Ἡ μητέρα του ἔδειξε τό δρόμο τῆς σωτηρίας

Στις δώδεκα τα μεσάνυχτα, χτύπησαν την πόρτα στην Εκκλησία. Ήταν μια γριούλα. Και ζητούσε παπά, να πάει να κοινωνήσει έναν άρρωστο.Ο παπάς ετοιμάστηκε και βγήκε αμέσως μαζί της. Πλησιάζουν σε ένα φτωχό σπιτάκι, τύπου παράγκας. Η γριούλα ανοίγει την πόρτα και μπάζει τον ιερέα σε ένα δωμάτιο.

Και να ξαφνικά ο παπάς ευρίσκεται εκεί μόνος με τον άρρωστο.
Ο άρρωστος του δείχνει με χειρονομίες την πόρτα και σκούζει.
- Φύγε από εδώ! Ποιος σε κάλεσε; Εγώ είμαι άθεος. Και άθεος θα πεθάνω.
Ο παπάς τα έχασε.
- Μα δεν ήλθα από μόνος μου! Με κάλεσε η γριά!
- Ποια γριά; Εγώ δεν ξέρω καμιά γριά!
Ο παπάς, καθώς στέκει απέναντί του, βλέπει επάνω από το κεφάλι του αρρώστου, μια φωτογραφία με την γυναίκα πού τον κάλεσε.
Του λέει, ενώ του δείχνει το πορτραίτο.
- Να αυτή!
- Ποια αυτή, ξέρεις, τί λες, παπά; Αυτή είναι η μάνα μου. Και έχει πεθάνει χρόνια τώρα!
Για μια στιγμή πάγωσαν και οι δύο. Αισθάνθηκαν δέος. Ο άρρωστος άρχισε να κλαίει. Και αφού έκλαψε, ζήτησε να εξομολογηθεί. Και μετά, κοινώνησε.
Η μητέρα του είχε φροντίσει από τον ουρανό, να του δείξει τον δρόμο της σωτηρίας.

The Person of Christ and the Style of Icons

Protopresbyter Stamatios Skliris

 From: A Mystery Great and Wondrous, Athens, Byzantine and Christian Museum.
Exhibition of Icons and Ecclesiastical Treasures 28 May - 31 July 2001.


The Jubilee celebrations and indeed the present Exhibition present opportunities for deliberation on the Person of Christ, the truly 'mysterious stranger' in man's midst. Here we shall concern ourselves chiefly with evaluating the contribution of Christians to art, through the worship and veneration of the Theanthropos. That is, the fact that a special style derived from the worship of Christ.
The Person of Christ, as experienced in the Orthodox East, played a very specific historical role. Instead of creating primarily a theory of the cosmos, a philosophical or ethical system, it was lived and experienced par excellence as the Church, as the Eucharistic congregation. As a gathering of believers in a particular place and at a specific time to celebrate the Eucharist, to constitute in unison the people of God, the Body of Christ that draws its identity from the eschatological expectation of the Resurrected Christ and his kingdom. The Person of Christ influenced art in this way; as a living presence of Christ within the Eucharist and as a painted narration of this event on the walls of the liturgical space within which the Eucharist took place. It is thus worth investigating this specific phenomenon, what new impetus this special congregation of men gave to painting, in the way that it lived and experienced Christ through time and depicted him in icons. An evaluation such as this would also show indirectly the significance of this exhibition of icons and treasures of the Church of Greece, as well as help us to understand and appraise the exhibits better.
The particular artistic characteristics of icons
Historically Christian painting began as a branch of Hellenistic and Roman art. Quickly, however, it showed a propensity towards developing a peculiar and particular figurative imagery, which was due to the new content of life brought by the eucharistic experience of Christ in the life of believers. This change in the content and purpose of life not only brought new pictorial subjects over the pagan ones, but also formed a new artistic language. This singularity was expressed visually through the following special characteristics:
1. Light plays the principal role in the icon, no longer as natural light that is governed by the law of rectilinear diffusion, but as a metaphysical light that is free from obligatory obedience to physical laws. It is a light that illumines uniformly and centrally both the whole and the parts, while at the same time cancelling the cast shadows (the shadows of the bodies which fall on the ground or on other bodies).
2. Colours are by definition bright or at least have bright reflections and rays.
3. Perspective is virtually overturned and things distant come close to the viewer.
4. Light and shade are differentiated. They exist on the parts, but not in the naturalistic manner in which a whole body can be in shadow while others can be in an area of light. All the bodies depicted and all the parts are illumined by a centripetal light, light that falls centrally on each part and pushes the shadow to the edge.
5. The figures are weightless and stand on the tips of their toes, as if dancing. The manner of lighting and the manner of drawing contribute to this effect.
6. Plasticity takes another form, appearing in a manner that is crystalline, prismatic, cubist.
7. The landscape is painted like a miniature of the composition as a whole. It functions decoratively and its strong colours impart a jubilant character even when it frames sad subjects.
8. The face, which basically continues the Hellenistic tradition of portraiture, is simplified and acquires abstract features. The drawing alludes to ancient red-figure vases with spare, clear, elegant lines and the modelling enhances its volumes with fine white lines, the highlights. The highlights create the impression that the face shines with a light similar to that of the Transfiguration of Christ on Mount Tabor. This element in conjunction with intensity of the gaze give the viewer the impression that the Christ depicted is not an ordinary person represented at an ordinary moment, but a unique person whom the venerator of the icon beholds at a unique moment, in which he comes into a unique relationship with him, which surpasses time and death.
These characteristics constitute the definitive difference between Christian and other painting, with regard to the stylistic manipulations of the image. And they represent the birth of a truly new manner of painting. For the Italian Renaissance constitutes a re-nascence of old ancient Greek pagan manners and not the birth of a radically new style. The Christians of the first centuries put 'new wine' (new Christian subjects) in 'new flasks' (new style). Later, after the thirteenth century, the Western version of Christian art appeared, which lost the special characteristics mentioned above. But in the East too these characteristics were altered somewhat from the fifteenth century. They became more severe and standardized, losing their joyous character and freedom of drawing, coloration and expression, yet gaining something else, the mystagogy and unction of icons during the period of Ottoman rule in Greece ('Cretan School').
The originality of icons
Although the repetition of iconographic models and the believers' demand for immediately recognizable images led to a relative standardization, in all the phases of the development of iconography originality is encountered. It is this originality that enables us to classify icons chronologically. Originality is achieved through the light, which expresses a remarkable freedom. This freedom is due to the authenticity of the ecclesiastical liturgical experience of Christ lived by believers.
For believers Jesus is not simply a man, but the corporeal bearer of all the fullness of divinity. This uncreated, divine dimension of the Theanthropos evoked the astonishment experienced by the Apostles on Mount Tabor during the Transfiguration. There they saw the wholly new man, the man no one had set eyes upon before. Not simply because he had the qualities of other men to a greater degree, but because, as uncreated, he transcended the definition of the qualities.
In order for us to comprehend the originality of Divine Grace, it is essential that we understand the distinction between created and uncreated, on which the Fathers of the Church insisted. Created means created by God, that which is subject to the natural laws and is known through its qualities. Uncreated is the divine, which is not plasma but source of creation; that which becomes known through revelation and which always evokes astonishment, because it introduces to the created the freedom from physical laws. The uncreated, whenever it is lived by the saints, always evokes astonishment and is always original, simply because, by definition, it transcends the human experience of created beings. Whereas all human experiences at some time grow old, because at some time we become psychologically familiar with them, the experience of the uncreated Grace is always something ontologically new, which evokes astonishment each time. If the Apostles had witnessed ten Transfigurations, the sense of astonishment and originality they experienced on Mount Tabor would never grow old. Just as the heavenly hosts praise god eternally, not out of duty nor by observing a liturgical ceremonial, but through an authentic sense of ecstasy towards the uncreated majesty that surpasses every created experience, so the authentic experience of Christ lived within the Church is a continuously original experience as far as the physical qualities are concerned and indescribable as far as physical descriptions are concerned. This is why icon-painters of all periods (except the present) render the Person of Christ in a manner which is on the one hand recognizable to believers and in accordance with tradition, yet on the other hand has always the uniqueness and the originality of the uncreated, as far as it is humanly possible to render these. Today, unfortunately, the model and ideal for icon-painters is how they will imitate the Christ painted by Panselinos or Theophanis, and not how they will render in an authentic manner the Theanthropos and the astonishment he should evoke in the believer. Thus they age and debase the eternally renewing message of Christ, which is the hope of the world, and deprive him of the eschatological vision of paradise.
The theology of the originality of the Person of Christ has not been emphasized sufficiently, even though it is Taborian, hesychastic and consequently radically Orthodox. It is frequently obscured by a conception of tradition as repetition of known and not original things. The fact frequently escapes us that the liturgical repetition of the same ceremonial and the insistence on the tradition of the past, in order to avoid the error of heresy (things absolutely essential for the life in Christ), are no more than the trappings of Love. But Love itself is ecstasy. We forget that author of the Icon of Christ is the Love of the Church to its Bridegroom and not historical and anthropological research. This freedom of Byzantine painting, which emerges from the authenticity and originality we have mentioned, can be identified in the following points:
1. In the way in which Christian art utilized borrowings from Antiquity. It kept the transcendence, the beauty and many pagan elements, boldly and fearlessly, so long as they served its needs. And concurrently, with equal daring and freedom, it doubted canons of measurements and proportions distinctive of art, and introduced an unprecedented surrealism, aimed at expressing the resurrected, the uncreated, the supernatural, that which was beyond measurement.
2. In the originality with which the Byzantines painted, so that nowhere in their art is there the dichotomy between the Byzantine and the naturalistic pictorial conception of the world.
3. In the free and fertile conception of tradition, in contrast to the sterile and timorous traditionalism of today. Tradition is seen not just as what was handed down from the past as an irrevocable total of parts, but as what was handed down to us, with special emphasis on the us, as the managers of tradition here and now, with self-awareness and self-motivation. That is, the future of tradition depends on us, who do not take from tradition ready-made solutions to emerging problems, but are inspired by the experience and the criteria of tradition, to find new and specific solutions to specific problems.
4. In the eschatological priority over historical accuracy, which inspired them to paint the Crucified Christ with the eschatological inscription: O ΒΑΣΙΛΕΥΣ ΤΗΣ ΔΟΞΗΣ (KING OF GLORY) rather than with the historical legend: Ο ΒΑΣΙΛΕΥΣ ΤΩΝ ΙΟΥΔΑΙΩΝ (KING OF ΤΗΕ JEWS).
5. In the anachronisms in the imagery, which are due to the authenticity of the experience. The icon-painter lives the events of the Divine Economy, which he paints with such familiarity that he dresses Christ in a chiton and a himation (and not Jewish garments), he presents him in front of Hellenistic buildings and not Hebrew tents, and he equips the soldiers who arrest him with Byzantine armour and weapons, not Roman.
6. Specifically in the imagery of the Person of Christ, we see the freedom in the diverse depictions, different from each other, which intervened until the Byzantine type of Christ was elaborated; such as initially the beardless youth, then the soldier with short beard and hair gathered behind, or with long beard and loosened hair.
The differences in style
In order to understand better this sustainable originality and freedom, it is worth examining some icons of Christ, characteristic of the era and of the creators, in which we shall try to identify the changes in style from period to period.
1. Encaustic icon of Christ. Sinai,6th century (Cat. no. 52). Here the Christian painter, employing the technique and expression of the Fayum portraits, gives a new solution with the dynamism of the Person of Christ. This is no longer the funerary portrait with the sorrow in the face of death, but the portrait of a completely new man, who triumphs over death. This is expressed through the light of the face and the expression of the eyes, which gaze upon us full of love and mercy. Christ does not behold us with the sadness of the suffering fellow mortal, but with the redemptive and salvationary love of the victor over death.
2. Icon of Christ in egg tempera. Sinai,11th century. The painter perceives Christ as a person entirely in light. The participation of light alters him, distances him from the naturalism of the encaustic Christ and endows him with the transcendence of the uncreated light, which suffuses the portrait in a manner that does not follow the naturalistic linear diffusion of light.
3. Mosaic icon of Christ. Berlin Museum, 12th century. The era of the Comneni endeavoured to express the Resurrection and the transcendence of death through a special style, based essentially on wavy lines. The rhythmical mobility that these undulations impart to the icon is artistically tantamount to eternal life.
4. Wall-painting of Christ, work of Panselinos, Protaton, Mt Athos, 14th century. Panselinos and Byzantine painting of the fourteenth century compose two things, humanism and hesychasm. The natural light that illumines the Person of Christ becomes simultaneously a visual language that reveals the participation of the
Divine Light. Concurrently, the expression of the eyes shows all the philanthropy and mercy of a God who became man out of love for man.
5. Icon of Christ. Monastery of Stavronikita, Mt Athos,16th century. The Cretan School presents the portrait of the completely new man through the mystagogical contrast between the strongly illumined and the deeply shadowed parts of the face.
It is clear that the Byzantine icon-painters did not believe that the Mystery of Christ was expressed hapax in the first icon and that they were bound henceforth to copy faithfully this one and only 'accurate' rendering of the portrait, as if it were the true photograph that constitutes the model for all periods. For them the Mystery of the Person of the Theanthropos was unspoken. Thus they attempted to depict the Theanthropos precisely to show his ecstatic, original and unrepeated character in relation to the other persons, who were created. It is this eschatological theology concerning Christ that is the source of the style of the holy icons, with all its details as discussed above.
The exhibition of icons and keimelia of the Church of Greece held in the Byzantine and Christian Museum, Athens. on the occasion of the Jubilee, tried to show this 'mysterious stranger' in all his aspects, in works in various materials and techniques, as well as of different periods of ecclesiastical history. Revealing is the unity and cohesion of this tradition and the parallel variety and singularity of each work and each creator.

