DEDICATED TO THE MEMORY OF ST. JOHN, ARCHBISHOP OF SHANGHAI AND SAN FRANCISCO

---

ORTHODOX CHRISTIAN WITNESS (USPS 412-260)
is published monthly by St. Nectarios American Orthodox Cathedral,
10300 Ashworth Avenue North, Seattle, Washington 98133-9410.
POSTMASTER: Send address changes to

OCW, 10300 Ashworth Ave. N., Seattle, WA. 98133-9410

Fr. Neketas S. Palassis, Editor Email: frneketas@stnectariospress.com
Telephone (206) 522-4471; (800) 643-4233 U.S. & Canada;
Fax: 206-523-0550

JANUARY, 2004, Vol. XXXVIII, No. 1 (1532)

TABLE OF CONTENTS:

1. The Lenten Encyclical of his Eminence Ephraim, Metropolitan of Boston

2. On Mother Teresa's Beatification and the Filioque

3. Delegates attending the Vatican and United Nations

4. Basic Points of Difference between the Orthodox Church and Papism

5. Fidel Castro asked the Ecumenical Patriarch to send books to Cuba and on the Monastic Community of Mount Athos.

6. Raised by Friends

7. New Titles from the Book Center

The blessings for which a seeker of the Kingdom of Heaven hopes are no trifle. Thou desirest to reign with Christ through ages without end; wilt thou not readily welcome the conflicts and labours and temptations of this short span of life, even unto death?

1. THE LENTEN ENCYCLICAL OF HIS EMINENCE

Ephraim, Metropolitan of Boston

In the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.

2. ON MOTHER TERESA’S BEATIFICATION AND THE “FILIOQUE”

       Much ado has been made recently about the “Orthodox-Catholic Agreed Statement on the Filioque,” and justly so. But a nagging thought keeps on recurring. Really, just how important is the “Filioque” question to today’s Roman Catholic theologians? One wonders.

       One wonders because in many other instances, matters of faith hardly seem to concern Rome any longer. How can we presume to make such an assumption? Well, the case of Mother Teresa’s Beatification on October 19, 2003 by Pope John Paul II immediately comes to mind.

       How so? Read on....

       The ecumenical movement today attempts to unify all religions. Pope John Paul II has been building bridges to non-Christian religions. Even Mother Teresa has the ecumenical/syncretistic spirit as seen from the book Servants of Love. She states, “We went every day to pray in some temple or church. The Archbishop gave us permission to do so. We prayed with the Jews, the Armenians, the Anglicans, the Jains, the Sikhs, the Buddhists, and the Hindus. It was extraordinary. All hearts united in prayer to the one true God” (Proclaiming the Gospel, April 1997).

       Hindu sources maintain that there are 330 million gods at most (after all, we have to draw the line somewhere): all of these gods are to be honored and worshipped. (This is counting every village deity, including the local female deities, who the Encyclopedia Britannica estimates are worshipped by 80% of the southern Indians.) Now the question: which one of these worship-worthy 330 million “one true” gods did Mother Teresa get permission to pray to? Given the shopping mall variety available for adoration, how could her Archbishop be sure that he picked the right one for Mother?

       The Holy Scriptures, on the other hand, are clear (though perhaps not politically correct:)

“All the gods of the heathen are demons, but the Lord made the heavens” (Psalm 95:5). This is what the Holy Spirit has taught us through the holy Prophet David — the permission of Mother Teresa’s archbishop notwithstanding.

       Elsewhere, in Mother Teresa: Her People and Her Work (by Desmond Doig, Harper & Row, NYC, 1976, p.156), Mother Teresa affirms, “If in coming face to face with God we accept Him in our lives, then we are converting. We become a better Hindu, a better Muslim, and a better whatever we are.... What God is in your mind you must accept”.

       Now then, what were we saying about the “Filioque” and the “Agreed Statement”?

