Categories: family, spiritual-writings
Date: 07 September 2008 13:09:43
A wonderful Father's [or is it Fathers'? [end pedant mode]] Day. My dad has appeared to have a wonderful day, and loved his Newtown Jet's polo shirt, and a good time was had at our family afternoon bbq. Sadly, my remaining grandmother's hearing and eye-sight is failing, which is not unexpected as she is in her 90s!, but it is hard to see it happening. Prayers appreciated for her, and for my mother, as decisions are made.
Our Spiritual Father, His Eminence Archbishop Paul of Australia, New Zealand and the Philippines, visited us today, together with his sub-deacon -- who recently graduated from Balamand Monastery in Lebanon, and who chants very well. A blessing to have them visit us, as well as a blessing having my godfather and his wife return from a six-week holiday, both quite tanned. Two parishioners whom have not been around for a while returned today also: great to see them. We had a very large Father's Day lunch: the ladies of our parish are to be continually thanked, and particularly for the wonderful dishes, and desserts!, they bring. I was able to stay behind and eat, and chat, to a number of people which was a great blessing.
As well as, attempting, to read a chapter of the Gospels each day [this is an oft-quoted recommendation for one's spiritual life among the Orthodox, and among many Orthodox Saints and writers], I am also reading St. Paul's Epistle to the Romans: A Pastoral Commentary by His Eminence Archbishop Dmitri (Royster) of Dallas and the South in the Orthodox Church in America. As an aside, the OCA has undergone some large troubles of late due to financial scandals: prayers appreciated for them.
I do love my Bible commentaries; one, I suppose, as I love learning in general; two, because it is always a blessing, and sometimes a chastisement, which may be necessary, to have the Bible opened up and explained; and three, because I do like to be continually challenged, and encouraged, as I walk this Christian path through my life. I am not generally into commentaries that go in-depth in terms of language [perhaps odd given my love of language], nor those that are too academic: I need a middle ground. I know others may look for something else, I only speak of what I need. And it is not just for my wants, but for my own sake: I constantly struggle against the temptation to know about God rather than to know God Yes, we need to learn about Him, but to me this means through a personal encounter, a personal relationship, a personal struggle; and while I write personal, as we must each one of us make our own decision to follow Christ, I believe this must also take place in the presence, where possible, of a Church community, of the Church. We cannot be a "solo" Christian.
One reason I greatly benefited from the Catholic Navarre Bibles and Commentaries were their emphasis on practical Christianity, as well as what is traditionally termed theology. Regarding "theology", as the Christian monk and ascetic Evagrius of Pontus [345-399 A.D.] wrote: "The one who prays is a theologian; the one who is a theologian, prays." They cannot be separated. I am finding a similar benefit in Archbishop Dmitri's Romans, A Pastoral Commentary. Archbishop Dmitri has also written a commentary on Hebrews which I will have to try and get after I finish this one. He writes very well, quoting from Church Fathers, and the Orthodox Church's liturgy and hymns; he also does explain, in summary form, many of the original Greek words used [I tend to skip these -- but I have read a few and find them interesting].
St Paul's Epistle to the Romans is often identified as one of the key books for the Reformation and for the Protestant Churches. With this in mind, as well as my up-bringing and early adult years in Protestant churches, I am finding it interesting to see how the Orthodox Church's belief and her explanation of Romans may differ. There are a lot of similarities, but I am also noting many differences. There are some wonderful quotes to draw upon, and I may give some of these in future blogs, both on agreements and disagreements.
For the moment though, a difficulty is perhaps not getting the answer I may want. Or not getting an answer at all to a question. In fact, the question itself is not even raised. This may seem odd, but as I attempt to live more and more in the life and teaching of the Orthodox Church, I am finding that the questions "the Western Churches" [yes, a broad brush: I pray you can see it is a generalisation for brevity's sake] may ask or have disagreements about, are often questions the Orthodox have not considered. And questions that sound very foreign at times.
This is not, I believe, because the Orthodox are not as inquisitive as those in other churches: they are. Though no doubt the fact that Orthodoxy has been in places simply struggling to survive plays its part. It is, to me, mainly that the West and the East have had very different histories. From what I understand, and please correct me if I am wrong, the East has had no Reformation or no Renaissance, at least not as the West did. Yes, the same questions can be and are often asked, but often the questions come from a stance or point-of-view foreign, in general, to Orthodoxy. And Orthodoxy may also have questions that seem strange to the West.
As an example, the faith / works question. Orthodox, at least from my experience, unless they are aware of other churches and their teachings, find this a very odd question. While, when I was an Anglican, it was a discussion many a time, for the Orthodox it traditionally has not been. It was accepted they are both important, and necessary. Faith being a type of works, the ultimate work in fact; but showing your faith in practical terms is also required [unless you confess Christ on your death bed of course and have no time for works!: God always works according to circumstances]. It is only since increased contact and dialogue with the West that Orthodox apologetics on this topic come to the fore.
Another issue is Christ's death on the Cross; growing up I was taught, in summary, it was Christ's Blood that was needed to satisfy the righteous wrath of God. This was our redemption. I have had trouble finding an Orthodox answer as Orthodoxy does not tend to take this view of the wrath of God needing blood sacrifice [from my reading: I may be wrong], so I remain a bit confused. It was such a large issue, the Issue, in my faith growing up, that I feel I need an explanation from Orthodoxy that explains this. Yet, the language of wrath and a sacrifice of Christ's Blood seems foreign to Orthodoxy. The emphasis, in a very basic form, is on Christ dying and experiencing Death, and destroying Death, the enemy, to lead us up and show us the way to eternal life. And on the shedding of His Blood, and the Water flowing from His Side, as an image of the Birth of the Church, and also the Blood of the Eucharist and the Water of Baptism. Symbolism and types play a large part in Orthodox theology.
I am hoping, praying, that as I read through and ponder this commentary, I can find out what the Orthodox questions in fact are, as well as the answers. And, that I may be granted a deeper understanding through St Paul's Epistle of the life I am called to live in Christ, and which has so abundantly and freely been given to me.