Τὶ εἶναι ἡ Ὀρθόδοξη Γυναίκα,Ἀπαντήσεις γόνιμες καί εὔστοχες.

Στοὺς χρόνους τῆς Παλαιᾶς Διαθήκης καὶ ἰδίως στὸν εἰδωλολατρικὸ κόσμο oi γυναῖκες ἦσαν – ἐκτὸς λίγων ἐξαιρέσεων -πολὺ χαμηλῆς κοινωνικῆς θέσεως καὶ σὲ μιὰ κατηγορία ἀνάλογη μὲ αὐτὴ τῶν δούλων καὶ τῶν σκλάβων. Ἀκόμη καὶ στὴν Παλαιὰ Διαθήκη ὑπῆρχεν ἡ πολυγαμία καὶ οἱ παλλακίδες. Τὸ μήνυμα ὅμως τοῦ Χριστοῦ τὰ ἄλλαξε αὐτά. Στὰ δικά του μάτια ὅλες oi ψυχὲς ἦταν ἴσες ἀσχέτως ἐξωτερικῶν διαφορῶν φυλῆς, χρώματος, ἡλικίας, θέσεως, φύλου. Οἱ γυναῖκες ἦταν ἀπὸ τοὺς πρώτους καὶ πιὸ ἀφοσιωμένους ἀκόλουθους τοῦ Χριστοῦ. Οἱ γυναῖκες ποτὲ δὲν ἐγκατέλειψαν τὸν Χριστό. Στὸν Χριστιανισμὸ ὑπάρχουν μερικὲς γυναῖκες Ἁγίες ποὺ τιμοῦνται ὡς «Ἰσαπόστολοι». Ἔρχονται ἀμέσως στὸ μυαλὸ τὰ ὀνόματα τῶν Ἁγίων Μαρίας Μαγδαληνῆς, Θέκλας, Ἑλένης κλπ. Ὁ Χριστὸς λοιπὸν ἄνοιξε ἕνα ἄλλο κόσμο. Ἡ ζωὴ ἀφιερώθηκε στὸν Θεό, γεμάτη σημασία καὶ νόημα. Στοὺς πρώτους μετὰ Χριστὸν αἰῶνες, οἱ χριστιανοὶ ἀνεχώρησαν πνευματικὰ καὶ σωματικὰ στὶς κατακόμβες.

Οἱ σημερινὲς γυναῖκες μποροῦν νὰ πάρουν πνευματικὴ δύναμη μὲ τὸ νὰ μιμηθοῦν τὴν πνευματικὴ ζωὴ στὶς παλιὲς κατακόμβες.

Αὐτὸ θὰ τις προετοιμάσει γιὰ τὶς ὑλικὲς κατακόμβες ποὺ εἶναι ἀποτέλεσμα τῆς ἀναβίωσης τῆς εἰδωλολατρείας στὴν σημερινὴ κοινωνία.

Τὸ πνεῦμα τῶν κατακομβῶν ἦταν μία ζωὴ ὁλοκληρωτικὰ ἀφιερωμένη στὸν Θεό, ποὺ βρῆκε τὴν ἔκφρασή της στὸν λειτουργικὸ κύκλο τῶν ἀκολουθιῶν ποὺ γινόταν κατὰ τὴν διάρκεια τῆς ἡμέρας καὶ τῆς νύχτας.

Τρέφονταν ἐπιπλέον ἀπὸ τὴν ζωὴ τῶν μαρτύρων ποὺ ἦταν τότε μία ζωντανὴ πραγματικότητα. Σὲ ἕνα κόσμο ποὺ μισοῦσε τὸν Χριστὸ οἱ ἁμαρτωλοὶ βρῆκαν ἐλπίδα στὸ νὰ ζοῦν καὶ νὰ πεθαίνουν γιὰ τὸν Χριστό. Αὐτὴ ἡ ἀτμόσφαιρα ποὺ ἐνέπνεε μιὰ ζωὴ ὄχι ἀνάλογη μὲ τὸ κοσμικὸ ρεῦμα ἔχει χαθεῖ σήμερα. Ὅταν ἐλευθερώθηκε ὁ Χριστιανισμὸς μετὰ τὸ Διάταγμα τῶν Μεδιολάνων τὸ 311 μ.Χ. οἱ χριστιανοὶ ἄφησαν τὶς κατακόμβες ἀλλὰ μαζὶ ἔχασαν τὸν φόβο τοῦ Θεοῦ καὶ χαλάρωσαν στὴν πνευματικὴ ζωή.

