A thoughtful and talented man said "I have no problem with God or my faith in Him, but what bothers me a bit is the Church. I could say that God is my Father and the Church is my mother." I think you could agree with this and continue: I feel fine with my Dad and I am happy when I am with him. He is a little bit distant but he is always there whenever I need help and support, he understands me and he does not take anything I say the wrong way. To put it simply, he loves me, and his love is a great source of inexpressible joy and exultation. As for my Mum, I can not say she does not love me (I love her too) she is my mother, but there is a big BUT. She loves me in such an authoritarian way, she stifles me, she pressures me, she does not leave me any personal space, any freedom. She watches me all the time, she is scared that I shall fall and hurt myself, she is so worried about my future and gets easily disappointed and pessimistic about it. She wants everything to be perfect and grumbles all the time. And when I dare to argue that my Dad - who is really in charge - does not share her point of view, without that meaning that he loves me less, she is ready with her answer, the complaint: "that's what kids are like nowadays, none of them love their Mum like they did in the good old days." Meanwhile she does all she can to make us feel she is not our Mum but our mother-in-law, as a Cypriot priest very cleverly put it.
Let us look at these complaints from both sides to see where justice lies. I have got the feeling that Christ who is the Good Shepherd of a logical flock, loves and cares for the weak and sickly sheep as much if not more than the healthy and productive ones, who give joy and satisfaction and "yielded a hundredfold"8.1. He does not make conditions about which of us will be in his flock. He "will have all men to be saved"8.2. He knows that his children have got their faults - all good Fathers know that - but inside the warm embrace of the family they will have the sharp edges taken off, and they will be given the opportunity to put their gifts and talents to good use and even do great things. The Church, on the other hand (whatever type of church it is) decrees that you have to pass a preliminary before taking part. Traditionally, the entry requirements for some "competitions" indeed, are so elevated that only a very few people can enter, even though this is totally against Jesus' teaching. Work out for yourselves how many young people can fulfil these strict requirements which they are given. What if these young people have great zeal and enthusiasm to offer, want to sacrifice themselves for peace, to fight for a better community? What if young people gladly answer the call to come close to the Church, only to find out that they are being offered passive participation in vigils and Byzantine services, which they do not understand and do not feel moved by? Young people are distanced from the heart of the Church not because they are "very rich"8.3 or because "monkery is too harsh”8.4, but because they are obliged to leave when there seems to be no chance of working for a vision of Love, Peace and Freedom and sometimes the notion elevated into doctrine that the Church is not "an unfenced vineyard", makes them leave.
This is reminiscent of the heavy-sounding speech of a "pillar" of a lay monastic community, who invited his followers to explain to them the inevitable and "unavoidable" dissolution of the "Movement": "We older ones founded this monastery with our sweat and now some young ones want to modernise it. So we are knocking it down, we are taking "the portion of goods that falleth"8.5 to us and whoever wants can come with us. What a great happiness their followers felt when suddenly and like the trumpet-call of an angel they realised that they were nothing but stones who had taken part in the building of the monastery walls, (and now they were being given the chance to choose which of the walls of the two new monasteries they wanted to be part of), is unspeakable!
Let us come back to the argument of the unfenced vineyard. Those who have this mentality do not understand one thing. The strict rules of keeping integrity and values of the Church by means foreign to the love and philanthropy of God, like excommunication, heavy punishments and various processes of pillorying the guilty, could not dissuade them from breaking the unified body of the Church of Christ into thousands of pieces ("Is Christ divided?8.6) and claiming for each part the whole truth for itself. The two main reasons for this sad reality, if we think of it seriously, are these: egoism and a passion for power.