3.  Delegates attending the Vatican and United Nations

            UN inspired annual interfaith congress "The Future of God", held during  October in Fatima, heard how the Shrine is to be developed into a  centre where all the religions of the world will gather to pay homage to  their various gods. The Congress was held in the Paul VI Pastoral Centre and  presided over by the Cardinal Patriarch of Lisbon Jose de Cruz Policarpo.

            The Shrine's rector, Monsignor Luciano Guerra, told the Congress that Fatima  "will change for the better." Addressing Hindu, Muslim, Jewish, Orthodox,  Buddhist and African Pagan representatives he stated: "The future of Fatima,  or the adoration of God and His mother at this holy Shrine, must pass  through the creation of a shrine where different religions can mingle. The  inter-religious dialogue in Portugal, and in the Catholic Church, is still  in an embryonic phase, but the Shrine of Fatima is not indifferent to this  fact and is already open to being a universalistic place of vocation."

            The Hindu representative Ansshok Ansraj, described how already in the Far  East millions of Hindus are getting "positive vibrations" from visiting Marian shrines without  endangering their faith.

Msgr. Guerra pointed out that the very fact that Fatima is the name of a Muslim and Mohammed's daughter is indicative that the Shrine must be open to the co-existence of various faiths and beliefs.

According to the Monsignor: "Therefore we must assume that it was the will of the Blessed Virgin Mary that this comes about this way."  Traditional Catholics opposed to the Congress were described by the Monsignor “old fashioned, narrow minded, fanatic extremists and Provocateurs.”

 For the first time in the 86-year history of Fatima all of the Pagan and Christian delegates were invited to participate in the Ecumenical celebrations. One of the principle speakers, the Jesuit theologian Father Jacques Dupuis, was insistent that the religions of the world must unite.  "The religion of the future will be a general converging of religions in a universal Christ that will satisfy all", he said.

 The Belgium born theologian argued: "The other religious traditions in the world are part of God's plan for humanity and the Holy Spirit is operating and present in Buddhist, Hindu and other sacred writings of Christian and non-Christian faiths as well." In an impassioned plea he said: "The universality of God's kingdom permits this, and this is nothing more than a diversified form of sharing in the same mystery of salvation. In the end it is hoped that the Christian will become a better Christian and each Hindu a better Hindu."

 An official statement put out by the Congress called for a non-proselytizing approach by all religions. "No one religion can irradiate another", it said "or strengthen itself by downplaying others and an open dialogue is the way to building bridges and tearing down walls of centuries of hate. What is needed is that each religion be true to its faith integrally and treat each religion on the same footing of equality with no inferior or superiority complexes." It emphasized that the secret to peace amongst all religions is admitting that contradictions exist between creeds but to concentrate on what unites them as opposed to what separates them.

Delegates agreed that religious shrines, including Fatima, should be revamped every 25 years to reflect modern day trends and beliefs. The Shrine of Fatima is about to undergo a complete re-construction with a new stadium-like basilica being erected close by the existing one built in 1921.

4. Basic Points of Difference between the Orthodox Church and Papism

[By His Eminence IEROTHEOS Vlachos -- Translated from Greek by Fr. Patrick B. O'Grady]

The bishops of Old Rome, beside small and non-essential differences, always held communion with the bishops of New Rome and the bishops of the East until the years 1009-1014, when, for the first time, the Frankish bishops seized the throne of Old Rome.  Until the year 1009 the Popes of Rome and the Patriarchs of Constantinople were unified in a common struggle against the Frankish princes and bishops, already even at that time heretics.

The Franks at the Synod of Frankfurt in 794 condemned the decrees of the Seventh Ecumenical Synod and the honorable veneration of the holy icons.  Likewise in 809 the Franks introduced into the Symbol of the Faith the "Filioque" (Latin: "and the Son"); namely, the doctrine concerning the procession of the Holy Spirit both from the Father and from the Son.  Now at that time the Orthodox Pope of Rome condemned this imposition.  At the Synod of Constantinople presided over by Photios the Great, at which also representatives of the Orthodox Pope of Rome

participated, they condemned as many as had condemned the decrees of the Seventh Ecumenical Synod and as many as had added the Filioque to the Symbol of Faith.  However, the Frankish Pope Sergius IV, in the year 1009, in his enthronement encyclical for the first time added the Filioque to the Symbol of Faith.  Then Pope Benedict VIII introduced the Creed with the Filioque into the worship service of the Church, at which time the Pope was stricken out from the diptychs of the Orthodox Church.