Αὐτοὶ ποὺ χρειάζονταν τὸν Θεὸ πήγαιναν στὴν ἔρημο νὰ ζήσουν μιὰν ἐν Χριστῷ ζωὴ χωρὶς περισπασμούς.

Περίπου τὸν ἴδιο καιρὸ ἄρχισε ἡ αἵρεση τοῦ χιλιασμοῦ.

Σύμφωνα μὲ αὐτὴ τὴν αἵρεση (ἀκόμη καὶ σήμερα ὑπάρχει) θὰ ὑπάρξει μία χιλιετὴς – στὴν κυριολεξία – βασιλεία τοῦ Χριστοῦ πάνω στὴν γῆ.

Οἱ χιλιαστὲς εἶναι ἀνίκανοι νὰ καταλάβουν τὴν ἰδέα πὼς ἡ βασιλεία τοῦ Χριστοῦ, μία πνευματικὴ βασιλεία, εἶναι ἤδη ἐδῶ μέσα σὲ κάθε πιστό. (Τὰ χίλια χρόνια εἶναι ὁ καιρὸς τώρα ὅταν ἡ Χάρις τοῦ Θεοῦ χύνεται φανερὰ στὸν κόσμο μέσα ἀπὸ τὰ σωτήρια μυστήρια τῆς Ἐκκλησίας τοῦ Χριστοῦ πάνω στὴν γῆ).

Ἐγίναμε γιὰ τὸν Θεό, γιὰ νὰ γίνουμε κοσμήματα λάμποντας ἀπὸ πνευματικὴ λάμψη στὸν οὐρανό, ἀφοῦ στιλβωθοῦμε μὲ τοὺς ἀγῶνες μας σ’ αὐτὴ τὴν ζωή.

Ἕνας βασικὸς τρόπος γιὰ νὰ πετύχουμε αὐτὸ τὸ στίλβωμα εἶναι μέσῳ τοῦ ἀσκητισμοῦ (πειθαρχίας) βασισμένου πάνω στὴν ἀγάπη γιὰ τὸν Θεό. Αὐτὴ εἶναι ἡ βάση γιὰ χριστιανικὴ ζωή. Στὸ σύγχρονο κόσμο οἱ στόχοι μας καὶ οἱ φιλοδοξίες μας ὡς Ὀρθόδοξων Χριστιανῶν πρέπει νὰ εἶναι οἱ ἴδιοι ὅπως τῶν πρώτων χριστιανῶν στοὺς χρόνους τῶν Κατακομβῶν.

Ὅταν ὑπάρχει πραγματικὸς διωγμὸς οἱ χριστιανοὶ ζοῦν σὲ πνευματικὲς καὶ κάποτε ὑλικὲς κατακόμβες.

Ἔτσι ἡ σύζυγος ἑνὸς ἱερέα ἦταν σὲ θέση νὰ προσφέρει παραπάνω γιὰ τοὺς ἀνθρώπους παρὰ ὁ ἴδιος ὁ ἱερέας ποὺ ἔπρεπε νὰ ζεῖ κρυμμένος. Αὐτὴ βοηθοῦσε τοὺς φτωχούς, τοὺς προετοίμαζε νὰ συναντηθοῦν μὲ τὸν ἱερέα καὶ γενικὰ ὀργάνωνε τὴν ἐνορία οὕτως ὥστε οἱ ἄνθρωποι νὰ ἔχουν εὐκολία στὸ νὰ πλησιάσουν τὰ Μυστήρια καὶ τὴν πνευματικὴ καθοδήγηση ὅσο ἦταν δυνατό. Στὸν Δυτικὸ κόσμο ὅπως καὶ κάτω ἀπὸ τὸν Κομμουνισμὸ ὁ καθένας διψᾶ γιὰ τὸν Θεὸ καὶ πρέπει ὅλοι νὰ προσφέρουμε αὐτὸ ποὺ μποροῦμε. Πρέπει νὰ βροῦμε μιὰ φιλοσοφία τῆς ζωῆς γιὰ νὰ ἀντιμετωπίσουμε τὴν σημερινὴ νεο-ειδωλολατρία ποὺ δὲν μπορεῖ νὰ μᾶς προσφέρει συγκεκριμένες ἀπαντήσεις ἤ ἕνα ἀληθινὸ σύστημα ἀξιῶν.

Οἱ Χριστιανοὶ δὲν πρέπει νὰ ντρέπονται γιὰ τὸ παρελθόν τους καὶ τὶς ἀξίες τους. Ἰδιαιτέρως δέ, δὲν πρέπει νὰ συμβαδίζουν μὲ τὸν μοντέρνο κόσμο καὶ τὴν ἐξάρτησή του ἀπὸ τὴν ἀνθρώπινη λογική.

Ἔτσι τὸ πρωταρχικὸν καθῆκον μιᾶς Χριστιανῆς μητέρας εἶναι νὰ σώσει τὰ παιδιά της ἀπὸ τὸν κοσμοκράτορα Διάβολο.

Τὸ πνεῦμα τῆς ἐποχῆς δὲν εἶναι τυχαῖο. Ὁ Διάβολος ἐμπνέει μόδες, γοῦστα καὶ φαντασιοπληξίες τόσο στὴν καθημερινὴ ζωὴ ὅσο καὶ στὸν «διανοούμενο» κόσμο.

Ἐπιπλέον ὁ Χριστιανισμὸς πεθαίνει σὰν πολιτιστικὴ βάση τῆς κοινωνίας μας. Τώρα εἴμαστε περικυκλωμένοι ἀπὸ ἕνα νεοειδωλολατρισμὸ πολὺ χειρότερο ἀπὸ αὐτὸν τοῦ παρελθόντος, διότι τώρα ὑπάρχει μία συνειδητὴ ἀπομάκρυνση ἀπὸ τὸν Χριστό. Ἀκόμη καὶ τὰ σχολεῖα ἔχουν ἐπηρεασθεῖ. Προσπαθοῦν νὰ διώξουν τὶς Χριστιανικὲς ἰδέες ἐνῶ ἀντιθέτως προωθοῦν τὸν χιλιασμό, τὴν ἰδέα ὅτι ὁ ἄνθρωπος εἶναι βασικὰ καλός. Γιὰ νὰ μεγαλώσει τὸ πρόβλημα οἱ γονεῖς δὲν εἶναι βαθειὰ ριζωμένοι στὴν Ὀρθοδοξία καὶ δὲν ἀπορροφοῦν δύναμη ἀπὸ Ὀρθόδοξες πηγές. Εἴμαστε στὸ ἔλεος τῶν δαιμόνων τοῦ σύγχρονου κόσμου διότι δὲν ζοῦμε μία συνειδητὴ Ὀρθόδοξη ζωή. Οἱ προσύλητοι ὑπόκεινται σὲ ἰδιαίτερους πειρασμούς. Μερικοὶ νομίζουν ὅτι ἀπὸ τὴν στιγμὴ ποὺ βαπτίζονται ἀποκτοῦν αὐτόματα ἁγιότητα καὶ εἶναι ἔκτοτε «ἀμόλυντοι». Ἄλλοι χρησιμοποιοῦν τοὺς πνευματικοὺς πατέρες γιὰ νὰ «ἀναβοσβήνουν» τὴν πνευματικότητά τους μέσῳ μιᾶς τυφλῆς ὑπακοῆς. Ἄλλοι ἀκόμη, ἀρχίζουν νὰ ἀποστατοῦν καὶ νὰ ἀποθαρρύνονται μὲ τὴν πνευματική τους προοδο μπορεῖ μάλιστα νὰ χάσουν κάθε ἐνδιαφέρον. Ἄλλοι γυρίζουν στὸν ἐθνικισμὸ σὰν ἕνα ὑποκατάστατο τοῦ πνευματικοῦ ἀγώνα. Γιὰ νὰ τὰ ἀντιμετωπίσουμε ὅλα αὐτὰ πρέπει νὰ γίνουμε ἀνεξάρτητοι Χριστιανοί. Μὲ αὐτὸ δὲν ἐννοοῦμε ἀνεξαρτησία ἀπὸ τὴν Ἐκκλησία, ἀλλὰ μᾶλλον μιὰ προσωπικὴ εὐθύνη καὶ ἀποφασιστικότητα νὰ ζήσουμε Ὀρθόδοξη Χριστανικὴ ζωὴ ὅσο ἀκριβὰ καὶ ἐὰν αὐτὸ κοστίσει.

Αὐτὸ εἶναι πολὺ σημαντικὸ διότι στὸ μέλλον ὅλες οἱ ὀργανωμένες ἐκκλησίες καὶ τὰ ἐπίσημα σχολεῖα θὰ ὑπηρετοῦν τὸν Ἀντίχριστο. Ἐν τούτοις ὀ,τιδήποτε καὶ ἐὰν συμβεῖ ἀνήκουμε στὸν Χριστὸ καὶ αὐτὴ εἶναι ἡ χαρὰ τῆς ὑπάρξεώς μας. Καὶ ἔτσι ἐρχόμαστε στὸ θέμα τῆς φιλοσοφίας μιᾶς Ὀρθόδοξης γυναίκας καὶ τοῦ σκοποῦ τῆς ζωῆς της στὸν κόσμο.

