OrthoAnalyika Shownotes: 18 October 2009
Note: be sure to subscribe to the podcast.
Homily/Lesson (19th Sunday after Pentecost)
“But if you love those who love you, what credit is that to you? For even sinners love those who love them. And if you do good to those who do good to you, what credit is that to you? For even sinners do the same. And if you lend to those from whom you hope to receive back, what credit is that to you? For even sinners lend to sinners to receive as much back. But love your enemies, do good, and lend, hoping for nothing in return; and your reward will be great, and you will be sons of the Most High. For He is kind to the unthankful and evil. Therefore be merciful, just as your Father also is merciful.” (St. Luke 6: 31-36)
Here we have Christ throwing down the gauntlet to the world, but not in the way that many expected. Some of the more devout Jews were looking for an anointed leader to help deliver them from the Romans. You can imagine how they expected Jesus to support them in this struggle. After all, they had legitimate grievances against the Romans: the Romans were imperialists and many of the Jews wanted to rule themselves.
But Jesus refused to be part of their worldly struggle. His challenge was not specifically to the Romans or to the Jews: in fact, it was a radical healing ministry that provided an end to all worldly divisions and rivalries. He challenged everyone to repent of their jealousies, hatreds, grudges, and self-satisfaction and embrace a life of mercy, love, and completely selfless giving. If we answered that challenge, He would enable us to reconcile and unite ourselves with one another and with God. The resulting union would allow for our eternal growth and joy, and show our previous fascination with selfish games and petty rivalries to be the wicked wastes of time they have always been.
I want you to understand just how revolutionary both His approach and His message is, because He is issuing us the same challenge here today.
In a world torn by factionalism – where people automatically face-off into opposing sides across which no love can flow and within which no humility can grow – all new information is automatically processed in such a way to harden the lines of battle. This is a well established political and psychological fact. In those rare times when the battle lines are destroyed, either through the domination of one side over the other or through dealignment, the opportunity for peace and reconciliation is soon lost as new battle lines over different issues and identities are formed. Left to our own devices, this permanent state of war would grind us down and destroy our humanity.
Philosophers like Hobbes, Locke, Smith, and Madison would have us find a political solution through this difficulty, either through the creation of a governmental leviathan that would force us to be free, or through channeling our pettiness into less violent activities like elections and markets. The problem is that these so-called “solutions” may ameliorate the social effects of our divisiveness, but they can also reinforce the sickness that causes it. And because our petty tribalism now rarely leads to violence (thanks to these modern political and economic institutions), we fail to notice the terrible damage that it does to us and to those we have cast as our enemies. But do not be deceived: we are becoming less human.
This desire to cast things into terms of battle has polarized our political, social, and international differences, turning them into contests which cannot be solved through compromise, but only through victory or defeat. Our divisiveness, our desire to see things in terms of “us” vs. “them” also strikes close to home, rendering our communities and our families. Even our parishes sometimes succumb to this, as when we welcome only those “like us” (thus dividing ourselves from the rest of our community) or when we create divisions and scapegoats amongst ourselves.
The effects are social (affecting our politics, our community, and our families), but the causes are personal: our very hearts are perverted and schismatic. Rather than simply taking part in war, we have become warmongers; rather than simply joining parties, we have become partisans; rather than joining divisions we have actually become divisive.
But this need not be our fate: Christ has shown us a better way. His message is so radical that it cannot be used by one side against the other without completely perverting it; and yet it is so powerful that if we listen we can end our divisions and ensure a free and lasting peace. Listen to the way it challenges everyone equally and think about how it can fundamentally reshape our relations with one another. Christ teaches that [you] should; “do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, and pray for those who spitefully use you… Give to everyone who asks of you.” (St. Luke 6: 27b, 28, 30a).
Last week we learned that “cheerful giving” was incompatible with grudges and petty games of manipulation. This week’s message continues this theme as Christ tells us that we should give what we have without any expectation of gain. This doesn’t just apply to money or our clothes (St. Luke 6:29), but to our love. We are to love people unconditionally, regardless of what they have done to us before or what they are likely to do to us in return. This doesn’t just mean opening up your heart to strangers, but to the people you may have hated for your entire adult life.