The basic distinction between the Orthodox Church and Papism is found in the doctrine concerning the uncreated nature and uncreated energy of God.  Whereas we Orthodox believe that God possesses an uncreated nature and uncreated energy and that God comes into communion with the creation and with man by means of His uncreated energy, the Papists believe that in God the uncreated nature is identified with His uncreated energy (acrus purus) and that God holds communion with the creation and with man through His created energies, even asserting that in God there exist also created energies.  So then the grace of God through which man is sanctified is seen as created energy.  But given this, one cannot be sanctified.

From this basic doctrine proceeds the teaching concerning the procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father and from the Son, the cleansing fire, the primacy of the Pope, etc.

Beside the fundamental difference between the Orthodox Church and Papism, in the theme of the nature and energy of God, there are other great differences, which have given rise to topics of theological dispute, namely:

--the Filioque, that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and from the Son with the result that the monarchy of the Father is diminished, the final equality of the Persons of the Holy Trinity is compromised, the Son is diminished in His own character in having been born, if there exists a oneness between Father and Son then the Holy Spirit is subordinated as not equal in power and of the same glory with the other Persons of the Holy Trinity, with the result that He is shown as the "unproductive Person,"

--the utilization of unleavened bread in the Divine Eucharist which transgresses the manner with which Christ accomplished the Mystical Supper,

--the consecration of the "precious Gifts" which takes place not with the epiclesis, but rather with the proclamation of Christ's words of institution, "Take, eat . . . drink of it, all of you . . .,"

--the view that the sacrifice of Christ on the Cross satisfied the Divine justice, which presents God the Father as a feudal lord and which overlooks the resurrection,

--the view about the "merits" of Christ which the Pope dispenses, along with the "superabundant" grace of the saints,

--the alienation and segmentation placed between the mysteries of Baptism, Chrismation, and the Divine Eucharist,

--the doctrine concerning the inheritance of guilt from the ancestral sin,

--the liturgical innovations in all of the mysteries of the Church (Baptism, Chrismation, Ordination, Confession, Marriage, Anointing),

--the practice of not communing the laity in the "Blood" of Christ,

--the primacy of the Pope, according to which the Pope is "episcopus episcoporum (Latin: the bishop of bishops) and the origin of the priesthood and of ecclesiastical authority, that he is the infallible head and the principle leader of the Church, governing it in monarchical fashion as the vicar of Christ on the earth" (I. Karmiris).  With this concept the Pope views himself as the successor of the Apostle Peter, to whom the other Apostles submit themselves, even the Apostle Paul,

--the non-existence of concelebration in the praxis of worship services,

--the infallibility of the Pope,

--the dogma of the immaculate conception of the Theotokos and the development of the worship of Mary (mariolatria), according to which the All-Holy Virgin is elevated to Triune Deity and even becomes a concept leading to a Holy Quaternity (!),

--the views of analogia entis (analogy of being) and analogia fidei (analogy of faith) which hold sway in the West,

--the unceasing progress of the Church in the discovery of the recesses of revelatory truth,

--the doctrine about absolute predestination,

--the concept concerning the single methodology for the knowledge of God and of creatures, which leads to a blending of theology and epistemology.

Moreover, the great difference in practice, which points out the manner of theology, is found also in the difference between Scholasticism and Hesychastic theology.  In the West Scholasticism was expounded as an endeavor to search out the meaning of all the mysteries of the faith by means of logic (Anselm of Canterbury, Thomas Aquinas).  However, in the Orthodox Church hesychasm prevails; namely, the purification of the heart and the illumination of the mind (nous), towards the acquisition of the knowledge of God.  The dialogue between St. Gregory Palamas and Barlaam the scholastic and uniate is characteristic and shows the difference.

