Selections from Seminary

The one common thread seen in all three of these readings ("lessons") is the living martyrdom of monastics. Every single reference to these verses among the Church Fathers which have been presented here refer to non-monastics...funny for readings chosen for monastics, huh? The clear message is that this living martyrdom is not only potentially attainable by all Christians, but as St. Symeon the New Theologian says, we are without excuse if we do not emulate them: "When God brings his hidden saints to light, it is in order that some may emulate them and others be without excuse. Those [of us] who wish to remain amid distractions as well as those [of us] who live a worthy life in [monastic] communities, in mountains and in caverns, are saved, and God bestows on them great blessings solely because they have faith in him." In other words, both the monastic life and life "in the world" are fitting to work out our salvation. When we hear of the life of a monasti...

  The Old Testament lessons (or parameia readings) for monastic saints reveal some interesting aspects of the monastic life, some of which are misunderstood in modern Orthodoxy, especially in America. The strongly Protestant-derived culture of the United States affects both those converting to Orthodoxy from Protestantism, but also those who have grown up Orthodox, but from within a non-Orthodox culture. What is immediately noticeable is the similarity between the readings for monastic saints and those for martyrs; two of the three readings are shared. Of the three monastic readings presented below, the first and the third are also used for martyrs. This somewhat helps define what it is to be a monastic: those who have chosen a living martyrdom. In the book of Revelation, when St. John the Theologian sees of the martyrs under the throne, there is a key word that speaks to this living martyrdom: “When He opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of those who had been sl...

In the introduction to The Life in Christ , Boris Bobrinskoy repeatedly claims that Cabasilas sees the Eucharistic communion as the layman’s communion in Christ. I had an immediate and negative reaction to such statements due to my aversion to the false dichotomy between “lay” and monastic spirituality, but especially in the current climate of quarantine at home and isolation from the parish and Eucharistic communion, a time of sharpened attention to communion and what that means when we do not have the Eucharistic communion. I will admit that I attempted to prove Bobrinskoy wrong and to find references from Cabasilas that would also support communion with Christ in other ways outside of the Eucharist. Certainly, Cabasilas speaks of union with Christ in our heart, but I will have to concede that the Eucharist is his focal point: “So perfect is this Mystery [the Eucharist], so far does it excel every other sacred rite that it leads to the very summit of good things. Here also is the...

Not to set up Schmemann’s work for rejection again, but his language about our salvation is exactly what I was just mentioning as fadish among Orthodox—he is not at all wrong and can say these things with the full weight of the Fathers behind him—salvation is a healing, or in this case, restoration of our nature: “It is Paradise, not sin, that reveals the true nature of man; it is to Paradise and to his true nature, to his primordial vestment of glory, that man returns in Baptism.” And also, “Christ came not to replace ‘natural’ matter with some ‘supernatural’ and sacred matter, but to restore it and to fulfill it as the means of communion with God.” That is all true, and Orthodoxically beautiful to say, but notice Cabasilas’s language on the same topic, mentioning not only “uniting our nature to Himself”, but also “paid the penalty”, a phrase rarely heard in today’s Orthodox dialect: “By this He paid the penalty for the sins which we had audaciously committed; then, because of tha...

There are some spots where it is helpful to have a man from our own times speaking on Baptism. Schmemann, writing on the tail of the greatest wave of cultural change in America, the tumultuous 60s, can speak to our mixed up, modern confusion...in this case, about death. “Seemingly, from a modern perspective, nothing has happened to biological death with Christ’s death, because we still all die,” runs the thinking of a modern atheist looking at Christianity. He is able to respond to this confusion with the fundamental Christian vision of death: it is that death “in which the ‘biological’ or physical death is not the whole death, not even its ultimate essence. For in this Christian vision, death is above all a spiritual reality, of which one can partake while being alive, from which one can be free while lying in the grave.” Cabasilas rightly speaks of this spiritual death in Baptism by saying that “in the sacred mysteries, then, we depict His burial and proclaim His death. By them we ...

Fr. Alexander made a good point, but a point that was so good it almost undercut his entire book in my mind. He posed this question: “Are we not somewhat restoring, even though restoring is always artificial”, and emphasizing his own point, “all restorations are always artificial”. He argues long and hard for faithfulness to the original services of Baptism and Chrismation, to make sure we are serving them as they were written to be served. And that would...or could be artificial, even in his own estimation. Therefore, it is essential to keep in mind when reading Fr. Alexander’s book, that it is not for some romantic or “archeological” love of the past or to see a perfect historical restoration of the services, “but because of our certitude that only within this original structure can the full meaning of Baptism be grasped and understood.” That I understand: if we cut out chunks of the service we lose meaning. Clear. Later, though, it feels as though the tentative understanding we ju...

