:: 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] ::