A consequence of all the foregoing is that we have in Papism a decline from Orthodox ecclesiology.  Whereas in the Orthodox Church great significance is given to theosis which consists in communion with God, through the vision of the Uncreated Light, then those who behold the Light gather in an Ecumenical Synod and accurately define revelatory truth under conditions of confusion.  But in Papism great significance is given to the edict of the Pope; indeed, the Pope even stands over these Ecumenical Synods.  Consistent with Latin theology, "the authority of the Church exists only when it is established and put in good order by the will of the Pope.  Under a contrary condition it is annihilated."  The Ecumenical Synods are seen as "councils of Christianity that are summoned under the authenticity, the authority, and the presidency of the Pope."  Whenever the Pope leaves the meeting hall of the Ecumenical Synod, it ceases to have power.  Bishop Mare has written, "There would be no Roman Catholics more accurate as those exclaiming, "I believe also in one Pope" than who say "I believe also in one . . . Church."

Furthermore, "the significance and role of the bishops within the Roman church is no more than a simple personification of the papal authority, to which also the bishops themselves submit just as also do the simple faithful."  Towards this papal ecclesiology it is essentially maintained, that "the apostolic authority left off with the apostles and was not passed on to their successors, the bishops.  Only the papal authority of Peter, under which all of the others are found, was passed on to the successors of Peter; namely, the popes."  Along with the foregoing it is maintained by the papal "church" that all the churches of the East are secessionist and have deficiencies.  It receives us as sister churches into communion by dispensation (kat' oikonomian), since she sees herself as the mother church and sees ourselves as daughter churches.

The Vatican is an earthly power and each pope is the wielder of the power of the Vatican.  It is a matter of a man-centered organization, a worldly, indeed an especially legalistic and worldly organization.  The earthly power of the Vatican was instituted in the year 755 by Pepin the Short, the father of Charlemagne -even in our own time he was recognized by Mussolini, in 1929.  The source of the proclamation of papal worldly power is significant, as Pope Pius XI maintained, "the one who stands in God's stead on earth cannot be obedient to earthly power."  Christ was obedient to earthly power, the pope cannot be!  The papal authority establishes a theocracy, since theocracy is defined as subsuming both worldly and ecclesiastical authority into one concept.  Today we can see theocratic-worldly power in the Vatican and in Iran.

Pope Innocent IV (1198-1216) maintained the characteristic nature of these things in his enthronement speech, "He who has the bride has the bridegroom.  However the bride herself (the church) has not been coupled with empty hands, but brings therein an incomparably rich dowry, the fullness of spiritual goods and the expanses of the world's things, the largesse and abundance of both. . . . Your contributions of the worldly things have given me the diadem, the mitre over the priesthood, the diadem for kingdom and it has established me as His representative in the garment and on the knee of which it is written: the King of kings and Lord of lords."

Consequently great theological differences exist, which have been condemned by the Synod of Photios the Great and at the Synod of Gregory Palamas, just as it appears in the "Synodikon of Orthodoxy."  In addition also the Fathers of the Church and the local synods down to the 19th century condemn all the deceits of papism.  The issue is not mollified or improved by a certain typical excuse which the pope would give for an historical error, whenever his theological views were outside of the revelation and the eccesiology is moved into an enclosed course, since of course the pope presents himself as leader of the Christian world, as successor of the Apostle Peter and the Vicar-representative of Christ over the earth, as if Christ would give His authority to the pope and He cease ruling in blessing in the heavens.

7. FIDEL CASTRO ASKED THE ECUMENICAL PATRIARCH TO SEND BOOKS TO CUBA ON THE MONASTIC COMMUNITY OF MOUNT ATHOS.

(Editor’s  note: These items are reprinted as they appeared on the internet. We’ll let our readers draw their own conclusions about the Patriarch’s visit to Cuba.)

www.mpa.gr - Havana, 24 January 2004 - Cuban leader Fidel Castro asked for the assistance of Ecumenical Patriarch Vartholomeos for books on the monastic community of Mount Athos and Christianity to be sent to Cuba during a dinner given in Havana yesterday by Greek-American businessman Yiannis Katsimatidis, the financial sponsor of the church of Saint Nikolaos in the Cuban capital.