Πρῶτα πρέπει νὰ θυμηθοῦμε πὼς ὁ γάμος ὅπως τὸν ξέρουμε εἶναι ἀποτέλεσμα τῆς πτώσεως τοῦ ἀνθρώπου. Πρὶν τὴν πτώση δὲν ὑπῆρχε διαφθορὰ ἤ θάνατος. Μετὰ τὴν πτώση ὁ ἄνδρας διατάχθηκε νὰ καλλιεργεῖ τὴν γῆ γιὰ τὴν τροφή του καὶ στὴ γυναίκα τέθηκε τὸ φορτίο νὰ γεννᾶ παιδιὰ μὲ «θλίψη καὶ πόνο».

Δὲν μποροῦμε νὰ ξέρουμε τώρα τὸ ἀρχικὸ σχέδιο τοῦ Θεοῦ γιὰ νὰ οἰκήσει τὴν γῆ, ἀλλὰ οἱ Ἅγιοι Πατέρες μᾶς λέγουν πὼς δὲν θὰ ἦταν μὲ τὴν γεννητικὴ πράξη.

Ὁ μεγάλος σκοπὸς τοῦ γάμου ἦταν νὰ φέρουν στὸν κόσμο παιδιὰ ποὺ φέρουν τὴν εἰκόνα τοῦ Θεοῦ. Ἔτσι ὁ οἰκογενειακὸς προγραμματισμὸς γιὰ ὑλικοὺς καὶ ἐγωιστικοὺς σκοποὺς εἶναι ἀντιχριστιανικός. Στὸν ἁγιασμὸ τοῦ γάμου ἡ Ἐκκλησία καλεῖ τὸ ζεῦγος νὰ γίνει «μία σάρξ». Συνεπῶς ὁ ἕνας δὲν θὰ πρέπει νὰ ἐπιβάλλει τὴν δύναμή του πάνω στὸν ἄλλον. Γι’ αὐτὸ ὁ γάμος γίνεται μέσον γιὰ τὴν ἐπίτευξη τῆς σωτηρίας. Καθὼς οἱ ἄνθρωποι βρίσκουν εὐχαρίστηση στὴν ἐρωτικὴ πράξη, τὸ φυσικὸ ἀποτέλεσμα εἶναι τὰ παιδιά. Ἔτσι ἐπίσης ἡ Ἐκκλησία μᾶς διδάσκει νὰ περιορίζουμε τὶς γενετήσιές μας ὁρμὲς καθὼς ἐπίσης καὶ τὴν λαιμαργία μας. Ἡ κοινὴ ἰδέα σήμερα τοῦ νὰ μὴν ἀποχτοῦν παιδιὰ εἶναι ἀποτέλεσμα τῆς φιληδονίας καὶ τῆς φιλαυτίας. Τὸ νὰ ἀποφασίσεις νὰ ἀπολαύσεις τὴν ἐρωτικὴ πράξη καὶ μὲ τεχνητὸ τρόπο νὰ σχεδιάσεις νὰ μὴν ἀποχτήσεις καθόλου παιδιά, εἶναι τὸ νὰ κάνεις τὴν ἐρωτικὴ πράξη μία θυσία στὸν διάβολο. Ἀκόμη προδίδει μία ἔλλειψη ἀγάπης καὶ ἐμπιστοσύνης στὸν Θεό.

Ὁ γάμος δὲν γίνεται – ὅπως τόσο συχνὰ νομίζεται – γιὰ τὴν εὐτυχία τῶν συζύγων καὶ τῆς οἰκογενείας, ἀλλὰ γιὰ τὴν σωτηρία τῶν ψυχῶν τους καὶ τὴν ἀνατροφὴ τῶν παιδιῶν τους στὴν ἁγιότητα.

Ἡ τελετὴ τοῦ γάμου μᾶς προσφέρει ἕνα ἐξυψωμένο ἰδανικὸ διότι ἡ μητρότητα σύμφωνα μὲ τὴν φύση δὲν εἶναι ἁγία, ἀλλὰ γίνεται μόνο ὅταν ἡ μητέρα ἀγωνίζεται νὰ ἀναθρέψει τὰ παιδιά της μὲ ἀγάπη καὶ φόβο Θεοῦ. Ἀφοῦ οἱ Προτεστάντες στεροῦνται ἐνεργοῦ ἐκδήλωσης ἀγάπης στὶς σχέσεις τους, πολλοὶ ἄνθρωποι – ἰδίως ἄνδρες -ντρέπονται νὰ ἐκδηλώσουν τὴν ἀγάπη τους γιὰ τοὺς γιούς τους. Ἕνας πατέρας πρέπει νὰ ἐπέμβει κατὰ τὴν ἐφηβεία τοῦ γιοῦ του γιὰ νὰ ἀποτρέψει αὐτὴ τὴ στέρηση ἀγάπης. Αὐτὸ ἐπίσης εἶναι μεγάλης σημασίας γιὰ τὶς κόρες διότι θὰ μεγαλώσουν καὶ θὰ δώσουν ζωὴ καὶ θὰ πρέπει νὰ εἶναι ἐφοδιασμένες γιὰ νὰ ἐμφυσήσουν ἁγιότητα στὰ παιδιά τους καὶ νὰ τοὺς ἐμπνεύσουν ἀγάπη γιὰ τὸν Θεό. Ἂν δὲν ἀγαπηθοῦν τὰ παιδιὰ ἀπὸ τὴν σύλληψή τους θὰ εἶναι πάντα πεινασμένα γιὰ ἀγάπη. Τὸ διαζύγιο εἶναι ἐπίσης ἀποτέλεσμα τῆς αἱρέσεως τοῦ χιλιασμοῦ – ἡ ἰδέα ὅτι μπορεῖ νὰ τελειοποιηθεῖ ἡ ζωὴ πάνω στὴν γῆ. Ἔτσι οἱ ἄνθρωποι ἀναζητοῦν «εὐτυχία» καὶ «ἀγάπη» στὸν γάμο, ἀλλὰ δὲν μποροῦν νὰ τὴν βροῦν διότι αὐτὸ ποὺ ἀναζητοῦν εἶναι μία γήινη ἀγάπη. Τέλος τὸ νὰ διαλέξει ἕνας νὰ μὴν παντρευτεῖ μπορεῖ νὰ συνδέεται μὲ τὸν ἐγωισμό. Ὁ Μοναχισμὸς εἶναι μία πολὺ ὑψηλὴ κλήση διότι εἶναι τὸ νὰ ζεῖς γιὰ τὸ Θεό. Αὐτὸ δὲν σημαίνει ὅτι ὅλοι ποὺ δὲν παντρεύονται ἤ εἰσέρχονται στὴν μοναχικὴ ζωὴ ζοῦν ἀντίθετα μὲ τὸ θέλημα τοῦ Θεοῦ. Ἀλλὰ τέτοιοι ἄνθρωποι πρέπει νὰ ἔχουν ἰδιαιτέρως ὑπ’ ὄψιν ὅτι προσπαθοῦν νὰ ζήσουν ὄχι γιὰ τὸν ἑαυτὸ τους ἀλλὰ γιὰ τὸν Θεό. Ἔτσι ἡ ἐκλογὴ τοῦ δρόμου τῆς ζωῆς πρέπει νὰ ὑπαγορεύεται ἀπὸ κίνητρο τοῦ πῶς νὰ εὐχαριστήσουν τὸν Θεὸ παρὰ τὸν ἑαυτό τους. Πραγματικὰ ὅλοι μας πρέπει νὰ ἀφιερώσουμε τὴν ζωή μας στὸν Θεό. Καὶ μέσω τῆς ζωῆς μας πρέπει νὰ ἀγωνιζόμαστε νὰ ἀγαποῦμε τὸν Θεό μας καὶ νὰ ἐκτελοῦμε τὸ θέλημά Του μέσα στοὺς ἀνθρώπους. Ἡ φιλοσοφία τῆς ζωῆς μας πρέπει νὰ εἶναι βασισμένη στὴν ταπείνωση καὶ στὴν παραδοχὴ τοῦ γεγονότος ὅτι δὲν μποροῦμε νὰ τὰ ξέρουμε ὅλα. Παρὰ τὴν ὑπόσχεση τοῦ ὄφεως δὲν μποροῦμε «νὰ γίνουμε Θεοί».

Ἡ δυστυχία ξεκινᾶ ἀπὸ τὴν ἀπουσία τοῦ Θεοῦ. Τὸ καθῆκον καὶ ἡ χαρὰ μας εἶναι νὰ ἀγαποῦμε τὸν Θεὸ ὑπεράνω ὅλων, νὰ μετανοοῦμε καὶ νὰ ἀγωνιζόμαστε κατὰ τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν μας γιὰ νὰ ζοῦμε μία ζωὴ σύμφωνα μὲ τὸν Χριστό. Διότι ἐὰν ὁ κόσμος δημιουργήθηκε γιὰ τὸν ἄνθρωπο, ὁ ἄνθρωπος δημιουργήθηκε γιὰ τὸν Θεὸ -γιὰ νὰ ἀποκτήσει θέα κάποιου ἄλλου κόσμου – ποὺ ἡ ὀμορφιὰ του ἀντικατοπτρίζεται στὴν ἁγία Ὀρθοδοξία.