A rather utopian approach (which as such may not have much to do with earthly reality) would be to have these two evils of human fate neutralized in a way that is near to the spirit of Christian teaching:
Egoism first, would be faced by the tactic of generosity and "open heart". Apart from theoretical misbeliefs and dogmatical differences, all these parts of the one Body are bound to have plenty of good points (and for those who are not grumblers, lots of good points). Indeed, if you ask a simple believer, who is not fanatical, how he deals with someone of another dogma or religion, he would tell you calmly that he has no problem and within a mutual spirit of love and respect for diversity, he could easily collaborate and live together, without seeing the person of another dogma as his enemy. The congregation does not present problems, but Church leadership does, and that is where the problems and arguments begin. The root of the evil is that none of the Church leaders ever honestly tried to sow the seeds of respect for other people's views. But where "authority" failed, the "simple" and unique Persons of the lay Christian people succeeded, "the Lord working with them"8.7.
As for Power and Authority, the danger of "infiltration" of "foreign elements" will be neutralised by the simple return of the Church to the principles and the character given by her Founder. An area of the spirit, without Scribes and Pharisees (the only people about whom Jesus said "Woe unto you"8.8), where there would be no room for Mammon or worldly power. Since there would not be any possibility of gain or exploitation, why would somebody try to get into it? Even in the case he intruded by chance or trickery, he would soon leave, because he would find the atmosphere so "unhygienic". Again doubts would be raised about the naivety of the writer. This can not really happen in our world. This comes from unearthly spheres. Right! Somebody has to remind us that "My kingdom is not of this world"8.9. But does not it begin from this world?
All this seems absurd to human logic, utopian and unreasonable. But did not a historical Person come to bridge this absurdity and give it substance? Let me dare to give a "working hypothesis”, though it may sound crazy. What were the criteria by which people were chosen for responsible and elevated positions in the ancient Church? Today things are very different, and the candidate for leadership, apart from his blind obedience to the "system", must also have good managerial skills, foreign languages, the ability to make speeches, administrative capabilities, the gift of communication. In the past, people were chosen for their zeal, their desire for sacrifice and offering, their self-denial. Did they have any worldly authority, any economic gain or emoluments? Saint Paul proudly showed off his calloused hands: "Yourselves know, that these hands have ministered unto my necessities, and to them that were with me"8.10. Saint Paul did not have a High Court judge's salary, nor did he expect a special place of honour at every public or private state event. He did not use luxury transport (unlike today's clergy with their BMW's and Mercedes cars), when he took his endless, painful and dangerous journeys through the world. He did not want any relationship that would have held him back in his struggle to fulfil his desire for continuous evangelizing, and kept for himself the difficult "it is good for a man not to touch a woman"8.11 but he did not "despised others"8.12 who combined their activities as apostles with wives and mothers in law8.13. On the contrary, he advised others, with deep humanity and understanding: "A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife"8.14.
Why is this not the case today too? Irrelevant! People will shout - those who belong to the "establishment" and who have a solid command of the knowledge of the situation. It is unreal and impractical. Right! But this is the Christian teaching. If it is unreal and impractical why we do hasten to preach it?
In spite of all this, simple people know deep down that today wonderful characters like that do exist, and if their integrity can not be guaranteed for a lifetime, you can at least ask it for a time. This is what Democracy after all means, and that is why our Synodic system is proud of being Democratic; although it is applying a truncated situation, because Democracy and a lifelong (even elected) leader are not compatible. Things would have been different if responsible servants ("let a man so account of us, as of the ministers of Christ, and stewards of the mysteries of God"8.14) and not Princes of the Church had been elected by the vote of clergy and lay and for limited periods of time. In that case, the Church would be outstanding and you would be able to see its splendour against the background of worldly politics. People would be able to see the difference by themselves without having to be bombarded with exaggerations and inaccuracies from advertising. Instead of people putting themselves forward as candidates for leadership, with vain promises, the faithful would find and conscript genuine people who would not come to take responsible positions for money and/or authority but would offer themselves to be used. Then there would no longer be any blasphemy against the Holy Spirit - whose divine inspiration has been replaced by landline or mobile telephones and transactions of any kind.
