:: St. Stephen's Musings ::

:: Tuesday, December 30, 2003 ::

Reading On Deck: Book Lover's Disease Strikes

As promised here is the list of books I received as gifts this Christmas season. Have you read any of these?:

"Counsels from the Holy Mountain" by Elder Ephraim (James posted a nice snippit from this book in this post)
"An Experiment in Criticism" by C.S. Lewis (One of the few Lewis books I haven't read before...and very timely with new classes I'm taking next year)

"Christ the Eternal Tao" by Hieromonk Damascene (I've read this before, but now I have my own copy)
"The Hidden Key to Harry Potter" by John Granger (The author is an Orthodox laymen!)
"The Well Educated Mind" by Susan Wise Baur (I'm a huge fan of the classical model of education)

"In the Heart of the Desert: The Spirituality of the Desert Fathers and Mothers" by Fr. John Chryssavgis (One of the best lecturers I've ever heard, by the way. He is coming in February to give another retreat that I am really looking forward to).

"Commentary on the Psalms: Volume I" by St. John Chrysostom
"The Art of the Infinite: The Pleasures of Mathematics" by Robert and Ellen Kaplan (the wife actually got this but I'm stealing it!)
"Precious Vessels of the Holy Spirit: The Lives & Counsels of Contemporary Elders of Greece" by H. Middleton (A very sharp looking book with lots of great pictures)

Last but not least, 2 English Literature research books and an illustrated hardback "History of Byzantium" will also be good reads.

These will all join a couple dozen more (at least!) I obtained during the fall/winter months that I haven't had time to even crack open. Of note: The biographies of St. Seraphim of Sarov, St. Nektarios and St. Seraphim Rose are highly anticipated reading, as well as several tomes I got in a personal exchange made with Brian. In fact I've had to buy another large bookshelf to keep pace with this insatiable problem of mine.

Daniel and I have already joked about having "book lover's disease", so now I ask this question with a bit more shame than usual (but it has to be done): Does anyone have any books they are looking to donate or get rid of? *grin*

:: Karl :: 9:14:00 AM [Link] ::

The Kursk Icon: A Christmas Gift

I received many wonderful gifts this Christmas season and tomorrow I'll post a bit about some of them. Yet it was last night, deep in the Oregon countryside in a small log cabin Russian Orthodox chapel, that I received a very special gift--the memory of which will be with me for quite some time.

Last night I was able to venerate the original Kursk Icon.

"Since its miraculous appearance in the forest of Kursk in the 13th century, the wonderworking icon of the Mother of God, known as the Kursk Root Icon of the Sign, has been a constant source of healing, comfort and deliverance from calamity to countless numbers of Orthodox Christians, most prominent among who was St. Seraphim of Sarov himself, a native of Kursk."

The Icon was brought to a ROCOR parish here in Oregon City as it makes its way from Seattle and next week to San Francisco. (A side note of interest: the church the icon was brought to was one Fr. Seraphim Rose of Platina helped start.)

After waiting for 2 hours for the icon to arrive, about 75 local Orthodox people processed into the dark and rainy December night to pack into a cozy chapel. We then corporately prayed a small service of thanksgiving and each of us was given ample time to view and venerate one of the most famous miracle-working icons in Christian history.

During the service the entire chapel began to smell of myrrh and rose petals, yet there was no incense burning.

It was fitting that this blessing would come to us during the celebration of the Nativity and as we look forward to Theophany. As St. Athanasius wrote in his masterpiece, "On the Incarnation", "the renewal of creation has been wrought by the Self-same Word Who made it in the beginning."

Miracle working icons are a pledge, a sign of that which is both already in our midst but also yet to come-- the total transfiguration and recreation of everything in Christ.

:: Karl :: 8:28:00 AM [Link] ::

On the Feast of Stephen

The 27th of December completes a trifecta for me of back-to-back-to-back celebrations: Christmas, Birthday, Nameday.

I wrote quite a bit about St. Stephen last year and why I admire him so much, so this year I'll post a short snippet from today's Dynamis reading in honor of my patron:

"In the portrayal of Christ's Martyr Stephen - as one "full of grace and power" (vs. 6:8) as one who speaks with 'wisdom and the Spirit' (vs. 6:10) - the Martyr directs our gaze into the heavens to behold "the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God" (vs. 7:55). Of course, it is the Lord Who is being revealed through the person of His Holy Martyr Stephen."

"Just as true icons always disclose the connection between their particular subjects and the Divine Incarnation, so likewise St. Luke's account of Christ's first Martyr, Stephen, manifests the Lord incarnate in His Church. Therefore, let the reader perceive, in the account of St. Stephen's witness, a faithful revelation of the Lord of grace and power, of wisdom and the Spirit, and of eternal Glory at the right hand of the Father."

"St. Stephen is the Proto-martyr not only in the sense of being the first martyr for the Lord, but also as the proto-type of Christ's martyrs, for all Christ's true martyrs reveal the Lord Jesus acting and teaching through His Body, the Church."

Troparion in tone 4 for St. Stephen--
O Protomartyr and mighty warrior of Christ our God,
You are victorious in battle and crowned with glory, O holy Stephen!
You confounded the council of your persecutors,
Beholding your Savior enthroned at the right hand of the Father.
Never cease to intercede for the salvation of our souls!

:: Karl :: 8:42:00 AM [Link] ::

This Day in History

Twenty seven years ago today I was born. On the off-chance you forgot to send me a present I'd be more than happy to email you the wish-list. *grin*

:: Karl :: 8:24:00 AM [Link] ::

Confessions of Book Readers

The last Orthodox Young Adult dinner/discussion of the month was held at our house last night and it was good to gather again.

I got into a humorous conversation near the end of the evening that brought up an interesting question. Several people were chatting about Lord of the Rings films and the deviations from the books. One person, however, remained rather taciturn.

When asked directly what he thought of the last film, he sheepishly smiled and confessed that not only had he not seen the previous two films, but had not even read the books!

This led us into an interesting discussion around this question: What is one book (or set of books) that you would be embarrassed to admit having never read?

Now don't be bashful. Leave your Christmas confession in the comment box (and let's hope the server holds!). Here is mine and for an English major and a bookophile it is pretty bad:

I've never finished a single book by Jane Austen. Sad but true. (Havdala will be particularly scandalized by this, methinks!)

Ok, your turn!

Update: Merry Christmas to all! A small change as been made to this post thanks to Clint's sharp eye and my rushed and ridiculously sloppy attempt at research for the material of this post. (See the comments for more). Also, here is another question to ponder: What book (or set of books) do you regret having read? Near the top of my list would have to be Edith Wharton's miserable "Ethan Frome."

:: Karl :: 8:35:00 AM [Link] ::

Commenting Woes

I know. Enetation is down. Again. I'm getting very close to switching....Perhaps at the end of the month.

Update: It is back online...for now. :)

:: Karl :: 5:48:00 PM [Link] ::

A Familiar Name But a New Blog

I ran across a comment on Fr. Hans' blog by a woman whose name was *very* familiar.

Lo and behold, she is a local Orthodox Christian and her parish was my former home parish for 5 years! (Hi Jan!) Jan's blog is called A World of Speculation. I look forward to keeping up with her writing.

:: Karl :: 4:52:00 PM [Link] ::

Matter Matters: Sacramentality of "The Return of the King"

I saw "Return of the King" last night and, despite its flaws, it is by far the best film of the trilogy and is quite simply one of the best films I have ever seen. I could gush on and on, but I will leave the clever use of adjectives to the professional film reviewers. (They have said it all anyway!)

Although I could spend a week blogging about the various elements of the film, there is one thing in particular that struck me. One of the things that I most appreciated about the film was how director Peter Jackson truly captured and emphasized Tolkien's sacramental vision and made it a central theme of the films. In Middle Earth, matter matters. A lot.

Something that Thomas Howard wrote in his classic "Evangelical is Not Enough" sheds some light on this:

Who will think lightly of his wedding ring and say it is nothing? Who will take a kiss lightly? It is only a physical pledge of something deeper, more mysterious, and more substantial, namely, love. But in that small physical act the great mystery is somehow bespoken.

