoman Empire. Now it is performed by the Jewish community, and since the Holy Sepulchre is governed by a Muslim family, I am sure that they are present as well. Once the Patriarch has been given all clear by the non-Christian authorities, he enters the Tomb of Jesus Christ, where the body of Christ lay. From the there he is sealed in until he receives the Holy Fire. From what I understand, he says a set of certain prayers that are asking for the blessing. At this point different occurrences have happened. The flame either descends in the form of an actual flame, or in the form of a blue light. For us Orthodox Christians, blue is the color of the seraphim, so it is always nice to know that the heavenly powers are watching over us and are also worshipping with us. Once the flame has been collected by the Patriarch, the flame is then announced to the world with bells and fanfare. The Patriarch exits the tomb and the candle that is now lit is used to light the candles of the nearby pilgrims. The fire itself does not burn. Let me repeat…the fire itself does not burn. While YouTube and Facebook videos have been taken down to discredit this, there is enough evidence from those present, including the non-Christians, to tell us otherwise. People have tried to set their beards, hats, cassocks, and other vestments on fire once receiving it. For at least the first 33 minutes, representing the years Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ was physically present on earth, it will not burn anything. After this, it becomes a normal flame. But for 33 minutes, it is exactly like the one ring from Lord of the Rings…cool to the touch. Again, I preface that Non-Christians are in the building while this occurs. They too are witness to the miracle.

                Now, I could sit here and drone on and on. But I would be here all day. There are plenty of videos, that have not been taken down, and there are plenty of witnesses you can find. I will not try to convince you. But let me tell you of some other incidents in which the powers that be, thought they could discredit Orthodoxy. First the Crusaders, who invaded during multiple crusades, have tried time and again to enter the Sepulchre and obtain the Holy Fire. Unfortunately, they did not receive it, and thus the Catholic population rioted because they believed that they were the superior church. Furthermore, the Armenian Patriarch of Jerusalem also attempted to receive the fire. Now, he was more successful than the Catholics, but just barely. In fact, the Armenian, prayed and prayed for the fire. When the fire did come it came in the form of a lightning strike. This lightning strike struck a nearby pillar which can still be seen to this day, and a crack formed. The fire however did not light the Armenian patriarch’s candle. Instead, the Greek Orthodox Patriarch of Jerusalem was standing nearby with a candle and God saw fit to light his candle instead. Of course, you know that was both humiliating and infuriating for the Armenian, and I’m sure he was utterly upset. Finally, I must say this. As an Orthodox Christian, who firmly believes in the oneness of the Church and thus believes it to be the established Church of Jesus Christ, it saddens me to know that when the Holy Fire does not descend and God has withdrawn his blessing from the world, we can expect the Second Coming to be near. I pray that the Orthodox Patriarch of Jerusalem continues to receive the Holy Fire for many years to come. I pray that I might experience this miracle in due course, if the Lord allows. I pray that all men would put aside their hatred for each other, and those who have a hatred for religion would put down their hate for us Christians and open their hearts to Jesus Christ. The Holy Fire is a gift from God that is given to us to show his authority and his power. No fire-making materials have ever explained the science behind the Holy Fire. No trick, no scam, no person has ever discredited it. They have tried, they have failed. Facebook, YouTube, Google, the works have attempted to cause division and strife in the Orthodox community and have tried to shy people away from the truth. They will receive their just reward at the Awesome Judgement Seat of Jesus Christ. Woe to them. I pray for us all, and ask, that as we have entered the celebration of Pascha, that you pray for me. May God have mercy on us all.

                Amen.