So how can a self-made status quo change, when it has nothing to envy of the establishment of the Scribes and Pharisees, with multiple "security valves" to protect itself, and with a "selfish gene" deeply rooted in its core? For that to happen, abruptly and suddenly, from one day to the next, a miracle is required, like the one expected by those people who frequently look indirectly for God's love through miracle-working icons, hoping they will force the intervention of God in the direction they think fit. They do not even suspect the possibility of a transformation long, mild, silent, but frequently painful (like the gestation procedure). Those who "thine eye be single"8.15 can see it and enjoy it in the development of the miracle called life.
That is what God's disappointed and betrayed people are waiting for. A miracle which is "unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness"8.16. "When the fullness of the time was come"8.17, when this miracle happens, there will be no need of fiery sermons so that the hungry and thirsty will come to the rich Dinner. Then the invitation "come and see"8.17 will be more than enough. Then they will not be repelled by the wordy declaration "I have seven homes of my own to fight my enemies."8.18 of those who made a vow of poverty, and an oath to keep all the commandments, the last of which is not the "provide neither gold, nor silver, nor brass in your purses"8.19. Some parish priests start spending to build beautiful marble churches, but when you ask them if they need something for the parishioners, they reply proudly "our church has no poor or needy". They do not even suspect the "hunger," "thirst," anxiety, despair and loneliness of the souls entrusted to them by God.
Then the priests should "maintain good works"8.20 (out of love and not out of duty), without managing the necessary money by themselves but delegating this service to well-chosen and tried members of the congregation, retaining only the supervision and final responsibility. They will, of course, willingly give reports on their own "management" instead of feeling that their dignity is offended by such an action.
Then these works will not be personalised nor share the unavoidable biological "end" of their inspirer and founder, but will be works belonging to the Church of which "the gates of hell shall not prevail against it"8.21. And the new people brought in to offer their services will not have the ambition to leave any personal stamp on things, like world leaders, nor will they want to expand and blow up their list of good deeds, but will humbly "abound to every good work"8.22 in the service of love. So the Church will not be restricted complacently to its "own" works, but will serve, support and "cleanse" every well-intentioned attempt, (regardless of how imperfect they are); with love, humility, circumspection, discretion and, of course, within the limits of human ability. Then even the zealous will not bury their talents in the depths of a cell but will cultivate and develop them in "zealous of good works"8.23, in the service of practical love for their neighbour.
Then the Church will not judge you, label you or categorize you, but will follow Jesus' example of accepting you as you are and will help you and encourage you continually to reach as far as you can. Just as Christ did not care for the jealous comments of the Scribes and Pharisees "when they saw that he was eating with sinners and tax collectors”8.24 nor was he afraid that his disciples and followers would be scandalized by that, so the Church would not attach importance to their "respectability" and "what people will say" nor be scandalized where they should not, bashfully closing their eyes, when people raise an outcry against obvious situations, which they pretend not see.
Then the churches would not be refuges for some people to hide their spiritual insecurity and ideological prepossessions, but would be "fair haven" for everyone, not only a place of worship but of real companionship and relation.
Then : "Let's go to other countries of truth
to other unique countries
to find ourselves on "personal" trails
to participate in anarchic marches
to meet with true experiences…"8.25
Then Yes! But until then what? Until then, pain and suffering and patience and faith and hope:
"Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus"!(8.26)
[8.1] Luc. 8, 8
[8.2] 1 Tim. 2, 4
[8.3] Luc. 18, 23
[8.4] Greek expression
[8.5] Luc. 15, 12
[8.6] 1 Cor. 1, 13
[8.7] Mar. 16, 20
[8.8] Mat. 23, 13
[8.9] Joh. 18, 36
[8.10] Act. 20, 34
[8.11] 1 Cor. 7, 1
[8.12] Luc. 18, 9
[8.13] Luc. 4, 38
[8.14] 1Tim. 3, 2
[8.14] 1 Cor. 4, 1
[8.15] Mat. 6, 22
[8.16] 1 Cor. 1, 23
[8.17] Gal. 4, 4
[8.18] Joh. 1, 46
[8.18] Phrase ascribed to a Bishop who was involved in a judicial dispute with his accusers.