These things, which are true, must somehow be focused and brought to a point in a symbol for us mortals. We cannot live with abstractions. We cannot nourish ourselves on generalities.

The religion that attempts to drive a wedge between the whole realm of Faith and the actual textures of physical life is a religion that has perhaps not granted to the Incarnation the full extent of the mysteries that attach to it and flow from it. It is to turn the Incarnation into a mere doctrine.

In the films one comes away with many thoughts, many emotions, many dreams. To live in a world like Middle Earth where every kiss, every look, every tear, every battle is immensely sacred and important. This is our goal. This is the Christian vocation--as king, priest, and prophet we are to synergize with Christ to sanctify all of life. As we say in the Liturgy, "thine own of thine own". God, through the Incarnation, has taken every facet of our lives and delivered it back to us redeemed. Let us not squander this gift.

:: Karl :: 9:36:00 AM [Link] ::

Not Quite the Same Miracle

This came from a company-wide email sent out ealier today by one of my more fearless co-workers:

"Today marks the beginning of Hanukkah, the Jewish holiday commemorating the
rededication of the Second Temple of Jerusalem in 164 B.C. Also referred to
as the Feast of Lights, Hanukkah recalls the Talmudic story of the Temple's
one-day supply of oil miraculously burning for eight days."

"Tonight at the Christmas Party, we will witness a similar miracle, as one
bottle of wine will last for eight minutes. Good thing we've got 12 cases
and a couple kegs."

There is nothing quite like an advertising firm's "Holiday" festivities...

:: Karl :: 8:49:00 PM [Link] ::

Myths About the Search...Again!

Josh has reposted his "Myths about the search for knowledge" .... It is well worth the read....and re-read!

For a fun game, everytime you see the word "truth" substitute the word "Church." Stunning.

:: Karl :: 8:13:00 AM [Link] ::

New Orthodox Blog: Philalethia

I recently stumbled upon Jonathan David, an Orthodox catechumen and a new (to me) blogger. Looks like another good read!

:: Karl :: 8:03:00 PM [Link] ::

Gene Talbott: Memory Eternal

My step-mother's father, Gene Talbott, was horribly injured in a fire last year but survived. After emerging from a coma, his days were spent in severe pain and disability -- yet he always had a smile on his face and a cheerful word for those who visited him.

Gene fell asleep in the Lord yesterday.

"With the saints give rest, 0 Christ, to the soul of Thy servant where sickness and sorrow are no more, neither sighing, but life everlasting...."

:: Karl :: 10:17:00 AM [Link] ::

Do You Need a Clairvoyant Elder?

When I was single, practicing Zen, and looking for Orthodoxy, I'm not so sure I would have fully believed the following quote.

Now, after being Orthodox for some time as well as being married, I know better.

"I usually tell people that if they are chomping at the bit for spiritual direction and want to repent and change, ask their friends or spouse or children for honest criticism. Most of us don't need a clairvoyant elder or the Philokalia to straighten us out because we haven't even gotten off the starting blocks yet."

:: Karl :: 10:05:00 AM [Link] ::

Man of Mystery

James thinks he knows the truth:

Karl: "Cut the act already! We know that you're not a young convert to Orthodoxy. You're real name is Hieromonk Demetrius Popova and you're like in your 60s or something and you have two or three doctorates in theology from various Orthodox seminaries. Really man, give it up already!"

James, you're way off base.... I have four doctorates. *grin*

:: Karl :: 1:01:00 PM [Link] ::

The Baby, the Bathwater and Hubris: The Future of Postmodern Theology

David Mills writes an interesting post at Touchstone's blog about the PoMo movement. This first point is classic:

"I�ve read some [PoMo's] writing on worship as if they had invented the idea of silence. And chanting. And candles...."

Mills goes on to make a point I've made in the past, but that doesn't usually go over very well. He writes,

"[Postmodern Christian] worship adopts lots of traditional objects and methods, like candles and chanted prayers, but in a liturgy or �worship experience� of their own devising. They aren�t interested in adopting the classic orders of the Western and Eastern liturgies, of submitting themselves to ancient and highly developed traditions. This seems to me unwise."

"I think the [postmodern Christians] offer much to think about, but [I] ask them to please remember not only the baby in the bath, but that the bath itself was developed for a very good reason and refined over time into an instrument very hard to replace with any lasting success."

Kevin Miller, whose rant on PoMoism ealier this year drew much discussion, notes one of the dangers of trying to rebuild the theological "bath":

"In order to avoid the hubris that often comes from the evangelical church, many folks are now getting squishy on things they should not be squishy about, including the authority of Scripture, the uniqueness of Christ, and the value of the Bible�s sexual ethic. If we lose those, we lose the Gospel."

This reminded me of the points made in this post on the proper place of hubris in the Christian life.

It also echoes comments recently made by Clifton over at Justin's blog about the dangers of PoMo theology, especially as it relates to missions and its future. Clifton writes something I totally agree with:

"I am much more sympathetic to postmodern modes of thinking than I am to their predecessor, but I am less than sanguine about the modern evangelical embrace of it--even in missional terms." Clifton continues with this great question:

"Such an embrace in the liberal mainline churches have given us the untethered and unaccountable actions of the Episcopal Church. What will emerge among evangelicals when their embrace of postmodernism turns to into an embrace from which they can no longer extricate themselves?"

Chris, in this great post and discussion, wonders "if we push "relevancy" too much and define it too broadly."

"Paul's message at Mars Hill was relevant, but are we reading more into the text so as to give ourselves "permission" for more sweeping changes?..."

I suppose that defining our relationship to culture does have a bearing on this topic. Jesus seemed very comfortable moving around within the culture of his day -- but it didn't hinder him from carrying out the work of the kingdom. I suppose, in part, this is the corrective that Church needs today (in places, that is) -- perhaps we've placed FAR too much stock in cultural relevancy, and have subsequently neglected our pursuit of Christ."

As I wrote in the comments at Chris' blog, we'll be a lot more relevant if we stop focusing on trying to be relevant and are just faithful with what we have been given in the Church (ala 2 Thess. 2:15). What are your thoughts--especially in regards to Clifton's question?

:: Karl :: 7:55:00 AM [Link] ::

The Prayer of the "Just"

Even in a spoof, it is always humorous to see people use set prayers instead of .... well, set prayers.

:: Karl :: 8:08:00 AM [Link] ::

Theater Fun--Lord of the Rings Style

I guess I'm a geek because I was amused reading this list of things not to do in the theater during "The Return of the King". (Props to Mark Shea)....here are a few of my favorites:

* Finish off every one of Elrond's lines with "Mr. Anderson."

* Imitate what you think a conversation between Gollum and Dobby and Yoda would be like.

* Dress up as old ladies and reenact "The Battle of Helms Deep" Monty Python style.

By the way, check out the staggering number of glowing reviews pouring in. Are the industry whispers of a possible Best Picture of the Year Oscar not quite as far fetched as once thought?

:: Karl :: 6:39:00 PM [Link] ::

The Fat Man and The Skinny Man

I love it! This is classic Chestertonian irony:

In the comments of this post claims are made that a certain blogger is overly intellectual, scorns other Christians who are not well-read, thinks the faith is only to be lived in the mind and not in "real" life, and that works are more important than simple faith.

In the comments of this post claims are made that the same blogger is overly sacramental, mocks those who are (or want to become) knowledgeable about their faith, and generally believes that faith is more important than works.

So, I call G.K. Chesterton to the stand to speak for the defense:

"Suppose we heard an unknown man spoken of my many men. Suppose we were puzzled to hear that some men said he was too tall and some too short; some objected to his fatness, some lamented his leanness; some thought him too dark, and some too fair. One explanation...would be that he might be an odd shape. "

"But there is another explanation. He might be the right shape. ...Perhaps (in short) this extraordinary thing is really the ordinary thing; at least the normal thing, the centre."

:: Karl :: 5:40:00 AM [Link] ::

A Sacramental Whince

Athanasius (no, not the saint) asks a good question with a nicely worded phrase:

"Do you have a "sacramental whince" in your past, a moment where you came to Christ and got something wholly different than you expected?"