Joung S. (Ὀρθόδοξη Μοναχή)

Μετάφραση: Τάσος Τελεβάντος, Βιοχημικὸς

ΠΗΓΗ-agiazoni.gr

St. Gregory the Theologian’s Advice to a New Bride

We are in Constantinople, in 384 AD. There is a festive event taking place: the wedding of two well-known youths of that time. They are both from upper class families.

The bride, Olympiatha, is a remarkable young lady, quite wealthy and a descendant of the imperial family. She is an orphan whose uncle Prokopios (an eparch of the Imperial State that is also her protector) undertook the responsibility for all of the wedding arrangements, including the invitation list. Olympiatha is marrying a wonderful man by the name of Nevrithios who is the eparch of Constantinople and overseer of the imperial fields.

According to the historians of that time, all of the “who is who” are in attendance of the wedding ceremony, including a sizeable group of bishops. St. Gregory the Theologian (the Patriarch of Constantinople and spiritual father of the bride) is unable to be present due to personal illness. He sent a personal letter to Prokopios expressing his regrets for being unable to attend due to illness. As the spiritual father of Olympiatha, he is pleased about the wedding and passes in writing his immense joy about the wedding of the “golden Olympiatha.” He calls her golden not because of her immense family wealth but rather her golden heart that is evident in the bride’s character and demeanor. In his letter, St. Gregory refers to her as “my child,” i.e., my spiritual child; as such, he is in position to know the depth of her character and quality of her soul as no one else.

Within his letter to Prokopios, he writes that “I am next to you, celebrating the event, and with you I place the right hand of the one youth upon the right hand of the other and then both of them upon the hand of God.”

Later on, St. Gregory sends to the young bride an original wedding gift: a poem with 111 verses, written in ancient Greek and with quite old-fashioned language (even for that time). Through this gift, he passes to his spiritual daughter the wisdom of pertinent advice and thus paints the ideal type of an Orthodox Christian wife. The poem is being translated in open format, and I pray that the saint forgives this transgression for taking such freedom with his wise writings.

† † †

My daughter,

For your wedding, I, your spiritual father Gregory, offer you this poem as a gift. And I consider it to be the best possible advice a father could offer to his beloved daughter.

Listen to me Olympiatha: I know that you desire to be a true Christian. As such, be aware that a true Christian must not only be one but she must also appear accordingly. This is why I ask you to pay special attention towards your personal appearance. You must be simple! Gold, attached to precious stones, does not add any value to women of your stature. This is even more so with make-up. It is very improper for you to alter your face, which represents an image of God, for the sole purpose of attraction and admiration by others. Know that this constitutes vanity that is unbecoming of a young lady of your character. I therefore ask that you overcome the feminine vanity that is abundant among young ladies of our time and remain simple in your appearance. The expensive and fancy dresses must remain for those women that have no desire for the life beyond and do not know what the meaning of spiritual struggle and attainment of virtues is all about; this type of woman cannot possibly comprehend the spiritual radiance and brilliance of a life in Christ. You have aimed towards greater goals and for a higher purpose for your life. These goals demands your full and undivided attentiveness and care.

First of all, you must respect and love God and immediately after Him you must respect and love your husband in the same manner as our Lord and Savior and in accordance with the instructions of our Holy Gospel. I thus ask you, how is it possible for a woman to love her husband in this manner if she has not met, has not respected and has not loved Her Lord and Creator in this same manner?

In your marriage, fondness, affection and love must be strong and persistent for him whom God has selected to be your life partner. This man is now the eye of your life and the delight of your heart. And if you ever perceive that your husband possibly loves you more than you love him, do not take advantage of his feeling by attempting to gain the upper had in your marriage. That is plainly wrong as it is totally against the writings of the Holy Gospel!

You must respect him and love him unconditionally, as you love God. Be aware that you are a woman and you have an important and great purpose and destiny; however, your purpose and destiny is different than that of your husband who must be the head of your household. Set aside the silliness of equality among the sexes, that some of your contemporaries preach, and attempt to comprehend the obligations of marriage. In the realization of these obligations you will discover the great patience and endurance that is necessary to fulfill your family duties; it is in this manner that you will also discover the great strength that you as a woman possess.

You must surely be aware of how easily anger overtakes men. They cannot maintain and they often appear as wild lions. It is at this exact moment that a woman must remain stronger and display her superiority. You must play the role of the lion-tamer. What does a lion-tamer do when the beast starts roaring? He becomes even calmer than usual and through kindness and persistence he overcomes his wrath. He speaks to him kindly, in a soft but firm voice, he caresses it, he attends to it, he pets it and little by little calmness is restored.

You must never criticize, scold or become derogatory towards your husband for something that he has erred. Likewise, you must avoid any contempt towards any inaction or indecision by your husband, even when the outcome is not favorable or something that you greatly desire or consider proper. Be aware that demons are always around attempting to penetrate your household, and break up the couple’s harmonious spiritual cohabitation.

You must share everything, joys and sorrows alike. The Holy Sacrament of Marriage has indeed made all common to both of you. This is equally important towards the daily obligations and duties as they apply to running the household; it is the only way that a strong foundation will be built for your marriage. Let both of you provide your views and opinions; in the end, however, allow your husband to have the final say.

When you observe your husband to be sorrowful, share in his sorrow and provide him the needed relief; the support of the person closest to you in moments of sorrow and despair is of great value and relief. Immediately, however, let your facial expressions become calm, clear and collected; let peace prevail upon your demeanor and forego the temptation of any thoughts of despair. The wife is the calm harbor for the sea wave-stricken husband.

Your presence within your home is irreplaceable; you must accordingly love your home with all the cares and concern of a dedicated housekeeper. You must view it and consider it as your kingdom and you should be judicious about how often you exit its entrance. Let your husband take care of many of the outside cares and obligations while you concentrate towards those within the home.

Be extremely careful with whom you associate and the company that you keep. Be especially careful of the social gatherings that you may be participating in. Do not allow yourself to enter entertainment centers of questionable background; these represent extreme danger towards your purity and the sanctity of your marriage. These types of social interactions remove the instinct of shame, eyes cross with eyes, and once shame is not there to guard from any impropriety, the demons are able to exercise their influence and give rise to evils of unspeakable magnitude.

On the other hand, social interactions with friends of substance and of firmly grounded spiritual state must be pursued. In this manner, words of value get implanted within you and you either benefit from them or are able to confront and resolve any weaknesses that you may recognize. Concurrently, you are able to cultivate social interests and get to know people who will benefit your household’s spiritual state.

Do not be anxious to keep company or even appear in public and in the company of others for no reason. You should instead dedicate your precious time in the company of your wiser and more prudent relatives, priests, and seriously-minded people, young and old alike.

Stay away from conceited and ostentatious women whose mind is pre-occupied with external appearances and social circles, all for the purpose of vainglory and public display. This should be the same for any men that you consider respectful and spiritual but whom your husband has not allowed to enter your home, irrespective of how highly you may regard them. For is there anything more precious for you than your good husband whom you love so dearly?

Your thoughts must aim high but you must never behave as intolerable or snobbish.

I applaud women that are known by only a few men. Do not run towards worldly feasts and celebrations, even when those are for weddings or birthdays. It is around those types of gatherings that the passions of the flesh are aroused with the many dances, the drinking, the laughter and the false joys that are capable of deceiving and misleading even the pure and the wise. Always remember that purity is extremely fragile—it is like bee wax exposed to the rays of the sun. It would be prudent to limit and at times avoid the worldly feasts, even within the confines of your own home. If we were capable of controlling the desires and many appetites of the stomach we would be well served in our struggles against the many passions of our flesh; we would be in a position to conquer them instead of being subdued by them.

Keep your face calm and collected and do not alter it with extreme laughter or with grimaces of dismay, anger or disappointment towards others. Your ears should be decorated not with pearls but instead with the sounds of proper language and with locks for all the improprieties that may enter your nous through them. Thus, whether they are open or closed your sense of hearing will remain pure.

As far as your eyes, they are the ones that display the contents of your soul. Let them be the source of blush and virgin purity that pours below your eye lashes. This way, your presence and eyesight will invoke modesty, decency and the shame of innocence to all that lay their eyes upon you, perhaps even your husband! It is best and for many reasons that you keep your eyes closed or indifferent to the events around you and you should make it a habit to always maintain your sight low.

And now for your tongue. Your husband will always be your enemy for as long as your tongue is uncontrolled, even if you are to be blessed with thousands of other talents. A foolish tongue often endangers even the most innocent of people. It is preferred to maintain quiet, even in cases that you are correct. This is because you risk the expression of an unintended improper word or characterization. No matter how greatly you desire to say a lot, it is best that you limit your words and instead choose your presence to be a quiet one.

Be attentive even of the manner that you walk; it matters greatly towards a prudent presence.

And now pay close attention and be mindful of the following advice: You must never exemplify or maintain an uncontrollable desire for the flesh. Persuade your husband to respect the holy days of the Church and the fasting periods. This is because God’s laws are of much greater importance than the image of God. Be mindful that the institution of marriage was established by the Son of God to aid His creation so that a balance is maintained, as some depart this world while others arrive.

If you have benefited from this old man through some spiritual words of value I ask that you keep these words and advice guarded well within the depths of your soul. In this manner, through everything that you have benefitted and through the grace of your moral stature, you will be capable of healing your excellent husband and well known politician from the evils of vainglory and pride that constantly surround him.