[8.19] Mat. 10, 9
[8.20] Tit. 3, 14
[8.21] Mat. 16, 18
[8.22] 2 Cor. 9, 8
[8.23] Tit. 2, 14
[8.24] Mar. 2, 16
[8.25] Verses of a song of S. Spanoudakis
(contemporary Greek composer).
[8.26] Rev. 22, 20
Let us look at these complaints from both sides to see where justice lies. I have got the feeling that Christ who is the Good Shepherd of a logical flock, loves and cares for the weak and sickly sheep as much if not more than the healthy and productive ones, who give joy and satisfaction and "yielded a hundredfold"8.1. He does not make conditions about which of us will be in his flock. He "will have all men to be saved"8.2. He knows that his children have got their faults - all good Fathers know that - but inside the warm embrace of the family they will have the sharp edges taken off, and they will be given the opportunity to put their gifts and talents to good use and even do great things. The Church, on the other hand (whatever type of church it is) decrees that you have to pass a preliminary before taking part. Traditionally, the entry requirements for some "competitions" indeed, are so elevated that only a very few people can enter, even though this is totally against Jesus' teaching. Work out for yourselves how many young people can fulfil these strict requirements which they are given. What if these young people have great zeal and enthusiasm to offer, want to sacrifice themselves for peace, to fight for a better community? What if young people gladly answer the call to come close to the Church, only to find out that they are being offered passive participation in vigils and Byzantine services, which they do not understand and do not feel moved by? Young people are distanced from the heart of the Church not because they are "very rich"8.3 or because "monkery is too harsh”8.4, but because they are obliged to leave when there seems to be no chance of working for a vision of Love, Peace and Freedom and sometimes the notion elevated into doctrine that the Church is not "an unfenced vineyard", makes them leave.
This is reminiscent of the heavy-sounding speech of a "pillar" of a lay monastic community, who invited his followers to explain to them the inevitable and "unavoidable" dissolution of the "Movement": "We older ones founded this monastery with our sweat and now some young ones want to modernise it. So we are knocking it down, we are taking "the portion of goods that falleth"8.5 to us and whoever wants can come with us. What a great happiness their followers felt when suddenly and like the trumpet-call of an angel they realised that they were nothing but stones who had taken part in the building of the monastery walls, (and now they were being given the chance to choose which of the walls of the two new monasteries they wanted to be part of), is unspeakable!
Let us come back to the argument of the unfenced vineyard. Those who have this mentality do not understand one thing. The strict rules of keeping integrity and values of the Church by means foreign to the love and philanthropy of God, like excommunication, heavy punishments and various processes of pillorying the guilty, could not dissuade them from breaking the unified body of the Church of Christ into thousands of pieces ("Is Christ divided?8.6) and claiming for each part the whole truth for itself. The two main reasons for this sad reality, if we think of it seriously, are these: egoism and a passion for power.
A rather utopian approach (which as such may not have much to do with earthly reality) would be to have these two evils of human fate neutralized in a way that is near to the spirit of Christian teaching:
Egoism first, would be faced by the tactic of generosity and "open heart". Apart from theoretical misbeliefs and dogmatical differences, all these parts of the one Body are bound to have plenty of good points (and for those who are not grumblers, lots of good points). Indeed, if you ask a simple believer, who is not fanatical, how he deals with someone of another dogma or religion, he would tell you calmly that he has no problem and within a mutual spirit of love and respect for diversity, he could easily collaborate and live together, without seeing the person of another dogma as his enemy. The congregation does not present problems, but Church leadership does, and that is where the problems and arguments begin. The root of the evil is that none of the Church leaders ever honestly tried to sow the seeds of respect for other people's views. But where "authority" failed, the "simple" and unique Persons of the lay Christian people succeeded, "the Lord working with them"8.7.
As for Power and Authority, the danger of "infiltration" of "foreign elements" will be neutralised by the simple return of the Church to the principles and the character given by her Founder. An area of the spirit, without Scribes and Pharisees (the only people about whom Jesus said "Woe unto you"8.8), where there would be no room for Mammon or worldly power. Since there would not be any possibility of gain or exploitation, why would somebody try to get into it? Even in the case he intruded by chance or trickery, he would soon leave, because he would find the atmosphere so "unhygienic". Again doubts would be raised about the naivety of the writer. This can not really happen in our world. This comes from unearthly spheres. Right! Somebody has to remind us that "My kingdom is not of this world"8.9. But does not it begin from this world?