:: Karl :: 2:18:00 PM [Link] ::

Quick Notes

1) Enetation is testing my patience, yet again. To see all the comments on previous posts click on the link at the very bottom of the comment box that says, "Check master server comments." This will bring them up and hopefully this little bug will not last long.

2) The Ortho-blog cache is up at blogs4God.

:: Karl :: 8:43:00 AM [Link] ::

Exhausted by the Epicureans

I finished my Ancient Philosophy final ealier today on fire and with a bang. I should get an "A" for the term.

The course, which began with such promise, ended up being rather pathetic. We spent way too much time with Lucretius, who I despise even more now thanks to this class. My fellow students seemed to be hand-picked for their rabid secular materialism and caustic method of arguing. It reminded me when I was at PU full time.

Anyway, if I have to hear one more person snicker with glee as a professor solemnly intones ".... and thus, as Lucretius so brilliantly shows us, we have no free will," I will gag. And I'll do it because I choose to, not because the atoms of the universe determined my reflex.

:: Karl :: 9:46:00 PM [Link] ::

Orthodoxy: Not Taking the Eucharist Seriously Enough? -- Part II:

Part I certainly drew some great comments! Keep 'em coming! In the original dialogue, Felix continued:

"We cannot say that we are allowing people to experience the life of the Church, all apart from Communion. If they are not joining us in that or experiencing it for themselves, they are *not* experiencing anything like the life of the Church. This is like me inviting you to join my family, but asking you to live in the back garden in a tent! Maybe EO need to be *more* organically integrated in this?!"

This analogy doesn't quite capture the nature of the relationship between those who have been united to the Church through the sacraments and those who are yet to. It also doesn't begin to explain why, if closed communion is wrong, why the Church was and is so protective of its mysteries.

For now consider this: You invite me over for a nice dinner with you and your wife and, when it's getting late and time for me to depart, I proceed to the bedroom with the two of you with my PJ's and toothbrush--fully expecting to sleep with you in your bed!

The revulsion one would (or should!) feel if someone demanded to sleep with his wife simply on the basis that they "have a relationship" with her is the same we feel when non-Orthodox demand we accept "open communion." It is here that we see closed communion as being precisely that which both maintains and furthers an integrated ecclesiology and sacramental vision.

He who takes the Eucharist seriously is he who freely offers it to those who would wish to be *fully* united with him AND, because of this love and compassion, guards and protects this wondrous gift from being abused and taken out of its proper and life-giving context. As I've written before, "family privileges come with family responsibilities." And for us they are hard to separate.

In the comments of Part I James of KY and James of the NW brought up a point that I've made before to friends--the interesting link between the EO understanding of our participation in the sacraments and our view of marriage. Here is something I once wrote to a friend:

St. Paul uses marriage as his prime analogy of the union between God and mankind (Eph 5:21-33). Just as sex is not merely a means to unity but the expression of a unity already existing, so with the sacraments and the life of the Church. That is why it is a sin to have sex outside of marriage--because premarital sex proclaims a union that is not complete.

So why has God created man and woman to be united in a sacramental and committed union, set apart from the couples' other relationships? Because He desires to unite them fully and completely in life, fullness of truth and in love to one another, and through that union, to all of the world. This is the same as our relationship in Christ, who is the Head of His Body, the Church.

If we desire to be united fully with Him, we will naturally want to be united to His Body as well. Just as a couple who isn't married can't claim they have the fullness of a love relationship, neither can those who are outside the Church claim they have the *fullness* of a love relationship with God.

Now, just because two people are married doesn't mean that they will display this unity. Two people can be married for years and never talk, and have never really learned to love each other with total self-denial and humility. In the same way, just because a person is a baptized Orthodox doesn't mean that they necessarily will come to be perfectly united to God. We need to "synergize" or cooperate with God to reach full union with Him. And sadly, many Orthodox don't.

It is also true that two people who are dating or engaged may have developed a deep and abiding love that is, in a sense, more "real" than another couple who is married. If they are responding to the call of love and are living, as best as they know how, God will work through that.

Yet most of us would consider an engaged couple not fully united as God intended until they are married. Not being joined fully to God by being united to His Church in the sacraments will leave us lacking the fullness of the love and grace God wishes to bestow on us. And why?

Because just as there is no such thing as a "married couple" without two members and their whole family connected to them in a union of mutual commitment to the truth and in love, so there is no such thing as an "individual" Christian without the Church to nurture them.

I have another interesting explanation of this from other sources....but I'll save it for another day.

:: Karl :: 8:44:00 AM [Link] ::

Orthodoxy: Not Taking the Eucharist Seriously Enough? -- Part I:

A while back I made a comment on a blog about the practice of open communion I concluded with this paragraph:

--For us the Eucharist is an end, not a means. It shows forth a unity and communion *already* established; it is not to be used as an evangelistic tool or a way to create unity. Closed communion has always been the teaching of the Church for 2000 years.--

Felix responded and, although it took me a while, I finally had some time to make a few comments: First off, he wrote,

"I imagine it's possible for you to make this last sentence only because you limit "Church" to your own expression of that. I might equally say that Believer's baptism has always been the teaching of the Church if I don't recognize paedobaptists as members of the Church. I have trouble with your statement historically, but we can leave that to one side."

Well, if we have to include every single person on earth who "believes in Jesus" to be fully a member of the Church, then your conclusion here follows. The problem with this relativistic definition of "Christianity" is that it has no foundation or precedent in Scripture or in the history of the Church.

As another blogger named Karl pointed out a Christianity that allows for contradictory teachings isn't Christainty as the Church Fathers and St. Paul understood it.

Felix continued, "I don't know that I really understand the Eucharist in this end or means kind of way. It's what we do. It expresses some things, it cements others, it is a means of grace and a manifestation and it serves to create other things. I think there's actually *more* to it that you have suggested."

Of course there is more to it! What I was trying to point out is that the Eucharist is intricately tied together with doctrine, praxis, apostolic continuity, etc. Like sex within marriage, the Eucharist is only for those who are already joined together into the one Faith.

We would actually say something more radical than "its what we do." Rather, the Eucharist is what we ARE. Partaking of the Eucharist is an act of ontology.

"I also find the [Orthodox] position troublesome because I don't think it takes the Eucharist seriously enough."

Wow! Now, that's a new objection! To our ears this is tantamount to telling Mother Teresa, "You know, you just don't take the plight of the poor seriously enough!" Spend some time in worship with us. Study our hymnography. Read the lives of the saints. Pray the daily offices, especially the pre- and post- communion prayers. In time, you'll realize how the Eucharist is our life.

Part II coming soon....

:: Karl :: 8:14:00 AM [Link] ::

Living Room's Blogging Tip Central

I've been following Darren's blog for quite a while now...one of my favorite "pomo" blogs. Some of you may already know that he has a great series going on how to improve your blog. Writing on topics like site design, increasing readership, and content ideas, Darren gives both future and current bloggers much good advice. Blogging addicts, rejoice.

:: Karl :: 2:05:00 PM [Link] ::

More "Relevant" Icons

I have a great idea.

Let's replace our Byzantine icons with digital printouts of these thumbnails. It shouldn't be too difficult to mount them on the iconostasis.

You know...cuz plastic kitsch that trivializes the gospel "meets the people where they are at".....and all that good stuff.

:: Karl :: 9:04:00 AM [Link] ::

Are you a Finder or a Seeker....Or Something Else? Part II:

"One of the settled but largely unspoken pieties of our time is the notion that 'seekers' have greater moral authority than 'finders.' It is a silly piety when stated clearly. But whenever it is openly challenged, one sees how entrenched it is," writes McClay from the article referenced in Part I.

Boy, is he right. From the intensity we bring to our discussions of how truth, tolerance, and the Gospel intertwine, it is clear that we need to have a more holistic understanding of what it truly means to be both a seeker and a finder.

No doubt, fundamentalism puts far too great an emphasis on the finding of truth and not much on the journey of repentance and Christian growth. As a reaction to this the current tendency is to over-emphasize the seeking and to down-play all truth claims so as to permit people to "explore" their faith.

A classic sentiment from this worldview is that Christianity is "...about walking with God, not getting my theological ducks in a row."