This is my gift and heirloom that I offer to you. And if you desire my blessing, I pray that you become a vineyard of descendants, with many children, and many children from these children, so that our God may be glorified by more of us, for it is for Him that we are born and to Him that we should aim our earthly paths.

Your spiritual father,

+Gregory

Patriarch of Constantinople

 Source: From the monthly publication «Ἐνοριακὰ Νέα» (“Parish News”), St. George Dionysou parish (northern Athens), translated from Greek by the staff of the Greek Orthodox Brotherhood of St. Poimen the Great.

Εάν ανομίας παρατηρήσης Κύριε, Κύριε, τις υποστήσεται;

«Αν Κύριε, εξετάσης τις ανομίες μας, ποιος θα μπορέση να σταθή μπροστά σου;». Για να μη λέγη λοιπόν κάποιος ότι, επειδή είμαι αμαρτωλός και γεμάτος από αμέτρητα κακά, δεν μπορώ να προσέλθω και να προσευχηθώ και να παρακαλώ τον Θεό, αφαιρώντας την δικαιολογία αυτή λέγει: «Αν εξετάσης τις ανομίες μας Κύριε, Κύριε, ποιος θα μπορέση να σταθή μπροστά σου;»; Το «ποιος», εδώ σημαίνει κανένας. Διότι δεν είναι δυνατό, δεν μπορεί κανένας ποτέ να επιτύχη την ευσπλαχνία και φιλανθρωπία του Θεού, αν εξετασθούν με λεπτομέρεια οι ευθύνες των πράξεών του.

Και αυτά τα λέγω όχι για να οδηγήσω τις ψυχές σας σε αδιαφορία ,αλλά για να παρηγορήσω εκείνους που πέφτουν σε απόγνωσι. Διότι ποιος θα μπορέση να καυχηθή ότι έχει αγνή καρδιά; ή ποιος θα έχη το θάρρος να πη ότι είναι καθαρός από αμαρτίες; Και γιατί αναφέρω τους άλλους; Διότι και αν ακόμη παρουσιάσω στη μέση τον Παύλο και θελήσω να κάνω ακριβή εξέτασι των πράξεών του, δεν θα μπορέση να σταθή απέναντί Του. Πράγματι, τι θα μπορούσε να πη; Μελέτησε προφήτες με πολύ ζήλο˙ υπήρξε ζηλωτής των πατρώων παραδόσεων, είδε να γίνωνται θαύματα, και όμως εξακολουθούσε να καταδιώκη την Εκκλησία˙ και δεν μεταστράφηκε παρά μόνον όταν είδε εκείνο το παράξενο όραμα και άκουσε εκείνη τη φρικτή φωνή˙ πριν από αυτό όμως όλα τα ανακάτωνε και τα συνέχεε. Αλλ’ όμως παραβλέποντας ο Θεός όλα εκείνα, και τον προσκάλεσε και τον έκανε άξιο μεγάλης χάριτος.

Τι συνέβη πάλι με τον κορυφαίο εκείνον, τον Πέτρο; δεν τον έλεγξε, όταν μετά από αμέτρητα σημεία και θαύματα και τόσο μεγάλη παραίνεσι και συμβουλή, έπεσε στο φοβερό εκείνο παράπτωμα; Αλλ’ όμως και εκείνο το παρέβλεψε και τον κατέστησε πρώτο ανάμεσα στους αποστόλους. Γι’ αυτό και έλεγε: « Σίμων, Σίμων, ο σατανάς θέλησε να σας κοσκινήση σαν το σιτάρι, εγώ όμως προσευχήθηκα για σένα, ώστε να μη σε εγκαταλείψη η πίστις σου» ( Λουκ. 22, 31-33 ). Και μετά από αυτά, αν δεν έλθη να κρίνη τους ανθρώπους με ευσπλαχνία και φιλανθρωπία, αλλά κρίνη με ακρίβεια και λεπτομέρεια , οπωσδήποτε όλους θα μας βρη υπεύθυνους. Γι’ αυτό και ο Παύλος έλεγε: «Δεν αισθάνομαι καμμία ενοχή εναντίον του εαυτού μου, αλλά αυτό δεν με κάνει να θεωρώ τον εαυτού μου δικαιωμένο» ( Α΄ Κορ. 4,4 )

(Εις τον ΡΚΘ΄ Ψαλμόν , ΕΠΕ 7, 68-76. PG 55, 373-376 )

Χρυσοστομικός Άμβων Ε΄

Η ΠΡΟΣΕΥΧΗ

Τα νεύρα της ψυχής»

Έκδοσις

Συνοδία Σπυρίδωνος Ιερομονάχου

Νέα Σκήτη Αγ. Όρους

ΙΕΡΟΣ ΝΑΟΣ ΑΓΙΟΥ ΔΗΜΗΤΡΙΟΥ ΚΟΥΒΑΡΑ

Met.Hierotheos of Nafpaktos-On the theology of freedom

 Metropolitan Hierotheos Vlachos of Nafpaktos

We can confront the topic of freedom from many angles. The first angle is the moral one, from which man's freedom is to act without being hindered by various duties. The second angle is the psychological one, from which his freedom consists in being able to make decisions without being subjected to various influences. A third angle is the philosophical one, from which freedom is the inalienable right of man, as a rational being, to think and to act. It is also possible for all the other freedoms, social, personal, national, economic, and so forth, to be put into this framework.

Those aspects of freedom will not concern us, but we are going to examine freedom from one angle, that of theology. For we shall discover that it differs greatly from the other angles, in that it is more integrated.

It must be said from the start that independence, or freedom, is an essential constituent of man. When God created man, He gave him free will, which not even He Himself violates.

In Holy Scripture it says that man was created in the image and likeness of God (Gen. 1,26). The holy Fathers have given various definitions as to just what this image is. Sometimes they refer it to man's sovereign dignity, to his superiority and his lordship over the terrestrial world, sometimes to his soul and body, sometimes to the whole man, sometimes to the ruling part of his soul, which is the nous, sometimes to his independence. All these definitions show that the holy Fathers avoid specifying one particular point which is the image, but they rather describe all the functions which express the image. In any case it is a fact that one interpretation of the image also refers to independence, which interests us here.

John of Damaskos' interpretation concerning the image is characteristic. He says that God formed the body from the earth and "by His own inbreathing gave him a rational and noetic soul, which last we say is the divine image". Extending this interpretation he says: "for 'in His image' means the nous and free will, while 'in His likeness' means such likeness in virtue as is possible". Thus 'in the image' refers chiefly to the noetic and independent. In what is to be said below we shall mostly interpret independence, freedom, because there are many misinterpretations on this subject. We shall emphasize some essential points. 

a) The relativity of human freedom

 

 Man as a creature, as created by God, has absolute freedom within its relativity. With his freedom he can even turn against his creator, but this freedom is relative. This is because man is not uncreated, but created, which means that he was created by God and therefore has a beginning.

Archimandrite Sophrony observes: "Absolute freedom means being able to determine one's being on all levels, independently, without constraint or limit in any form. This is the freedom of God - man does not have it", for he has not the authority to create "out of nought".

The ultimate temptation for the freedom of man (and in general of subsistent spirits) "is to fashion his own being, determine himself in all things, become a god himself, and not just take what is given, because that would entail a feeling of dependence".

Thus man does not have absolute freedom by his biological birth. But he can acquire absolute freedom by his rebirth and experiencing Christ's life, as we shall explain in the next section. 

b) The challenge of freedom

 

 

The preceding also leads us to another parallel conclusion, that what is given to man by his existence is a challenge for freedom. True freedom is not just the choice of an event, but the possibility of a self-determined existence.

It has been observed very correctly that: "The ultimate challenge to the freedom of the person is the 'necessity' of existence. The moral sense of freedom, to which Western philosophy has accustomed us, is satisfied with the simple power of choice: a man is free who is able to choose one of the possibilities set before him. But this 'freedom' is already bound by the 'necessity' of these possibilities, and the ultimate and most binding of these 'necessities' for man is his existence itself: How can a man be considered absolutely free when he cannot do other than accept his existence?" Therefore man "as a created being cannot escape the 'necessity' of his existence".

In this light we can interpret an agonising existential question of many contemporary young people: "Why did my parents give birth to me without asking me? Why should I come into existence without being asked?" To be sure, before someone came into existence there was no one to be asked, but in any case this is a question which shows that the greatest challenge for freedom is the fact of existence and the fact that therefore man has to do something in order to be given the possibility of determining a new birth for himself.

Incidentally it should be pointed out that in the opinion of some, the embryo in its mother's womb is asked if it wishes to come to life. And the miscarriage of many embryos is interpreted as their refusal to be born. Thus in a way their existential freedom is preserved. We cannot judge this view from the patristic point of view, because the holy Fathers have not expressed themselves on this matter, at least as far as I know. 

c) Freedom and fall

 

 

The freedom of man before the fall somehow worked differently from that which works today. Freedom as we know it in the period after the fall, after the victory of sin and the passions, after the illness which came into the whole human race as a consequence of Adam's sin, after the decay of communities and institutions, is receiving dreadful effects and it requires great pains in order to express it in a positive way. In the life before the fall there was the possibility of positive or negative response to the will of God, but that was different from freedom as we live it today. In other words, today we suffer terrible pressures and effects, and therefore it is with great labour and struggle that we make decisions about doing something, while in man's original life this labour and struggle did not exist.