This is an absolutely unfair and completely biased and subjective opinion—I think my emphasis is quite clear in saying how the following probably should not be said in a proper and balanced evaluation of these two books, but will be anyway, for I think it is helpful to the reader in determining how to interpret my thoughts on these two books—but Schmemann’s book seems too theologically “uppity”, where Cabasilas is more like hearing wise thoughts that may be partially over the listener’s head, but the understood pieces become pearls to cherish. [ This is where you choose to read any of the following articles or not. I am not anti-Schmemann; I loved the book, but this work, and I am assuming others of his as well, are written "higher" than necessary. ] St. Nicholas’s book, for all of its distance from us in time and geography and culture, seems to treat Baptism in a way that hits our modern context more directly than Fr. Alexander's book. It is not better, and Fr. Alexa...

Fr. Alexander Schmemann starts off his book with a lamentation about our need to understand Baptism. That clearly reveals his intended audience: Orthodox Christians. Over and over throughout his book, he finds every exhortation, every inspirational liturgical detail, every symbol lost on the modern ear to help reconnect modern Orthodox Christians with the richness of Baptism, Chrismation, and the Eucharist. And that is a message that needs to be heard, especially in the 1970s when he wrote it. He makes references to abbreviation or outright removal of seemingly redundant, meaningless, or outdated parts of the baptismal service, which to him is particularly abhorrent because such changes usually proceed from ignorance of the sacrament. St. Nicholas Cabasilas seems to have had a different audience in mind. On the surface, he, too, is speaking to Orthodox Christians, though it is difficult to say if that be to his own flock, because there is much uncertainty as to whether he ended his l...

How often are we looking for a good book to help explain a particular topic? It is often the case that new books—we could roughly define that as written in the past decade—are the easiest to find, quite likely will be easy to read, and more or less cover the topic needed, but are somehow lacking in depth. Most new books look more like paperback versions of a collection of blog posts than a “real” book. If, on the other hand, the priest looks to the Church Fathers, the texts are often archaic and tedious, which might simply be a result of the style of translation employed. And even if the text is not actually difficult to read, the impression can still remain that any book with a saint as an author will be too hard to understand. Neither of the books I intend to cover in this book review, of sorts, fit neatly into either of these categories. Both cover the meaning of the Mystery of Baptism and extend their discussion into Chrismation and the Eucharist, both are a wealth of informati...

I am thankful for reading a recent article by Fr. Lawrence Farley, and particularly for the additional perspective he has added to my thinking about what "going to church" means in the wake of these worldwide quarantining measures to fight the spread of this virus. He wrote at length about the importance of the gathering of Christians as being central to the purpose of the Eucharist, and thus to the meaning of  "the Church". That "gathering" aspect is not something I had dwelled on much. I would like to add another layer to what he said. He said, " The Eucharist is what Christians do on Sunday when they gather together in the Lord’s Name, and the celebration of the Eucharist presupposes a previous gathering." That is true. Otherwise, a priest would be allowed to celebrate by himself. The Church is the "ekklesia" (Greek ἐκκλησία, 'gathering'), the community of believers, which is seen in beautiful perfection when we partake of...

I received an e-mail from my parish back in Oregon with information from Archbishop Benjamin about how to proceed in these days of quarantine as we move ever closer to the pinnacle of the entire Church year: Great and Holy Pascha. One of the most important aspects of this letter is the fact that the diocese has a plan in place; that face, in itself, is reassuring, especially in these times of ever-changing situations. However, what I would like to focus on is a spiritual reminder he gives us all. On Behalf of All, and for All " The Sunday Liturgies will be offered, behind locked doors, 'on behalf of all, and for all.'" That is no trite reference to Liturgy. Truly, the Holy Eucharist is consecrated for all of us. From the beginning of this quarantine, when many churches were forced to close their doors, I noticed bishops allowing monastic communities to continue services. Not only was that partially necessary because the monastic communities live at the monastery, b...

This starts out as a bit of trivia, but ends up as a timely piece of encouragement for us living in this time of quarantine. Stick with me to the end... I found out in class today that the word quarantine comes from the word 40 in Italian (actually, I think it was first in the Venetian language, but those are both Romantic, so close enough). I checked the etymology of quarantine online, and numerous sources confirmed. But, it is obvious, if you think about it: four quar ters in a dollar, four quar ts in a gallon, right? You can see the 'four' in there. It comes from the days of the Bubonic Plague, where incoming ships would be quarantined, or 'do their forty-days', to help stop the spread of the Plague. So, here is another connection to start to make this a bit more applicable to our daily lives. During Lent, almost every year (if not every year, I don't know), we celebrate the feast of the 40 Martyrs of Sebaste (9Mar). Their feast was intentionally placed duri...