What we fail to see is that both those who stop once they have some of the truth and those who revel in semi-darkenss of the existential "journey" are only half correct--and thus both end up being dead-ends in the spiritual life.

The Gospel and the teaching of the Church is clear--seeking and finding are not to be put in opposition to one another but rather are intimately linked and, in the lives of the saints, perpetually lead to one another.

A walk with God that leads one to eschew theology is no walk because it refuses the signposts God has given us through His Church; and a theology that doesn't lead to real faith and real praxis is nothing but empty words and lifeless. As St. Ephraim said, "Those who pray truly are theologians; and those who are truly theologians, pray."

Let us not fail to complete the paradox!

"Seek and ye shall find" tells us plainly that both are to be prized. Literally this verse translates from the Greek into "Keep seeking...." It is a active verb. Thus it is in the finding that we have something (or rather Someone) to seek; and it is in the seeking that we will find Him.

A convert to Orthodoxy once told me that, as a Protestant, she felt like she was "running around a racetrack." She was so busy seeking the newest fad "spiritual practice", or popular Christian book, or alt. worship scene that she never found any truth worth keeping. She was encouraged to be a "seeker" but was never shown what the goal was nor examples of people who had really found it.

The racetrack was a dead-end; she was training for a race that never began.

The irony was that once she found the Orthodox Church she was able to really seek God because she had a foundation and a Truth from which to journey from and, more importantly, more deeply into to. She had both found and been found.

As that amazing quote from Chesterton points out, the only way to truly be a seeker (or to attract people who are seeking the truth) is to have found it yourself. Fidelity wins people more than novelty and relevance.

But the key is, having found the Truth you continue to seek it. "Father up and further in" as Lewis wrote. Let us all seek to find and having found, continue to seek.

Update: (inserting tongue in cheek...) Mesmerized by the magnificent prose of this post, NeoTheologe *almost* considered converting to Orthodoxy. I'll keep trying!

:: Karl :: 8:17:00 AM [Link] ::

Tree Bomb

A 150 foot tree from the park just completely uprooted and smashed into my 3-story office building, shattering countless glass windows, crushing two cars and bringing in countless police, media crews, and firemen to the scene. It sounded and felt like a bomb hit the building....Thankfully there were few injuries. But it sure has the office abuzz!

Now, back to your regularly scheduled musings....

:: Karl :: 10:30:00 AM [Link] ::

Are you a Finder or a Seeker....Or Something Else? Part I:

Chris makes some good points about being a "lifelong learner" and the necessity of humility in this recent post.

However, he posits a dichotomy (between being a "dispenser" of truth and a "receptacle" of truth) that I think is not merely simplistic, but betrays one of the chief errors of our postmodern age.

Wilfred M. McClay (who I'll return to in Part II) makes a great point against this dichotomy in a book review in the December 03 issue of "First Things" This postmodern attitude, he says,

"presumes something that one has no right to presume, but that right-thinking and 'spiritual' people in the Western world now presume every day: that ultimate truth is relative or pluriform, and the "journey" of pilgrimage is more important than the convictions of the pilgrim or the destination toward which they journey...."

It has been claimed that the individualism and pragmatism (in regards to the spiritual journey) we see so often in our churches is directly related to this false dualism between "seeking" and "finding." Once we've decided that those who seek have more to offer than those who find, we end up inevitably disparaging or distrusting the witness and truth of those who have found. This leads us to watering down and trimming the truth to fit the lowest common denominator.

"Seeker sensitive" becomes "finder intolerant" frighteningly fast.

Is it any wonder why so many postmodern Christians see themselves primarily as seekers yet no one seems to find what they are looking for? Like rats in a maze, we gleefuly stroll through the corridors of our spiritual life content being lost. (Unlike St. Paul in 1 Cor who says, "I do not run aimlessly, I do not box as one beating the air.")

As Clifton notes, if we accept this worldview and way of understanding the Christian life, we fail to see Jesus as "the scandal of particularity." Worse, we end up glorifying and emulating those who refuse to walk the path and ignore those who have found the path and are walking it. Can you imagine St. Paul endorsing a view that dichotomizes between "seekers" and "finders" in this way? I think not--otherwise half of his own writings would have to be shunned because they came from a "finder"-- and a pretty staunch one at that!

However, I've left something important out. There is a more fundamental error within the dualism of seeking and finding that I'll explore a bit in Part II....

:: Karl :: 12:56:00 PM [Link] ::

Infomercial Script for "The Original Christian Church"

A few years ago I was a production coordinator for an advertising firm that specialized in television commercial and infomercial production. Knowing that, you'll see why I found the following spoof particularly amusing (posted on the Orthodox Convert List).

In industry lingo this is what is called the CTA, or Call to Action portion of the commercial. Imagine yourself watching TV late one night, when suddenly.........

**In a deep, rich infomercial voice-over**

Are you dissatisfied with your current church?
Are looking for something more ancient? More Holy? More...Christian?
Do you suffer from a frequent urge to stand for hours on end?
Do you long for that Old Time religion?

Try the ORIGINAL CHRISTIAN CHURCH(tm)!
That's right for a limited time only you can join millions of other Christians in The Original Christian Church(tm)!

Join now and you'll receive a lifetime supply of GRACE. That's right Grace. Once applied through the patented Chrism of Grace(tm) it is Guaranteed to cure what ails you (if used according to manufacturer directions).

If you call now, we will also give you the "Tools for the Struggle." This amazing tool set includes prayers too numerous to count, Beginners Fast(tm), Intermediate Fast(tm) and, Monastic Fast(tm). It also comes with Metanoia(tm), Prostration(tm), and confession. As a member of The Original Christian Church(tm) you will also be given access to the Two "I"s(tm): Incense and Ikons.

Surprise your friends with knowledge of ancient Christian beliefs practices long abandoned by the West!

Visit one of our websites to begin your journey on The Way(tm):

Orthodox Church in America
Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America
Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese of America

This offer is only good until the end of Time. May be subject to pious customs not covered in this notice.

:: Karl :: 7:43:00 AM [Link] ::

"All You Need is Love"

"No man is called to practice inordinate self-denial, since God, being Love, desires only that His children shall be happy."

Before you click the link guess who said this and where it came from. Jennifer's analysis is short and sweet.

:: Karl :: 9:28:00 PM [Link] ::

Scholasticism and Islam

From the Orthodox Convert Discussion Group:

"Scholasticism aimed at Islam will only do what has been done with Christianity: the lukewarm will become secularized, the fanatic will become more so, and the remainder will find some way in which they can deal with the contradictions."

One could quibble with this a bit, but it is fairly accurate---especially if by "dealing with contradictions" one is referring to the gleeful way in which postmoderns (of whatever ecclesiastical or religious flavor) are wont to changing definition of words to mean the opposite of what they have meant for the last 2000 years.

:: Karl :: 3:10:00 PM [Link] ::

Preparing for the Nativity

I hope all you had a wonderful and blessed Thanksgiving! I will be up at the monastery of St. John the Baptist in Goldendale for part of the weekend and won't be posting again until next week.

As part of an attempt to really seize the Nativity season the wife are starting some new traditions in our family, as well as more fully dedicating ourselves to the more familiar ones (confession, prayer, almsgiving, and fasting).

One new custom is taking turns reading aloud to one another from either St. Athanasius' "On the Incarnation" or Fr. Thomas Hopko's "The Winter Pascha."

We will also spend time each evening participating in the custom of the Jesse Tree. (I highly recommend this one to families with young children).

Here is my question to you dear reader: Other than the typical Christian disciplines of fasting, increased prayer, and almsgiving, what are some ways you and your family are preparing for the Feast?

:: Karl :: 11:06:00 AM [Link] ::

The One Year Blog-o-versary: A Look Back

Today is the one year "blog-o-versary" of St. Stephen's Musings.

I have really come to enjoy how blogging, interacting with all of my readers and friends, and thinking more deeply about the Faith have all come together in one forum. I was a reader of blogs for many months before I ventured into the fray myself last fall. I think my wife got tired of hearing about all the things I wanted to write in response to other blogs, so she urged me to start my own. Here we are a year later!