We should further point out that man's freedom even to sin and to withdraw from his Creator was a sign not of perfection but of imperfection. For his vacillation about what to do, instead of being stimulated by love and freedom towards the purpose of creation, the lack of impetus in man towards his archetype, shows a weakness and imperfection. Man should naturally be led towards the good. St. Maximos the e Confessor, interpreting the request of Christ's prayer "Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven" says that he who impels his rational power towards God and worships him mystically becomes a participant in the angels' worship of God. In this case the words of the Apostle Paul apply: "For our citizenship is in heaven". Among these men desire does not sap their powers through sensual pleasure, "but there is only the intelligence naturally leading intelligent beings towards the source of intelligence, the Logos Himself". The perfection of man's freedom lies in his turning naturally towards his archetype. 

d) Natural will and will based on opinion

 

 

While speaking of man's independence, I think that something must also be said about Christ's independence. St. John of Damaskos speaks "about the wills and independence of our Lord Jesus Christ". It is the subject of a dogma which shows us true freedom, how the two wills in Christ work and also how the saints too, who are united with Christ, can experience true freedom.

There is a difference between 'willing' and 'how one wills'. To will is a work of nature, just as seeing is, since in all men there is willing. However, 'how one wills' is not of nature, "but of our opinion", just as how to see well or badly is also a matter of the particular opinion and freedom of each man. The "willing" is called will and "natural will", "how one wills" which is subject to the will, is called "will based on opinion".

Through His incarnation Christ assumed human nature, wholly without sin. Thus in His hypostasis the divine was united immutably, inseparably, indivisibly with human nature. Since Christ had two natures, therefore "we say that his natural wills and natural energies were two". But since the hypostasis is one, therefore "also we call one and the same both his willing and his doing". And Christ wills and acts not in a divided way but in unison; for He wills and "each form acts in communion with the other". It is one who acts, but in any case He has two natural energies and wills which do not act separately, but each single energy works in communion with the other. In any case "we call the wills and the actions natural and not hypostatic".

We have said that in each person there is the natural will and the will based on opinion. Christ had two natural wills, which worked "in communion with each other", but he did not have a will based on opinion. The will based on opinion is that of option, which is expressed after judgement, thought, dissent and decision. There was none of this in Christ. Therefore St. John of Damaskos says characteristically: "It is impossible to speak of opinion and option in Christ, if we want to speak literally". Opinion is a fruit and result of seeking and will and judgement about the unknown. After the opinion is formed, the option prefers one or the other. But Christ was not simply a man, but also God who knew everything, and therefore "he was unhesitating in thought and seeking and will and judgement, and naturally he was at home with the good, and evil was alien". Christ's will was naturally guided to doing good and to withdrawal from evil. This is why as God He never sinned, nor did He have any possibility to sin. What the human will desired did come about in the Person of Christ "not in contradiction of opinion but in identity of natures". This means that "He wished these things naturally, at the time when His divine will wished and allowed the flesh to suffer and do the same things". Thus in Christ there was not dissent, wavering, inner conflict when there was something to be done.

Christ, being God and man, naturally had "a will", but He did not have the will based on opinion, as we said before. His human will "yielded and submitted to His divine will without being moved by his own opinion, but willing those things which his divine will wanted it to will".

Each will of Christ, both the divine and the human, willed and moved independently. For in every intelligent nature there is independence. How was it possible to have intelligence and not to have independence? So Christ's soul "was independent in his willing and wanted to moved independently", "but wanted those things independently which His divine will wanted it to will". Thus the two wills in Christ differed not in opinion, but in natural power: the divine will was without beginning, accomplishing all things, therefore having power and dispassion; His human will began in time, suffered natural and blameless passions and, while naturally it was not all-powerful, still, since it had been assumed truly and naturally by God the Word, that is why He was all-powerful.

All these things indicate that since in Christ there were two natures there were also two wills. Likewise his independence, which is closely connected with his human nature, acted naturally towards the good, following the divine will. 

e) The freedom of the saints

 

What has been said is needed in order for us to understand the limits of human freedom and also to understand how freedom, independence functions in the saints. As we shall see in what follows, the saint's independent will, precisely because he is favoured with divine grace, always moves naturally towards the good. When I speak of a saint I mean the deified person who partakes of God's deifying energy.

The Apostle Paul offers this witness: "It is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me" (Gal. 2,11). He has the certainty that Christ lives in him, and so elsewhere too he says: "Imitate me, just as I also imitate Christ" (1 Cor. 11,1). St. Gregory Palamas, bearer of the same Revelation, interpreting this teaching of the Apostle, says: "Do you see clearly that grace is uncreated? Not only is such grace uncreated, but also the result of this sort of energy of God is uncreated; and the great Paul, no longer living the temporal life but the divine and eternal life of the indwelling word, came to be without beginning and without end by grace". And a little further on: "Paul was a created being until he lived the life which had come about by God's command; then he no longer lived this life but a life which had become indwelt by God, become uncreated by grace: and wholly possessing only the living and acting word of God".

In the Apostle's words and in the interpretation by St. Gregory Palamas, champion of the theologians, it is clear that a man who has been united with Christ, who has attained illumination and deification, by grace becomes uncreated and without beginning, because he has the living Christ within him.

And St. Maximos the Confessor, interpreting the words of the Apostle Paul that Melchizedek, who is a type of Christ, was "without father, without mother, without genealogy" (Heb. 7,3), writes: "The person who has mortified the earthly aspects of himself, thoroughly extinguishing the will of the flesh within him and repudiating the attachment to it which splits asunder the love we owe to God alone; who has disowned all the modalities of the flesh and the world for the sake of divine grace... - such a person has become, like Melchizedek, 'without father, without mother, without descent'. For because of the union with the Spirit that has taken place within him he cannot now be dominated by flesh or by nature".

Every Christian, when he is united with Christ, is deified, sanctified, and his whole being, and somehow also his freedom, which is always subject to God's will, is shown favour. In this sense we say that by His incanartion He granted us freedom. He freed us from sin, death and the devil and we enjoy this freedom in our spiritual rebirth. Nicholas Kavasilas says characteristically: "It was when He mounted the cross and died and rose again that the freedom of mankind came about, that the form and the beauty were created and the new members were prepared".

We have already seen that the challenge for freedom is the given fact of existence, and this creates an existential problem. But by rebirth in Christ, which takes place within the Church, the people overcome this existential problem. Just as great as the difference between biological birth and spiritual birth is the difference between the struggle over the fact of existence and the possibility of self-determination of the new existence. Man is born spiritually by his own will. This spiritual birth has great meaning and importance. St. Gregory the Theologian speaks of three births. The first is the biological birth from the parents, the second is through the mysteries of holy Baptism, the father of which is God, and the third is through tears, and the father of this birth is the man himself. To express ourselves through St. Maximos the Confessor, by the first birth we come into being, by the second into "well being" and by the third, which is identical with resurrection, into "ever well being"

Thus man is called to this new life, and if he responds, he is born into "ever well being", overcoming the provocation and temptation given in his existence. And since the deified person becomes "uncreated", "without beginning" and "without genealogy" - by the grace of God - for this reason he acquires a freedom which is absolute within human limits and facts. Since his freedom has an impulse towards God through love, there is no ambivalence in him, his independence functions naturally and so he becomes perfect by grace, since he has abandoned the imperfection of his nature, which is indicated by the battle for single-mindedness.

St. Symeon the New Theologian says that our self-determination, our free will, is not removed by Baptism, "but it grants us freedom no longer to be held against our will in the devil's tyranny". Baptism grants man the freedom not to be tyrannised by his desire, by the devil. After Baptism it again depends on us whether we remain self-willed towards God's commandments or we depart from this way and go back to the devil through his cunning practices.

St. Diadochos of Photike, referring to the desire for self-determination, says that independence is a desire of the rational soul, which moves readily "towards whatever it desires". Therefore he urges us to persuade it to move only towards the good. When it is moving towards the good, it is fulfilling its purpose and moving naturally.

The same saint writes that all men are formed in the image of God. "But to be in His likeness is granted only to those who through great love have brought their own freedom into subjection to God". "Only when we do not belong to ourselves do we become like Him who through love has reconciled us to Himself". From these words of the saint it can be seen that the likeness belongs to the saints who have mortified their passions and subjected their freedom to God through love. He emphasises the subjection of freedom to God, but this comes about through love. For in fact it is only then that freedom moves and functions naturally.

It can be added that "the only exercise of freedom, in an ontological manner, is love". True freedom cannot be expressed without love; it loses its ontological content. And this means "that personhood creates the following dilemma for human existence: either freedom as love, or freedom as negation".

In the saints we encounter the co-existence of love and freedom. They love God really, I could say ecstatically, and therefore their freedom, having been released from different admixtures and ailments, is directed towards God, it moves naturally. And in this way the saints are true men, what we have usually called persons.

Since, however, I do not wish to take my stand on a philosophical and theological level, which may seem abstract - although I do not think it is, for the theological position is necessary - I shall go on to present some expressions of freedom, as it is experienced in the ascetic life of the Church. One is man's freedom from death, another is the freedom of the nous from logic and the senses, and the third is man's freedom from the environment. These topics will reveal clearly the great value of freedom, as the members of our Church experience it. 