Speaking to the Greek reporters covering the formal visit of the Ecumenical Patriarch to Cuba, Fidel Castro said that he would like to visit Greece especially during the Athens Olympic Games but he has no visa.

The main issue of discussion during the dinner was education at a time characterized internationally by a crisis in values. 

FIDEL INVITED TO MT. ATHOS

www.mpa.gr - Istanbul, 28 January 2004 - A formal invitation will be extended to Cuban leader Fidel Castro to visit Mt. Athos, by Ecumenical Patriarch Vartholomeos, in his letter thanking him for the warm welcome during his historic visit to Cuba, which opened up new horizons for Orthodoxy and Hellenism, both in this island country of the Caribbean, and throughout the American continent. 

REVIEW OF VARTHOLOMEOS' VISIT TO CUBA

www.mpa.gr - Istanbul, 28 January 2004 - A formal invitation will be extended to Cuban leader Fidel Castro to visit Mt. Athos, by Ecumenical Patriarch Vartholomeos, in his letter thanking him for the warm welcome during his historic visit to Cuba, which opened up new horizons for Orthodoxy and Hellenism, both in this island country of the Caribbean, and throughout the American continent.

In a discussion with the press shortly before the landing of the Olympic Airways flight in Istanbul, the Ecumenical Patriarch mentioned the unexpectedly warm welcome he received from the Cuban government and its President Fidel Castro, as well as the pressures of the US.

The Americans cannot be pleased, but we are not a party, we are not an ideology, pointed out the Patriarch, asking those who continue insist on the embargo against Cuba: What did the poor do, what did the children do, so as not to have medicines, asked the Head of Orthodoxy.

Patriarch Vartholomeos observed that the role and mission of the Patriarchate place it above ideologies, political confrontations and quarrels.

The welcome in store for the Head of the 300 million Orthodox Christians around the world by the Cuban government, but mainly by the Cuban people was staggering. The President of Cuba met with the Patriarch 7 times, had three private meetings with him, accompanied him to the airport in his car, and expressing views that were unimaginable by outsiders for an unyielding Marxist revolutionary such as Fidel.

It is indicatory that Fidel Castro acted outside protocol and went to the Park Central hotel, where the Patriarch was staying, in person in order to see him off at the airport.
Another characteristic was the warm way in which the Ecumenical Patriarch was received by the Cuban people, in a country which until recently included a mere handful of Greeks and Orthodox Christians. In all of his Holiness' public appearances, hundreds of citizens, some of whom bore small flags with the Patriarchate's symbol, flooded the streets in attempts to shake and kiss his hand, while there were cheers of joy and gratitude for the support of the Patriarchate to Cuba at this difficult turning point in its history.

According to statements of the public, they expect a lot from the Ecumenical Patriarch and Greece, not mere financial aid, but help with ideas, because it seems that Cuba is at the beginning of impressive openings. Evidence of this opening can be found both in the wish expressed by Fidel for books on Mt. Athos and Orthodoxy to be sent to Cuba, in order to be distributed to the country's schools and foundations, and in the invitation for the foundation of Theology School of the Ecumenical Patriarchate in Havana, with the expenses to be covered by the Cuban State.

The success of Vartholomeos' visit to Cuba becomes even greater if one takes into account the intense pressure from the US initially to call off the trip, so that moral support is not given to dictator Castro, as was the message from many sides. This was followed by attempts to downplay the trip and finally, on the eve of the inauguration of the St. Nikolaos' church, to implicate the Patriarch as an official invitee of the Cuban government, in an antigovernment event, regardless of the organizers' intentions and the just demands for the release of political prisoners expressed by their relatives and the officials of the Cuban opposition.