As someone who enjoys writing and thinking, blogging has given me a way of sharpening my writing skills and has provided an invaluable way of disciplining my mind and my heart. Thanks to all of you who have made this year one of real growth and insight for me. Pray for me as I pray for you.

My posting with be spotty this weekend with holiday and family festivities coming up. So I offer you the past. Below are a few links to what I consider to be some of my more interesting, memorable, and in some cases, provocative posts. Enjoy!

"Freedom Within Within Structure--Becoming Communal Selves"

"Does Truth = Sincerity?"

"Reflections on Fr. Seraphim Rose and Evangelism"

"What Does it Mean to "Save Someone?"

"Personal and Individual"

"Worship, Evangelism: More on Closed vs. Open Communion"

"Follow the Beaten Path"

"Incarnational Theology, Flannery O'Conner, and Cartesian Dualism"

"Noetic Knowledge: More on Apophaticism and St. Gregory"

"My Barber, the Relativist"

"The Cult of the Nice"

"Conflict in the Blogosphere: Ramifications of the Incarnation "

"A Hymn For The Reformed Child"

"Are You Called?: Brief Thoughts on Women's Ordination"

"Ecumenical Dialogue: The Fallacy of the Temperament Argument"

"Individual vs Personal: What is the Nature of a Christian Spiritual Journey?"

"A Beautiful Dance or a Futile Debate?"

"Bridging the Chasm: Theological Dialogue"

"A Shared Relativistic Worldview"

"The Future of Emerging Church Ecclesiology"

"True Unity vs. 'Belief Systems': Part V (and the Conclusion) of a Response to NeoTheologue"

"Icons and the Emerging Church: A Response to an Anabaptist"

"Sex in Films"

:: Karl :: 9:29:00 AM [Link] ::

Left, Right And Everywhere Else: Questions About Convert Zeal

"Mrs. Musings" wrote an interesting comment over at Huw's blog" that I am tempted to add to and comment on in more depth. For now I'll simply quote it in full and ask you to add your comments. She raises several important issues and questions--ones we converts need to think about more deeply. She writes,

"I think it is important to note that there is One True Faith, and we sinners in our attempts to fit things into the boxes of our own reason sometimes make our camps to the left or to the right of the mark. Warning: I'm about to be really judgemenal and general:"

"'The left' is typically characterized by participation in ecumenical dialogue, shorter services (more generous use of 'ekonomia'), less of the 'trappings' of [19]th century Russian piety. The so-called left also seems more skeptical about 'pious tradition' and sometimes goes out of its way to mention how outlandish the hagiography of a particular saint is...."

"'The right' might be characterized by its tendency to do every troparia in the menaion with all the stychira in the typicon for that particular day. One might judge the right by saying they wear long beards (males), wear skirts and head coverings (females), wear prayer ropes, go by their saint name, adhere to the canons more strictly, etc. The 'right' normally has very strong feelings and opinions against ecumenism."

"The problem with both of the above descriptions is they judge outwardly and put people into camps, and it's totally unfair. It's not fair to judge someone for wearing or not wearing a head covering. It's wrong to feel like you're not really Orthodox if you don't wear a beard.'" [Editorial comment: This hair-etic grinned when he read this sentence!]

"The last thing Orthodoxy needs is Americans forming camps and denominationalizing (did I make that word up?) it! However, I think there is a need to be very discerning because there are some very sketchy ideas out there in seminaryville that the laity need to be careful about."

"My opinion: This is the reason why we need more monasticism (elders, really)in America and not more Orthodox scholars! (OK, both would be fine) But I think it's something that needs to be discussed!"

"As Elder Ephraim of Mt. Athos (memory eternal) once said, when asked about this issue: 'It doesn't matter [whether a church does all of the stichera, etc in a service]. If they are doing it for love of God and love of neighbor, it doesn't matter what they do.'"

"Is it loving to plant the seeds of doubt in peoples' hearts about whether St. Mary of Egypt's life is true? Is it loving to give inquirers dirty looks when they visit your church without a head covering? Is it loving to have 2 hour Vespers services in a parish that has many young children? Is it loving to call someone a "monastophile" or a "maximalist" who's simply trying to be a good steward of the tradition God has given to them?"

Update: MHG has several good questions in the comments here but then tries to get my goat in the comments on the post before this by trying to claim that holding logical thoughts about and defending the truth is, ipso facto, antithical to faith.

Update II: Josh continues the line of thought he posted in the comments.

:: Karl :: 9:23:00 AM [Link] ::

An Orthodox Young Adult Group--Is it a "Home Church"? Part III:

In Part I of this series I described our meetings.

In Part II I pointed to the problem of modern understandings of Matthew 18:20 as well as other key prerequisties for "church."

Now I can expand on the thought that drove me to write about this issue in the first place. Those of us in our gatherings can truly enjoy our time together because we know how our group fits into the bigger picture of the Orthodox Christian life and the communal nature of the Church. [See Update at the end for more....]

Even more important is that, because of the context within which our meetings occur, we know exactly what their limitations are. In other words we know that what we do isn't "church" in the fullest sense of the word.

The frustration and unmet needs especially in regards to discipleship, and teaching frequently expressed by postmodern Christians is due, in part, to the fact that they are expecting their group (whether it be "home church" or what have you) to be what it isn't: The Church.

One of the principle problems with "home churches" is their sense of identity and self-understanding does not have an ecclesial or time-tested spiritual foundation from which to draw from and ground itself. While their intent is good they are not "catholic" in the patristic sense of the word; i.e. they do not live out the faith "according to the whole" has it has been preserved by the Church. In other words, they are trying to create by their own human power that which God already preserved.

This is not to say that there is nothing good going on in them because there certainly is. The Holy Spirit moves where He wills. As I've made clear on this blog, I'm certainly one of the more hopeful observers of the Em-church movement.

But much of the postmodern "home church" movement is man-made, unstable, and prone to excesses. Worst of all it is liable to see itself as having the power to "make up the rules" as it goes along, totally unaware of or sometimes in total defiance to the reality of the historic Church.

It is this point that truly distinguishes our Orthdox home gathering from the postmodern "home church." By submitting ourselves to the incarnate, historic, God-preserved apostolic Church, we are able to be that much more of an expression of the Church.

**Update:** I had a thought after reading comments made by Basil over at Huw's blog about "our brothers who are somewhere behind us on the road and struggling with their beliefs in public." I think it is vitally important to see the fine line between authentic struggle and fortification and continuation of heresy.

Of course we should never rush to "criticize cripples taking their first baby steps in physical therapy for not running" but neither should we congratulate cripples who refuse to complete their therapy and then complain when those who have found the true Hospital try and show them what they are missing.

The only thing worse than a group that has ceased to care about the true faith is one who is half-way there and calls it good.

:: Karl :: 9:03:00 AM [Link] ::

Humility in All the Wrong Places

There is a world of difference between saying "You are wrong, I am right" and saying "You are bad and I am good. You are out and I am in. God loves me, God doesn't even know you."

No doubt we can and should always strive to be more charitable in our discussions. No argument there. But if the world postmodern Christians want to live in is one where we must believe that all of the contradictory things said about Jesus and his Church are equally true....well, I think you'll find that view hard to defend and even more difficult to convince people to die for.

St. Paul and all the Church Fathers and martyrs who suffered to preserve and pass down the truth had a lot of "certainty" about their beliefs. The key is they also had abundant humility; not in regards to the truth but in regards to themselves. They did not invent the truth--they simply received it and lived it and refused to make excuses for falsehood. Why? Because in the end heresy will destroy the soul just as pride will.

G. K. Chesterton, in chapter 3 of his short little masterpiece "Orthodoxy", brilliantly notes that "...what we suffer from today is humility in the wrong place. Modesty has moved from the organ of ambition. Modesty has settled upon the organ of conviction; where it was never meant to be. A man was meant to be doubtful about himself, but undoubting about the truth; this has been exactly reversed. Nowadays the part of a man that a man does assert is exactly the part he ought not to assert--himself. The part he doubts is exactly the part he ought not to doubt--the Divine Reason...."