“Why would anyone want to do such a thing? What good could possibly come of it? Won’t people take advantage of us? Won’t we end up looking like fools – or enabling bad behavior?” The fact that these questions occur to us demonstrates how far we are from offering unconditional love for anything or anyone, but let me conclude by offering an answer. There are at least three reasons why we should be willing to devote ourselves to this radical new plan of action.
First: obedience. We should be willing to devote ourselves unconditionally to one another because the omniscient, omnipotent, and all-loving God has told us that this is the proper way to live. But perhaps this is not enough; we may be as far from accepting God’s advice as we are from loving our enemies. Perhaps it is for this reason that God has sweetened the pot.
Second: reward. God promises us a reward if we follow His teaching; “But love your enemies, do good, and lend, hoping for nothing in return; and your reward will be great, and you will be sons of the Most High.” If we do not implicitly trust the things that God teaches us, perhaps this reward will get us headed in the right direction. But for some of us, even this is not enough. But if we cannot trust the promises of a God who is so powerful that He created the world out of nothing and loves us so much that He suffered on the Cross for us, what will be believe? Glory to God that there are indicators that His Way works that even the blind might see.
Third: logic and experience. Love is the rule, the founding principle of this world, and the thing that makes us fully whom we were created to be. Millennia of our selfish perversion have distorted us and this world, but love still has a special resonance. When we harmonize ourselves to it, then beautiful things happen naturally. Let me give you some worldly examples. Political science: societies with higher levels of trust and civic cooperation are more efficient and provide higher levels of satisfaction (e.g. Putnam). The same can be extended to relations between groups and nations (e.g. Axlerod). Psychologically, we were created to trust people who offer us gifts – and with a natural desire to reciprocate (e.g. Cialdini). From your own experience, you know how loaning money – especially to relatives and friends – poisons your relationships. Perhaps you have also felt joy when you helped a friend or stranger in need. And I am sure all of you have felt the freedom and relief of forgiveness (both ways). You are healthier when you live this way, and our communities are healthier when when we all do the same. You have seen families and groups where this kind of behavior was the norm; you have also seen families and groups where it was not. Which should we chose? Which should we create around ourselves? [St. Seraphim of Sarov].
End your warfare against one another and against this world. Give your forgiveness, your love, and your mercy without condition. Glory and thanksgiving to God that He has done the same for us.
+++
Mail:
Why are you okay with EP control over the Orthodox in America, and not with Russian control over the Orthodox in Ukraine?
What is the status of the outreach effort in southern Rhode Island? Why did you select Kingston/URI? What is your approach?
How do you select the lessons from Scripture each week? Topic for your homily? Is the page you post the actual transcript?
News:
Local News –
Ordination of Fr. Silouan Rolando (Axios!). Script Cards. Shaw’s Cards. Tithing? Electricians. Masons. RICC F&O (Poverty. Utility of the experience for my pastoral ministry). Upcoming events: Clergy Retreat, Ordination of Rdr. Charles, Subdeacon and Reader Retreat. Substitute Teaching at War College. Rearranged the rectory office (aka the “Orthoanalytika Studios”) into the “Winter Chapel”. (How do y’all feel about that? Is it okay to serve in a side chapel? Under what conditions? What are the costs and benefits?) Still enjoying karate and still tracking calories/exercise. Ongoing adult education: going to add a second class on Thursday evenings at 6:30 in the Winter Chapel.
Broader News –
Yulia Tymoshenko Wins Highest Award of Jerusalem Orthodox Church
10/20/2009
JERUSALEM — Ukrainian Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko visited the sacred places of Jerusalem last weekend. Tymoshenko came to Jerusalem on a private visit on October 17, 2009. The prime minister prayed at the Weeping Wall. On Sunday, October 18, Patriarch of Jerusalem Theophilus III presented to Prime Minister of Ukraine Yulia Tymoshenko the highest award of the Jerusalem Orthodox Church, the Order of the Holy Sepulchre. This award is given to heads of churches and of states for outstanding services to the Orthodox Church.