During an opening ceremony of a Greek artwork exhibit, the Patriarch stressed that the Cuban people has the right to freely develop relations with all other peoples. Cuba must be allowed to breath freely and develop commercial and cultural relations with all other members of the international community, he added, stressing that the lifting of the embargo this year, when the Olympics are to be carried out in their birthplace, Greece, would be a good symbol.

It should be pointed out however that in his speeches in Cuba, in the presence of Fidel Castro, the Head of the Orthodox Church did not stop repeating the need to respect human rights and religious and civil liberties. His most noteworthy speech was at the opening of the church of St. Nikolaos in Havana, where he underlined that the free expression of religious faith, is a basic human right, which along with all other human rights, must be respected and inviolable, especially by those who have humanism as the basis for their ideology. Further along his speech, with Castro by his side, Patriarch Vartholomeos underlined that the church of St. Nikolaos will send a message of respect towards the human face and its rights, its freedom, its dignity, its right to disagree, its inviolable right to life.

The results of this significant visit will soon be seen and we expect impressive moves by Fidel Castro, in the spirit of his discussions with the Ecumenical Patriarch, best of which would be a general amnesty and the release of all political prisoners. 

7. RAISED BY FRIENDS

Bad parents and bad schools make for a lost generation

The Jerusalem Post, November 21, 2003

BY SHMULEY BOTEACH

With the world focused on terrorists, we have all taken our eye off far less dangerous creatures, but animals nonetheless. I speak not of lions, tigers, or bears, but rather of our children. Shocking as it may sound, it is sometimes difficult to draw the line between terrorist murderers and high-school teenagers.

The 1999 Columbine massacre in Colorado, perpetrated by two teens, was the equivalent of the worst terrorist attacks. And although the United States has the most instances of school shootings — there were 253 school-associated deaths between 1994 and 1999 alone — the phenomenon extends worldwide. A single example was that of Erfurt, Germany, where last year 13 teachers, two students, and a policeman were killed by a student at a secondary school.

To be sure, Western teenagers do not maim and murder like their Islamic teenage counterparts in order to acquire 70 virgins. Indeed, virginity is the last thing on Western teenagers’ minds, intent as they are to lose it at the first available opportunity. But they are plenty dangerous nonetheless.

Consider that in America last year three million crimes were committed in the country’s 85,000 schools. Nine percent of eighth graders carry a gun, knife, or club to school at least once a month, and nearly 150,000 students bring handguns to school every day. And don’t think they’re not planning to use it, since 20% of students said they believed it was OK to kill someone if they stole something from you. In Britain, an astonishing half of all teenagers have reportedly committed a crime by the age of 15 and a third of 14-year-olds have vandalized property.

Not convinced yet that our kids are really messed up? Scores of teenage kids are having more sex than their parents. Newsweek recently reported that a full third of all married couples in America are not having any sex. But teens are scoring from a very early age. Most studies show that the average age for first time intercourse in the US is currently 13.2 for boys and 14.6 for girls.

A truly staggering 35 percent of young women become pregnant in the United States at least once before they reach the age of 20 (80 percent are unmarried) and every day 8,000 teenagers in the United States become infected by a sexually transmitted disease. This year alone nearly three million teens will become infected.

How could kids, whose traditional hallmark is innocence, have deteriorated so badly? There are two major causes. Bad parents and bad schools.

Let’s begin first with the contemporary mom and dad who believe it’s their job to be their kids’ best friend rather than their parent; trusted buddies rather than disciplinarians. If our kids are animals, it’s because we have opened the cages.

We’re all familiar with the modern expert gibberish by now. Never alienate your kid by using the word “forbid.” Punishment will only invite rebellion. Being harsh will ensure that your kids hide things from you. Better that you become a trusted confidant so that your 13-year-old son can talk to you about how to avoid contracting herpes when having sex with his girlfriend.

Several times a week on my radio show we host some of these experts on child-rearing peddling their twaddle. Here is one such conversation:

Expert: I drove five hours to my 14-year-old daughter’s camp on visiting day and brought along her boyfriend to see her.

Me: You let your daughter have a boyfriend at 14?