"...Thus we should be wrong if we had said hastily that there is no humility typical of our time. The truth is that there is a real humility typical of our time; but it so happens that it is practically a more poisonous humility than the wildest prostrations of the ascetic. The old humility was a spur that prevented a man from stopping; not a nail in his boot that prevented him from going on."

"For the old humility made a man doubtful about his efforts, which might make him work harder. But the new humility makes a man doubtful about his aims, which will make him stop working altogether."

:: Karl :: 3:44:00 PM [Link] ::

An Orthodox Young Adult Group--Is it a "Home Church"? Part II:

Many modern Christians who fall into our age range would describe our group and our meetings as "church." In fact, for many of them, what we do would be considered the fullness of what it means to be a church.

However, as Jordan Bajis notes in chapter 10 of his brilliant book _Common Ground_, "Bible studies, 'fellowship' nights, prayer meetings, etc. may be *expressions* of the Church, but they are not the Church."

I have long contended that Matthew 18:20 is the most widely misunderstood and misinterpreted "ecclesiastical proof text" in today's Christian culture. There is a subtle but important difference between a necessary and a sufficient cause. "Two or three gathered", while necessary, is not a sufficient ecclesial defining condition. So what else is needed for a gathering to be considered "church"? For starters:

* The centrality of the Bishop/Presybyter
* participation in the Eucharist
* entering into the heavens for worship as given to us by God
* adherence to and continuity with the apostolic deposit of faith

All of these (and many other elements) are also not sufficient, in and of themselves, but are also necessary. As Bajis writes, "To merely gather with Christians is different than to gather in Jesus' name, for to gather in Christ's name is to signify the covenantal and organic understanding of God's bond with His people; � this is the Church.....The experience of Church takes place not at an evangelistic crusade or in a Bible study group (as good as these may be), but when Christians come together as an assembled people [Eucharistically in the historic and apostolic church]."

Part III soon....

:: Karl :: 8:48:00 AM [Link] ::

The Cache, the Blogroll, and other Items

* Today is Thursday and that means the Ortho-blog cache is up at blogs4God! This is the third post, by my first without Dean's help! I try and keep them short and sweet but feel free to email me your ideas and cache-worthy posts.

* Like a fidgety little child, I can't leave things alone. I'm constantly tweaking and organizing things--including my blogroll. I've added a few new links (particularly a whole new category devoted to a few of the PoMo bloggers I keep up with) and I've rearranged the format a bit.

* I know. I know. The commenting feature is horrible. I'm still weighing my options. The worst part is that just as I get to the point of being totally fed up, it works perfectly for a week or two. Sigh. The saga continues....

* Parts II and III of "An Orthodox Young Adult Group--Is it a "Home Church"? are forthcoming....Stay tuned.

:: Karl :: 10:23:00 AM [Link] ::

An Orthodox Young Adult Group--Is it a "Home Church"?: Part I

Earlier this year my wife and I started hosting a bi-monthly gathering of 15-20 local Orthodox Christian "young adults" (I use that term loosely because we have people anywhere from 19 to their mid 30's).

I really look forward to these meetings. We eat dinner together as a group, talking about our lives and getting to know one another better. After dinner Fr. Theodore leads us in a lively and in-depth discussion of various writings of the Church Fathers.

For the last several meetings we have focused on St. Dorotheos' opus "Practical Teachings on the Christian Life." Recent topics from this book that we dived into included: humility, obedience, the role of the conscience in the spiritual life, and the fear of God.

Then we corporately pray/chant the Compline service together in front of the icon corner in our living room, with incense and candles lit.

We conclude the evenings with a potluck dessert, tea, and continued discussion and fellowship for those who wish to stay late. Some people schedule confessions for this time, and go with Father into our bedroom for privacy.

After our last meeting and as I was getting into bed, a thought struck me about the nature of our meetings that I had always known but had never really fleshed out.....

Part II coming soon.....

:: Karl :: 12:49:00 PM [Link] ::

Speaking of Being Denominationally Promiscuous...

Where do you worship?

"On Christmas I went with some friends to the Pretzelterian church out on First Street, because it's so pretty with all the lights. On Easter I went to University Whatever Church, because they did a passion play. When I'm feeling low, I go to the Church of the Gladfest. When I want to hear good music, I go to the Church of the Frozen."

"When I want to meet friendly people, I go to the Church of the Thawed. At least once a month I go to Sam 'n' Alice's Independent Bible Church, because the preaching is good and it reminds me of what I grew up with. And last Sunday," she finished triumphantly, "I went to MacChurch, because they have a great college ministry."

:: Karl :: 12:14:00 PM [Link] ::

The ESOB Meeting of 2003

James has already posted the "minutes" of our meeting but here are some brief and random tidbits on this past weekend's trip up to Seattle when I met up with James, Chance, Aaron, and Basil:

* I am much more eloquent and bold in print than I am in person as I tend to be somewhat reserved in social situations and even downright shy. It was very nice to interact with the folks at St. Paul's (who were very gracious and welcoming) and James' hospitality made for a very relaxing and enjoyable afternoon.

* Aaron, much to my surprise, looks a lot like Luke Jackson of Oregon Duck fame. I got to hear more about his spiritual journey to Orthodoxy which was fascinating. He and his wife and little Basil are darling!

* James isn't kidding when he says his kids are a little crazy! They are very cute but full of energy and spunk--how the 6 of them fit in that tiny house without going insane is beyond me.

* Basil has the bushiest beard I've ever seen; even this "hair-etic" was impressed! And I learned that he is the master of all that is sushi and authentic Russian cuisine.

* Chance arrived later so sadly I didn't get to talk with him as much. He was expecting I would look more like Clifton. Boy, was he disappointed!

* I propose the next ESOB meeting be in Portland. The beer is plentiful and the door is always open!

:: Karl :: 1:37:00 PM [Link] ::

Random Saturday Thoughts

* I'm still working the kinks out with the Ortho-blog Thursday cache at blogs4God. With Dean's help, I should be able to post directly starting next week. I also want to make a correction to the most recent cache which says that I have posted "the Christian response to sex in films." This should read "a Christian response....." I am not trying to imply that my post (or really anything I write for that matter!) is perfectly indicative of the Church's teaching! I'm still tweaking how I want to format and present the cache. Please add your comments or email me your suggestions, worthy post URLs, etc.

* Clifton posts a review of "Revolutions" which, in some ways mirrors my review as well as adds to this in-depth conversation many of us are having.

* It's essays like this one on the nature of baptism that give me great hope that many in the Em-church movement will find their ultimate home in the Orthodox Church. Keep searching guys. You're more Orthodox than you know....

* Speaking of seachers: A very dear family member is coming to Great Vespers tonight for her first experience of Orthodox worship. Glory to God for all things!

* Proto Theo, a group of us from the self-created E.S.O.B. (Ecumenical Synod of Orthodox Bloggers) will be getting together for a first face-to-face meeting this Sunday. Although not quite a quorum (?) it looks to be a great time for Chance, Aaron, James, and me to worship together and spend some quality, non-digital, time together.

* I've got several partial posts in the works on a variety of topics such as the differences between "home church", an Orthodox young adult group, and the Church; as well as a reponse to a claim made to me that the Orthodox "don't take the Eucharist seriously enough."

:: Karl :: 2:04:00 PM [Link] ::

The Link Between Orthopraxis and Orthodoxy

Phil asks, "How do you step outside of modernism or post-modernism theologically? How can we think about God in ways other than through the prism of our own culture/context? Can it be done?"

I wrote--The way in which you frame your last question is a clue..."How can we think about God ..?" The Church Fathers and the Tradition of the Church say that coming to a true knowledge and understanding of God comes, not through thinking (although this is needed) but first and foremost through purification of the soul.

This is accomplished primarily through prayer, participation in the sacraments, and the ascetic life-- not through rational analysis (modernism) nor through "experiences" (postmodernism). This is how the Orthodox Christian "steps out" of his particular culture/philosophy/opinions etc....we allow ourselves to be fully formed by "the mind of Christ" as it has been preserved in the Church's incarnational way of life.--

Jennifer writes on this topic also. I love this line: "In the early days of Christianity, converts weren't immediately subjected to lectures on homoosious and such."