 Taken from the book "The Person in The Orthodox Tradition"By Metropolitan Hierotheos Vlachos of Nafpaktos.

«Γιά σένα σφάχτηκε ο Αμνός του Θεού καί σύ τόν αφήνεις;».

Στo προηγούμενο κήρυγμά μου, αδελφοί χριστιανοί, στήν ερμηνεία τής θείας Λειτουργίας σας είπα αυτό το βασικό: Ότι ή θεία Λειτουργία γίνεται γιά τήν θεία Κοινωνία. Η θεία Λειτουργία είναι ενα ωραίο δέντρο καί καρπός, γλυκός καρπός του δέντρου αυτού, είναι ή θεία Κοινωνία. Όλα στήν Θεία Λειτουργία έγιναν γιά να βγεί ο Ιερέας έξω κρατώντας τό Άγιο Ποτήριο καί νά πεί: «Μετά φόβου θεού, πίστεως καί αγάπης, προσέλθετε».

Αν όμως δέν προσερχόμαστε γιά νά κοινωνήσουμε, τότε τί έννοια έχουν τά όσα ωραία έγιναν γιά νά ετοιμαστεί τό θείο Τραπέζι και οί τόσες ευχές του Ιερέα πού είπε γιά τήν θεία Κοινωνία; Ξαναλέω τόν λόγο του αγίου Ιωάννου του Χρυσοστόμου, πού απευθύνει σέ εκείνους πού δέν κοινωνούν και τούς λέει: «Γιά σένα σφάχτηκε ο Αμνός του Θεού καί σύ τόν αφήνεις;». Αλλά είπαμε πάλι στό προηγούμενο μας κήρυγμα, αγαπητοί μου αδελφοί, ότι γιά νά γευθούμε τήν θεία Κοινωνία, γιά νά έχει αυτή μέσα μας τά σωστικά της απο­τελέσματα, γιά νά είναι πραγματικά «κοινωνία» μέ τόν Θεό, πρέπει νά τό προσπαθούμε νά καθαρίζουμε τήν ψυχή μας από τά αμαρτωλά πάθη. Γιατί άν ή ψυχή μας είναι ακάθαρτη, ο Θεός, είπαμε, δέν μπορεί νά ενωθεί μέ ακάθαρτο. Ώστε λοιπόν: Αυτά τά δύο, αγαπητοί μου, συνιστούν τόν σωστό ορθόδοξο χριστιανό. Πρώτον μέν ο αγώνας μας γιά νά καθαρίσουμε τήν ψυχή μας από τά βρώμικα πάθη- καί δεύτερον, νά κοινωνούμε τό Σώμα καί τό Αίμα του Χριστού, νά μετέχουμε γενικά στά ιερά Μυστήρια. Το λέγω αυτό, γιατί στήν “Εκκλησία μας εμφανίστηκαν παλαιά δύο αιρετικοί.

Ο ενας ήταν ο δυτικός Βαρλαάμ, ο οποίος τόνιζε τήν συμμετοχή στά Μυστήρια, χωρίς όμως νά έκρινε ώς αναγκαία τήν ψυχική καθαρότητα. Καί από τήν άλλη πλευρά ήταν οί αιρετικοί Μασσαλιανοί (ή Ευχίτες), οί οποίοι τόνιζαν τήν άσκητικότητα καί τήν προσευχή χωρίς όμως νά τονίζουν την θεία Κοινωνία. Αυτά τά δύο άκρα είναι αιρετικά, αλλά ο δικός μας άγιος Γρηγόριος ο Παλαμάς τά συνεδίασε καί κήρυττε: Άσκηση καί προσευχή μέ θεία Κοινωνία. Πρίν από τήν θεία Κοινωνία οπωσδήποτε πρέπει νά νηστεύουμε. Τό πόσο όμως πρέπει νά νηστεύουμε αυτό δέν καθορίζεται. Αυτό εξαρτάται από τήν υγεία του κα­θενός, από τήν ψυχική καί σωματική αντοχή του, από το πόσο συχνά κοινωνάει ή καί από άλλους παράγοντες. Όλα αυτά θά τά λάβει υπ” όψιν του ο καλός καί φω­τισμένος πνευματικός καί θά βάλει ανάλογη νηστεία στόν κάθε πιστό. Υπάρχουν νέ­οι καί νέες στήν Αθήνα, αλλά καί αλλού, οί οποίοι θέλουν νά κοινωνούν συχνά, αλλά δέν τούς αφήνει ο άθεος πατέρας τους. Καί τό καταλαβαίνει ο αθεόφοβος από την νηστεία πού θέλει νά κάνει τό παιδί του. Στήν περίπτωση αυτή ο καλός πνευματι­κός θά συμβουλέψει αυτόν τον νέο ή τήν νέα, γιά νά μήν στερηθεί την θεία Κοινω­νία καί γιά νά αποφύγει τήν ταραχή μέ τόν πατέρα του, νά νηστέψει κρυφά μόνο μι­σή μέρα, μόνο τό Σάββατο τό βράδυ, καί τήν άλλη μέρα νά πάει νά κοινωνήσει. Καί έχω ακούσει ότι καλοί πνευματικοί έτσι πράγματι ενεργούν.

Τήν θεία Κοινωνία, αδελφοί μου, πρέπει νά τήν λαμβάνουμε μέ ευλάβεια καί τάξη. Καί βέβαια έτσι πρέπει νά γίνεται, αφού πρόκειται γιά κοινωνία του Σώματος καί του Αίματος του Χριστού, πού και οί άγγελοι του ουρανού μέ πόθο καί δέος ατε­νίζουν. Όχι λοιπόν κουβέντες καί φωνές ή καί σπρωξίματα στήν θεία Κοινωνία. Ο καθένας νά στέκεται ήρεμα καί νά προσεύχεται από μέσα του μέχρις ότου έρθει ή σειρά του γιά νά κοινωνήσει. Οί Ιουδαίοι όταν έτρωγαν τόν πασχάλιο αμνό, πού προεικόνιζε τήν θεία Κοινωνία ήταν όρθιοι καί κρατούσαν ραβδί στό χέρι. Ετσι καί εμείς όταν κοινωνούμε.

Η ράβδος στήν Παλαιά Διαθήκη προτύπωνε τόν Σταυρό. Οταν λοιπόν έρχεται ή σειρά σας για να κοινωνήσετε, νά κάνετε πρώτα τόν σταυ­ρό σας νά παίρνετε έπειτα τό άγιο Μανδήλιο καί νά τό βάζετε κάτω από τό σαγό­νι σας, ώστε νά καλύπτεται μέ τό άγιο Μανδήλιο ή απόσταση του προσώπου σας από τό Άγιο Ποτήριο. Αυτό γίνεται, μήπως, εάν συμβεί καί πέσει σταγόνα του θεί­ου Αίματος από την αγία Λαβίδα — φύλαγε, Χριστέ, τήν ώρα αυτή! —, ή θεία αυτή σταγόνα νά πέσει πάνω στό άγιο Μανδήλιο καί νά μήν πέσει κάτω. Γιατί αυτό, χρι­στιανοί μου, τό νά πέσει ή θεία Κοινωνία κάτω στό δάπεδο είναι μεγάλη αμαρτία.

Κάνοντας λοιπόν τόν σταυρό σας, όταν έρθει ή σειρά σας γιά τήν θεία Κοινωνία, παίρνετε τό άγιο Μανδήλιο καί τό βάζετε κάτω από τό σαγόνι σας καί ανοίγετε κα­λά τό στόμα σας γιά νά κοινωνήσετε. Αφού κοινωνήσετε, σπογγίζετε τό στόμα σας, κάνετε πάλι τόν σταυρό σας καί παραχωρείτε τήν σειρά σας στόν επόμενο.

Σάς παρακαλώ, χριστιανοί μου, νά μάθετε τά παιδάκια νά κοινωνούν καί αυτά μέ τόν ίδιο τρόπο καί μάλιστα νά κοινωνούν μόνα τους. Δέν είναι καθόλου σωστό νά τρέ­χει ενας μεγάλος γιά νά βοηθήσει νά κοινωνήσει ένα παιδάκι του Δημοτικού Σχο­λείου. Άς αφήνουμε τά παιδάκια νά κοινωνούν μόνα τους. Εχω παρατηρήσει ότι, όταν αφήνουμε τά παιδιά νά κοινωνούν μόνα τους, κοινωνούν μιά χαρά- κοινωνούν καλύτερα από τούς μεγάλους. Ξέρω όμως ότι γιά νά τά καταφέρει νά κοινωνάει μό­νο του καί σωστά τό παιδί, χρειάζεται τήν καλή συμβουλή από την μάνα του.

Η καλή χριστιανή μητέρα θά συμβουλέψει τό παιδί της στό σπίτι από τήν προηγούμε­νη μέρα καί τό σταυρό του νά κάνει πρίν από τήν θεία Κοινωνία καί τό στόμα του καλά νά ανοίξει καί νά τό σπογγίσει καλά, όταν θά κοινωνήσει.

O Γόρτυνος Ιερεμίας

inagiounikolaoutouneou.gr