Expert: Of course. And he’s such a nice boy;

Me: Do you allow him to be alone with her in her bedroom?

Expert: Of course. I don’t prohibit my daughter from anything. We talk about everything.

Me: What if she wants to have sex?

Expert: I’ve told her many times that I prefer that she not have sex. But ultimately she has to make her own choices, and I took her to a doctor to get contraception just in case.

Me: Wow, lady. This drivel is criminal. I don’t mean to offend, but your book belongs in the dung heap rather than a book store.

Expert: Your tough line will only get your children to rebel. You don’t own them, you know.

Wanna make a bet? They’re my kids. And I will not only teach them right and wrong, but I will reward them for the right and punish them for the wrong.

Kids have plenty of friends. But they only have one or two parents. They need someone to give them backbone and steel themselves against the malign forces that seek to subtly corrupt them,

Like God at Sinai, when it comes to my children I am first and foremost a lawgiver. I set down rules of what is and is not acceptable. And there are consequences for transgressing the law. But I am not an unjust god. In raising my children I employ the biblical example of the Israelites’ declaration at Sinai, “We shall obey and we shall seek to understand.” My kids first have to obey. They must listen because I am their father, whether they like it or not, whether they understand it or not. But once they have been obedient, it is time for me to pull them into a quiet room and explain to them in fatherly rather than friendly tones the reasons behind my actions.

The belief that children are better off with parents relinquishing authority and acting as their equals results from two misguided beliefs.

• First, that teens are young adults rather than big children and therefore require understanding rather than guidance.

• Second, that rather than parents superimposing their beliefs and values system on their children, it is beneficial for children to discover life’s essentials through their own experiences.

Of course, there is always the uncharitable position that friendship is a posture adopted by parents who are too busy watching TV to discipline their kids. Much easier to give in rather than resist their children’s demands and rationalize the capitulation with some inane philosophy about how allowing your kids to experiment with marijuana will prevent them from trying harder drugs.

Sadly, the demonization of severity is not only limited to parenting. New Age feel-good liberalism rejects any kind of harshness as outdated. Harsh reprisals are for cavemen.

Everyone can be reasoned with, anyone can be spoken to. There is goodness in all people. Innocent thousands get slaughtered and most countries will only go so far as to impose “sanctions” against dictators. But while political leaders are destroying the world with a philosophy that tyrannical action should not invite punishment, we can save our kids from the destructive belief that we must never get tough with them. But even the most disciplined parents in the world cannot save their kids from terrible schools and the malign influences their children will encounter there.

The toughest thing our children face is peer pressure. Growing up is an awkward experience and the easiest thing to do is blend in, conform, and squander one’s uniqueness.

Our children must be immersed in an environment that teaches them the fundamentals of human living. That all humans are extraordinary because they are created in the divine image, even if they don’t become rich or famous. That a precious life is one that changes the world with kindness. That money is special because it can feed the hungry rather than buy a Hummer. And that drugs are wrong not because the police may catch you, but because there is no greater sin in life than to destroy one’s God-given potential. Marijuana makes you lazy and drugs make you dumb.

When I was a boy of six, I remember learning of Moses challenging the tyranny of Egypt, and I learned that I too must be a voice for the oppressed. I chanced upon the battles fought by Samson, and I learned that I too must be a champion of my people. And I discovered the judgment of Solomon and learned that I too must acquire wisdom.

While religious information can be acquired later in life, religious values must be absorbed early if they are to shape character and mold moral fiber.

It is the great teachings like the Ten Commandments — which have just been outlawed in American public places — that teach our children that although they may be bullied in school, stealing their fathers’ pistols and blowing away the bullies is not the answer.

If only we could get parents to believe in biblical values, we just might have more refined kids.
____________________________________________________________________________

7. NEW TITLES FROM THE BOOK CENTER

(GS6) GREAT COLLECTION OF LIVES OF SAINTS, VOL. 6,   February,  321pp. Paper back, d$28.00, Cloth e$35.00  (Volumes 1-5 also available)