Later, talking about "liberal" churches, she notes that "you might argue you have people behaving like Christians but believing like Unitarians. Well, actually, what you have is people behaving like humanitarians and believing like Unitarians. If we want to make disciples of Christ, we're going to have to reexamine what Christian practices are and why we do them - beyond a 'we feed the poor because Jesus said to.'"

When I was in the process of becoming Orthodox I remember asking a pious, well-educated Protestant friend to give me one concrete, practical, reason how the orthodox doctrine of the Trinity made a difference in his spiritual life. His response was a weak smile, a shrug of the shoulders, and a concession that in many ways "doctrine" and "spiritual practice" had very little to do with each other in the Protestant world. We need this link between praxis and doxa; otherwise our worship becomes misinformed and our praxis becomes self-serving.

Update: Jim quotes some great passages from Bishop Ware's "The Orthodox Way" on some of the practical ways the doctrine of the Trinity informs our praxis.

Update II: Josh doesn't like the way I worded this post because he sees some mysterious dichotomy between "faith" and praxis. He also doesn't care for the idea that purity of soul is a prerequisite to see God. I hate to break this to you, but I didn't make this up!

:: Karl :: 8:12:00 AM [Link] ::

"Hair-acy" Update

John recants of his former position in a radical way. The "hair-etics" rejoice!

:: Karl :: 10:26:00 AM [Link] ::

Gay Activists and the Emerging Church

Try this exercise out:

In the first paragraph of the following quote delete "gay marriage" and "marriage" and substitute the word "Church" in their place. In the second paragraph, replace "marriage" and substitute "Christianity." In both paragraphs replace "gay activists" and "gays" with your local postmodern Christian movement du jour.

"Outwardly, the advocates of gay marriage claim to admire marriage. But to claim the authority to redefine marriage, they must first claim that marriage is a flawed, man-made institution that needs to be reworked, or worse yet, that it is merely a result of the unguided evolutionary process...."

"Gay activists claim to believe marriage is so meaningful that it should be extended to gays, but their case rests on the belief that marriage is so meaningless that it can be claimed by anyone who wants it."

--Quoted from "Defining Marriage Down" by Adam G. Mersereau's article in the November 2003 issue of Touchstone.

:: Karl :: 8:55:00 AM [Link] ::

Sex in Films

A reader brings up an interesting question in regards to my review of "The Matrix Revolutions." It is a question I have debated with numerous family and friends and inevitably I always seem to come out the lecher and the loser. I'm willing to stick my neck out and take another beating. The reader asks: How can Christians in good conscience endorse or recommended films that contain explicit sexual imagery? Here is my *very short* answer to this question:

While I found the Zion party scene in "Reloaded" to be *ridiculously* gratuitous, the "cake" scene with the Merovingian to be a little juvenile, and the brief S&M scene in "Revolutions" to be mildly disturbing, I don't see them (or the other examples of sexuality in either of the later two Matrix films) discrediting or destroying the integrity of the films nor my guarded recommendation.

In many ways elements of violence and sexuality can illumine the greater story and help us understand the motivations and psyche of characters in any film. Sex and violence are, undeniable, part of what it means to live in this world. Even Serpahim Rose believed that there were works of fiction that could be used to lead people to Christ. The "sanctified imagination", as Lewis talked about, is a good thing.

The questions one must ask are these: Does *any* representation of sin or evil reduce the power of the story or truth one is trying to convey? How much is "too much"? Does it drive the plot, develop characters, or is it just eye candy? Etc...

Here's another question: What do you do with much of the Bible? If the Bible was made into a movie, much of it would be rated R if not flat out NC-17 and would contain warnings like "Adult themes, nudity, sexuality, violence, torture, and bloody deaths abound." Any attempt to mute, censor, or sugar-coat those parts would do the text and us a horrible disservice.

While this doesn't excuse or explain explicit and unnecessary sexual and violent images in ANY film, one must see through them to the greater point or story that is trying to be told. If one can't do that, then it is better to not watch films, read books, attend plays, or expose oneself to images, stories, or examples of vice.

With any recommendation of a film or book or work of art comes the implicit assumption that those who, for whatever reason can't handle certain aspects, will do the proper research and abstain if needed. Some of us are tempted or distracted easier than others. Like so many things the "weaker brother" element is crucial.

But frankly, even with all this said, I'll admit that from an Orthodox POV many films and books are better left on the shelf and out of my mind. If I spent as much time in prayer, fasting, and works of mercy as I do watching films and reading books, I'd be saint by now.

:: Karl :: 10:07:00 AM [Link] ::

From the "No Comment" Zone

These are the kinds of classes PSU offers to help us fulfill the Senior Capstone credit requirement:

UNST 421, "The Spirituality of Being Awake" - I, (3 credits)

"Students in this Capstone class will arrive with something they call 'spirituality' or 'spiritual practice,' whatever that is: Christianity, Judaism, Eco-feminism, Native American Spirituality, Buddhism, Islam, Sufism, Witchcraft, etc.

Through direct service with Portland-area social service agencies, students will discover and explore the connections between their direct-service experiences and their spirituality.

How is one's spirituality informed by one's observations and awarenesses? How are one's observations and awarenesses informed by one's spirituality? What is the cost of being wide awake? For their final product, students will utilize their lived experiences and expressed spirituality to develop and facilitate a project that supports the mission of their affiliated agency."

:: Karl :: 1:10:00 PM [Link] ::

The Patron Saint of Blogging

I think I just found the patron saint of blogging and amazingly his feast day is this Sunday.

"In addition to the usual time he spent dealing with the problems of his job, hearing confessions, writing papers and the like, Nektarios was now involved in something new which also demanded his time."

"He gradually got involved in extensive correspondence with clerics, theologians, and religious scholars of other faiths outside Greece, concerning the topic of true belief and how the members of each faith thought that theirs encompassed it."

"So, when Nektarios would receive a letter stating such an argument, he would respond by sending his writings, and in turn, would receive writings responding to what he had sent."

"Nektarios, of course, took the time to study them....'For how can I sit by idly when I know of all the arguments presented against my sweet and invincible Orthodoxy,' he thought to himself."

Quoted from "Saint Nektarios: The Saint of Our Century" by Sotos Chondropoulos, page 143.

:: Karl :: 4:48:00 PM [Link] ::

Matrix Revolutions Review

Very minor spoilers--Overall grade: B minus

I stand by my conviction that the original Matrix film is the greatest Sci-Fi movie ever made (edging out "Blade Runner" "Star Wars" and "Aliens"). From a philosophical, narrative, and visual point of view, the first Matrix film has no equal and is easily one of the most influential and important films of our generation.

Unlike many critics I thought "Reloaded" was a very good film and, while containing several glaring faults, was sufficiently bold and sophisticated enough to make up for its own bloated self-importance. The previous two films made clear that the brothers had the talent to pull off a masterpiece in the final installment, but also had the potential to let the narrative slip away from them. Thus, I went into "Revolutions" with mixed expectations.

It starts with some clever bits of dialogue, especially during the first 20 minutes. The middle part has a series of entertaining action pieces, although not very well edited in spots (At one point, Neo disappears from the plot for about 30 minutes which is a grave mistake, IMO) And as always great special effects abound throughout. The battle for Zion is truly fantastic. From an acting point of view there were some great highlights. Weaving and Bliss (Agent Smith and Bane, respectively ) are magnificent in their roles. I wouldn't be surprised if Weaving is nominated for a Best Supporting Actor Oscar.

The conclusion of the film was somewhat convoluted and murky, as expected. My main beef is that the writers rely *way* too heavily on Sisyphusian-existentialist philosophy at the end, which is very disappointing considering how superb the messianic overtones are in "Reloaded." At one point it seems like the brothers couldn't decide how to end the final confrontation and the sloppiness of the final 8-10 minutes will be a disappointment to many.

However I am glad that the resolution is not quite as neatly tied as one might expect from a Hollywood blockbuster. The "answers" lead to more questions, as they always do in the Matrix. It is truly a postmodern film in this respect.

The flip side is that as "Revolutions" hurls us toward a complicated ending, it leaves several very tantalizing plot lines unresolved (and in some cases, untouched) and fails to more fully develop several of the characters introduced in "Reloaded." This mistake is typical of the third part of most modern trilogies, but for some reason is even more irritating in this case considering the potential.