All this seems absurd to human logic, utopian and unreasonable. But did not a historical Person come to bridge this absurdity and give it substance? Let me dare to give a "working hypothesis”, though it may sound crazy. What were the criteria by which people were chosen for responsible and elevated positions in the ancient Church? Today things are very different, and the candidate for leadership, apart from his blind obedience to the "system", must also have good managerial skills, foreign languages, the ability to make speeches, administrative capabilities, the gift of communication. In the past, people were chosen for their zeal, their desire for sacrifice and offering, their self-denial. Did they have any worldly authority, any economic gain or emoluments? Saint Paul proudly showed off his calloused hands: "Yourselves know, that these hands have ministered unto my necessities, and to them that were with me"8.10. Saint Paul did not have a High Court judge's salary, nor did he expect a special place of honour at every public or private state event. He did not use luxury transport (unlike today's clergy with their BMW's and Mercedes cars), when he took his endless, painful and dangerous journeys through the world. He did not want any relationship that would have held him back in his struggle to fulfil his desire for continuous evangelizing, and kept for himself the difficult "it is good for a man not to touch a woman"8.11 but he did not "despised others"8.12 who combined their activities as apostles with wives and mothers in law8.13. On the contrary, he advised others, with deep humanity and understanding: "A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife"8.14.
Why is this not the case today too? Irrelevant! People will shout - those who belong to the "establishment" and who have a solid command of the knowledge of the situation. It is unreal and impractical. Right! But this is the Christian teaching. If it is unreal and impractical why we do hasten to preach it?
In spite of all this, simple people know deep down that today wonderful characters like that do exist, and if their integrity can not be guaranteed for a lifetime, you can at least ask it for a time. This is what Democracy after all means, and that is why our Synodic system is proud of being Democratic; although it is applying a truncated situation, because Democracy and a lifelong (even elected) leader are not compatible. Things would have been different if responsible servants ("let a man so account of us, as of the ministers of Christ, and stewards of the mysteries of God"8.14) and not Princes of the Church had been elected by the vote of clergy and lay and for limited periods of time. In that case, the Church would be outstanding and you would be able to see its splendour against the background of worldly politics. People would be able to see the difference by themselves without having to be bombarded with exaggerations and inaccuracies from advertising. Instead of people putting themselves forward as candidates for leadership, with vain promises, the faithful would find and conscript genuine people who would not come to take responsible positions for money and/or authority but would offer themselves to be used. Then there would no longer be any blasphemy against the Holy Spirit - whose divine inspiration has been replaced by landline or mobile telephones and transactions of any kind.
So how can a self-made status quo change, when it has nothing to envy of the establishment of the Scribes and Pharisees, with multiple "security valves" to protect itself, and with a "selfish gene" deeply rooted in its core? For that to happen, abruptly and suddenly, from one day to the next, a miracle is required, like the one expected by those people who frequently look indirectly for God's love through miracle-working icons, hoping they will force the intervention of God in the direction they think fit. They do not even suspect the possibility of a transformation long, mild, silent, but frequently painful (like the gestation procedure). Those who "thine eye be single"8.15 can see it and enjoy it in the development of the miracle called life.
That is what God's disappointed and betrayed people are waiting for. A miracle which is "unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness"8.16. "When the fullness of the time was come"8.17, when this miracle happens, there will be no need of fiery sermons so that the hungry and thirsty will come to the rich Dinner. Then the invitation "come and see"8.17 will be more than enough. Then they will not be repelled by the wordy declaration "I have seven homes of my own to fight my enemies."8.18 of those who made a vow of poverty, and an oath to keep all the commandments, the last of which is not the "provide neither gold, nor silver, nor brass in your purses"8.19. Some parish priests start spending to build beautiful marble churches, but when you ask them if they need something for the parishioners, they reply proudly "our church has no poor or needy". They do not even suspect the "hunger," "thirst," anxiety, despair and loneliness of the souls entrusted to them by God.