By different estimates from 35 000 up to 40 000 people bowed unto the Wonderworking Pochayiv Icon of the Theotokos at the time of its three-week journey throughout Canada. Within the period from September 22 till October 11 the wonderworking icon visited Montreal, Toronto, Ottawa, Vancouver, Edmonton, Calgary, Regina, Winnipeg. Praying and conducting akathist prayer services at the wonderworking image of the Mother of God were the clergymen and lay people from all the orthodox jurisdictions of Canada, i.e. of the Orthodox Church in America, the hierarchs and clergy of the Patriarchates of Constantinople, Antioch, Moscow, Serbia and Romania, of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church in Canada (Patriarchate of Constantinople) etc. These days the prayer to the Mother of God sounded in Church Slavonic, English, Greek, Romanian, Ukrainian and other languages. The Greek Catholic and Roman Catholic bishops and priests, monastics and lay people came to bow to the venerated Ukrainian shrine.
Double Standard in Pakistan. Fantastic coverage of NYTimes Reporter’s Ordeal.
Vatican Seeks to Lure Disaffected Anglicans
VATICAN CITY – The Vatican announced Tuesday it was making it easier for Anglicans to convert to Roman Catholicism — a surprise move designed to entice traditionalists opposed to women priests, openly gay clergy and the blessing of same-sex unions.
We do this, as well. Some well-intentioned advice on things to avoid when moving a parish towards Orthodoxy.
Volya/Andy Rooney Moment: Globalization
From Peter Berger; “Religion in a Globalizing World”
Look at the changes in the just the last 100 years: Pentacostalism. Growth of LDS. Growth of Islam. Changing face of Chrisendom. Others.
Had believed that religion would die: secularism and modernization
Berger believes that the globalization (and growth) of religion is part of the growth of pluralism. How would this work? How is it like/unlike previous periods of growth (e.g. Millet; late Roman). Market paradigm.
Modernization need not bring about secularism, but tends to bring about pluralism. Huge implications for how institutions adapt and people socialize (Pew). Voluntary. Vibrant. Not tied to the state.
Claims that hard to repress this pluralism (example of Russia… but what about Arabian Peninsula?)
Does create a tension between relativism and fundamentalism. The fundamentalism backlash:
Fundamentalism can be defined in different ways. I would define it as an attempt to restore or create anew the taken-for-grantedness of a particular worldview meaning in of a particular religious tradition, to be taken for granted against a relativization of the modern world. And that’s a very difficult project.
Again, I could talk about this at inordinate length, but let me simply say there are two models of fundamentalism. One is – I call it the “reconquista” model. That was the term used in the endless war between Christians and Muslims in Spain when the Spanish Christians were going to re-conquer Spain from Islam. So I would say the reconquista model of fundamentalism is to impose the restored taken-for-grantedness on an entire society. That is a very difficult project. I would say there is no significant Christian community today who wants to do that. The Catholic Church has long given up this project. The role it had during the Spanish civil war would be unthinkable today.
Unfortunately, there are significant elements in the Muslim world who do want to do that. It’s a very difficult project because for the project to succeed, you have to control and eliminate the pluralistic dynamic, and that’s very hard to do. As I’ve mentioned before with Russia and China, even if you have a totalitarian state, it is difficult to do.
The more modest, and therefore more possible, model for fundamentalism is a sort of micro-totalitarianism. You don’t try to impose your ideas on the society as a whole, but you create a community within which it becomes possible. This is the sectarian or sub-cultural possibility. It’s also difficult because the pluralistic dynamic is very strong and you have to have very strong isolation of your community from the surrounding society, which you have decided can go to hell because the truth is now within your community. But at least compared to the reconquista model, it is feasible.
What are the implications for Orthodoxy here? In monopoly states?
Relativism is a great temtpation – it is the automatic (default) psychological response to living amongst good people of different faiths (and bad people of your own). As pastors and leaders, we must provide a framework for people to maintain their faith within a pluralist world. A fundamentalism approach is to create a cult mentality within the parish (the micro model Berger describes). Is this healthy? What are the costs? Benefits? The other extreme is to just go with the flow. Costs? Benefits?
Is there another way? Provide people with the confidence of their calling. Witness with love. Embrace mystery. Trust to the Traditional ways and explain their relevance for today.