Bottom line: "Revolutions" doesn't have the enrapturing and coherent narrative aspects of "The Matrix" , nor the sheer grandeur and vision of "Reloaded." It was like a badly edited and sloppy version of "Return of the Jedi." It contains some of the best and worst aspects of the previous two films which makes for a mixed bag.

"Revolutions" is worth seeing and overall I still think it is a good film. All things considered the Matrix trilogy is by far one of the more interesting and intriguing stories in modern cinematic history, even if the third part leaves much to be desired. But you know, it was more fun reading all the articles, predictions, and philosophical essays than actually watching the film!

:: Karl :: 11:27:00 AM [Link] ::

Tough Inquirer Questions

"If Orthodoxy is so great, why haven't I heard of it?"

"If the Orthodox Church has preserved the fullness of the Faith, why are there so many good people not a part of it?"

"If I see so much fruit in other faiths, how can the Orthodox claim to be the true faith?"

These are kinds of questions I've gotten so many times from so many different people, I'm really curious to know how others have dealt with this particular line of thought in conversation and/or come to grips with these questions themselves. Briefly, it is obvious there are several problems with the above questions.

First, they deny the path that God has created for us to follow is a narrow one, and render the implications of Matt. 7:13-14 functionally obsolete. Second, they relegate the truth of Jesus' words in John 21:22 to everyone except the questioner, which is exaclty the opposite of Jesus' point. Third, there is a basic philosophical error embedded within the heart of these questions. I call it the "Peak-a-boo Syndrome." It comes down to this:

--Whatever I do not see does not really exist or is not or can not be really true--

Thus, if I or my loved ones have not found Orthodoxy, it

A. Does not really exist (i.e. "The Church was destroyed by Constantine and can be rebuilt and recreated by [fill in the blank movement du jour]) or
B. Can be defined in terms of whatever I'm doing at the moment. ("I believe in the Nicene Creed, just like the Orthodox, even though I mean someting totaly different by the words. But I'm just as much a Nicean Christian as the Orthodox.")

When confronted with this line of thought, sometimes I try to delve into the false assumptions that the questions are based on (for example, debunking the kind of soteriology that sends people to hell for being innocently ignorant). Some people find the answer of "We know where the Church is, not where it isn't" the perfect way of answering these questions. In other cases I just point out that the answer they want is meaningless if one fails to realize that no matter what was in the past or in other people's lives, the person asking the question is facing Orthodoxy NOW. Each case, each person asking these questions needs to hear different facets of the answer.

I have used a wide variety of approaches in trying to answer these questions in the past, but have always remained ultimately stumped as to why this particular line of thought is so pervasive and important to some people. For me, it is a very foreign way of judging truth claims.

So now I ask you, dear reader: Have you ever been asked any of the first three questions I listed at the start of this post? How did you handle the situation? Have you ever asked these questions yourself? What resolution did you come to?

Update: James has a few answers.

:: Karl :: 8:44:00 AM [Link] ::

U2 and St. Andrew of Crete: A Lenten Reflection

After reading the news from this post, I was inspired to dig up the following meditation on U2's song "Stuck in a Moment" posted on the Evangelical/Orthodox Discussion Group a few years back. Enjoy.

[Begin quoted material] -- This offering's subject line is from U2's most recent album, "All That You Can't Leave Behind." The song is titled "Stuck in a Moment." An excerpt:

I'm not afraid
Of anything in this world
There's nothing you can throw at me
That I haven't already heard

I'm just trying to find
A decent melody
A song that I can sing
In my own company

In some weird sense, this song sometimes sounds to me like God's song to us during Lent. The rest:

I never thought you were a fool
But darling look at you
You gotta stand up straight
Carry your own weight
These tears are going nowhere baby

You've got to get yourself together
You've got stuck in a moment
And now you can't get out of it

Don't say that later will be better
Now you're stuck in a moment
And you can't get out of it

Selfish tears are not what God seeks, but rather tears of real repentance, the tears that aren't "going nowhere." Indeed, with the tears of repentance, we can truly then "stand up straight / Carry [our] own weight," because it is God Himself Who lifts us. More:

I will not forsake
The colors that you bring
The nights you filled with fireworks
They left you with nothing

I am still enchanted
By the light you brought to me
I listen through your ears
Through your eyes I can see

God accepts our offerings to Him, but often our religious pretty falseness(_pseudokalos_) amounts to little more than fireworks which, while pretty, leave us with nothing in the end. What God wants is our souls, ourselves, the "light you brought to me," and in us he can "listen through [our] ears/Through [our] eyes [He] can see." Our gluttonies and addictions fill us...

And you are such a fool
To worry like you do
I know it's tough
And you can never get enough
Of what you don't really need now
My, oh my

...and so, we fast! He calls to us again:

You've got to get yourself together
You've got stuck in a moment
And you can't get out of it

Oh love, look at you now
You've got yourself stuck in a moment
And you can't get out of it

I was unconscious, half asleep
The water is warm 'til you discover how deep

Perhaps here He speaks of the Incarnation and of His rejection by His people:

I wasn't jumping, for me it was a fall
It's a long way down to nothing at all

You've got to get yourself together
You've got stuck in a moment
And you can't get out of it

Don't say that later will be better
Now you're stuck in a moment
And you can't get out of it

"Don't say that later will be better" echoes a centuries previous song by St. Andrew of Crete: "My soul, my soul, arise! Why are you sleeping? The end is drawing near, and you will be confounded. Awake, then, and be watchful, that Christ our God may spare you, Who is everywhere present and fills all things."

But He will be with us always, throughout our Lenten struggle:

And if the night runs over
And if the day won't last
And if our way should falter
Along the stony pass

It's just a moment
This time will pass

One of my favorite Biblical phrases has got to be "This, too, shall pass." Lent is about so many things, but among those things is, I think, getting unstuck from our "moments." We seem to be obsessed with moments here in our culture. If the "moment" has one element missing or fumbled, it's "ruined," and the "mood" is broken.

Lent is about struggle against sin, the struggle against nothingness, the struggle to attain to who we were created to be, our *true selves*. If we stay stuck in our moments, then the dynamic of Creator-Created relationship is disowned. We in fact deny the dynamic of our relationship with the Created, as well, whether it is with the Earth that God made for us or with our fellow persons.

Life is *dynamic* -- I am not the same person I was when I began this little letter. Getting stuck in ruts, in moments -- that is the stuff of sin, to make us believe that the status quo is just dandy, when in reality, we are not "stuck" but really moving *away* from Life Himself. We cannot help but be always moving, always changing, always dynamic -- we can, however, fool ourselves into the static, getting stuck in moments.

In those "moments" in which we find ourselves, the true nature of sin is that self-satisfaction, self-sufficiency, wrong-headed contentment. In that "moment," we do not need any God, because we have our "moment," our lovely, controllable, predictable, safe place of "happiness." In our "moment," we are an idol (_eidolon_, "phantom"), a false god (_pseudotheos_), and in our pseudotheology, we have our moment of pleasure, our moment of power, our moment of self sufficiency.

In Lent, God calls us once again to break out of our moments, to be really ravished by a sweetness and wonder which is entirely beyond all control, beyond all understanding, beyond all prediction, beyond everything that is safe. It is a place which is dangerous, mystical, powerful, and all of it is only possible with true humility, true self-emptying.

*Alone*, we are in our moments, our paltry little self-made "worlds" which are safe, stable, and nice. *With God* and *in His Church*, we are capable of being *true* gods ("I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High." Ps. 82:6), moving beyond ourselves, moving into perfect self-transcendence, moving into perfect communion, into true holiness, becoming what we were created to be.

Only through true repentance, struggle, self-emptying, and deep, joyful sorrow, can we enter into the eternal, divine flame, soaking up His radiance and heat, ourselves becoming blindingly brilliant as we radiate the Holy Light.

"He is my Helper and Protector, and has become my salvation. This is my God and I will glorify Him. My father's God and I will exalt Him. For gloriously has He been glorified." (St. Andrew of Crete)"

:: Karl :: 7:59:00 AM [Link] ::