Then the priests should "maintain good works"8.20 (out of love and not out of duty), without managing the necessary money by themselves but delegating this service to well-chosen and tried members of the congregation, retaining only the supervision and final responsibility. They will, of course, willingly give reports on their own "management" instead of feeling that their dignity is offended by such an action.
Then these works will not be personalised nor share the unavoidable biological "end" of their inspirer and founder, but will be works belonging to the Church of which "the gates of hell shall not prevail against it"8.21. And the new people brought in to offer their services will not have the ambition to leave any personal stamp on things, like world leaders, nor will they want to expand and blow up their list of good deeds, but will humbly "abound to every good work"8.22 in the service of love. So the Church will not be restricted complacently to its "own" works, but will serve, support and "cleanse" every well-intentioned attempt, (regardless of how imperfect they are); with love, humility, circumspection, discretion and, of course, within the limits of human ability. Then even the zealous will not bury their talents in the depths of a cell but will cultivate and develop them in "zealous of good works"8.23, in the service of practical love for their neighbour.
Then the Church will not judge you, label you or categorize you, but will follow Jesus' example of accepting you as you are and will help you and encourage you continually to reach as far as you can. Just as Christ did not care for the jealous comments of the Scribes and Pharisees "when they saw that he was eating with sinners and tax collectors”8.24 nor was he afraid that his disciples and followers would be scandalized by that, so the Church would not attach importance to their "respectability" and "what people will say" nor be scandalized where they should not, bashfully closing their eyes, when people raise an outcry against obvious situations, which they pretend not see.
Then the churches would not be refuges for some people to hide their spiritual insecurity and ideological prepossessions, but would be "fair haven" for everyone, not only a place of worship but of real companionship and relation.
Then : "Let's go to other countries of truth
to other unique countries
to find ourselves on "personal" trails
to participate in anarchic marches
to meet with true experiences…"8.25
Then Yes! But until then what? Until then, pain and suffering and patience and faith and hope:
"Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus"!(8.26)
[8.1] Luc. 8, 8
[8.2] 1 Tim. 2, 4
[8.3] Luc. 18, 23
[8.4] Greek expression
[8.5] Luc. 15, 12
[8.6] 1 Cor. 1, 13
[8.7] Mar. 16, 20
[8.8] Mat. 23, 13
[8.9] Joh. 18, 36
[8.10] Act. 20, 34
[8.11] 1 Cor. 7, 1
[8.12] Luc. 18, 9
[8.13] Luc. 4, 38
[8.14] 1Tim. 3, 2
[8.14] 1 Cor. 4, 1
[8.15] Mat. 6, 22
[8.16] 1 Cor. 1, 23
[8.17] Gal. 4, 4
[8.18] Joh. 1, 46
[8.18] Phrase ascribed to a Bishop who was involved in a judicial dispute with his accusers.
[8.19] Mat. 10, 9
[8.20] Tit. 3, 14
[8.21] Mat. 16, 18
[8.22] 2 Cor. 9, 8
[8.23] Tit. 2, 14
[8.24] Mar. 2, 16
[8.25] Verses of a song of S. Spanoudakis
(contemporary Greek composer).
[8.26] Rev. 22, 20
1 comment:
I required some information and was searching on Yahoo UK for it. I visited each of the top 3 pages that came up but didn’t get any relevant result... I then luckily found your diamond message board in the dirt and thought to check it out. This is what I wanted!
Cheers peeps at betrayed-christianity.blogspot.com and keep the good effort up.
[color=#225588][URL=http://www.iron-science.co.uk/]bodybuilding supplements[/URL] [URL=http://www.iron-science.co.uk/]Sports Nutrition[/URL] [URL=http://www.iron-science.co.uk/]bodybuilding[/URL] [URL=http://www.iron-science.co.uk/]Sports Supplements[/URL] [/color]
Post a Comment