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
MARCH, 2006, Vol. XL, No. 3, (1558)
TABLE OF CONTENTS:
1. ORTHODOXY SUNDAY, SERMON BY MET. MOSES OF SEATTLE.
2. PREPARE FOR END OF LIFE WITH "LIVING WILL."
3. THE CHIEF SINNER
4. CITIZENSHIP 101
5. COUNT YOUR BLESSINGS
6. NEW FROM THE BOOK CENTER
When you go to your spiritual father for confession, do not bring
yourself as an accuser of other people, saying, "he said this," and
"so-and-so said that". . . but speak about your own doings, so that you
may obtain forgiveness.
Elder Daniel of Kantounakia
1. ORTHODOXY SUNDAY 2005
Sermon by His Eminence, Moses, Metropolitan of Seattle
Philip came and found Nathaniel and said, "We have found Him of
Whom Moses in the law and the prophets, did write, Jesus of Nazareth."
And Nathanael said unto him, "Can any good thing come out of Nazareth?"
Philip saith unto him, "Come and see." - that is, come and
experience. Christianity is not an abstract philosophy. We live and
experience the things of God.
Upon seeing Nathaniel our Saviour said, "Behold, an Israelite in whom
there is no guile."
If guile is cunning and deceit, what is an Israelite in whom there is
no guile?
Saint John of Kronstadt explains that Nathaniel encountered Christ and
examined the matter and straightway believed and was steadfast. "Rabbi,
Thou art the Son of God, Thou art the King of Israel."
What is important for us to understand, is that once one cautiously
examines the faith and comes to know and realize that it is "the faith
once delivered to the saints" and the heart of Holy Tradition, one does
not corrupt one's faith through some ulterior motive or vested interest
or vainglory or love of honour or ambition. Heresy comes from vainglory
and pride. Our Saviour Himself made this clear when He asked the
Pharisees and Sadducees, "How can ye believe, which receive honour one
from another? And seek not the honour that cometh from God only" (John
5:44).
And the Gospel further explains, "But though He had done so many
miracles before them, yet they believed not on Him." And later,
"Nevertheless among the chief rulers also many believed on Him; but
because of the Pharisees they did not confess Him, lest they should be
put out of the synagogue: for they loved the praise of men more than
the praise of God" (John 12:37, 42-43). This a frightening choice with
eternal consequences; yet many have chosen the praise of men over the
praise of God throughout the centuries.
We see from our Saviour's conversation with the Samaritan woman, Saint
Photini, that to seek honor only from God, to confess Him in spirit and
in truth is essential for our salvation.
The beginningless Son and Word of God dared to accomplish fearful and
awesome things; He put on our flesh and demonstrated His extreme love
for us by His labours and sweat, suffering and death. And He
established a new covenant for His people through His incarnation. At
the fearful and awesome Mystical Supper, our Saviour spoke those words
that each priest repeats at the Holy Liturgy, "Drink ye all of it, this
is the Blood of the New Testament" that is, the blood of the new
Covenant and teaching. In the Holy Liturgy, immediately after the
priest repeats these very words, he lifts the chalice and the paten and
solemnly declares, "Thine Own of Thine Own, because of all and for
all." In other words, because of all that our God has accomplished for
us and revealed and taught unto us from the beginning of creation unto
the consummation of this world; because of the Cross, death and
Resurrection of our Saviour, and for all that love His name and are
communicants of His Mysteries.
Thus, the Mystery of our salvation is intrinsically bound unto our
Saviour's revelation of the truth. Pilate asked the King of Kings and
Lord of Lords, "Art Thou a king then?" And our Saviour answered, "Thou
sayest that I am a king. To this end was I born, and for this cause
came I into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth. Every
one that is of the truth hears My voice."
Then, alas, Pilate spoke for all relativists saying, "What is truth?"
(John 18:37-38). Pluralism and relativism permeate our
society.-These ideas operate on the assumption that God is dead and man
is the measure of all things. Unfortunately, modern day Ecumenism
echoes these sentiments by proclaiming that doctrine as such doesn't
matter. The ecumenists claim that we can ignore the words of our
Saviour and all be joined into one mindless herd. For ecumenists,
belief in the Divinity of our Saviour, the virgin Birth of our Saviour,
the real presence of the Body and Blood of Christ at Holy Communion are
all optional. They proclaim a love that denies the teaching of the God
of love. Saint Photios the Great dispels this darkness with his maxim
that to proclaim the truth is the greatest act of love.
In his day, St John of Kronstadt explained that people who wish to
ignore doctrine and say that it doesn't matter are saying that truth
and falsehood are a matter of indifference to God.
Our Saviour taught us the parable of the merchant who found a Pearl of
Great Price, to purchase which he was willing to sell all. Saint John
Chrysostom teaches that the Pearl of Great Price signifies the
singleness of truth, for which we must be willing to sell all. We must
all ask ourselves, what are our priorities? Are we willing to sell all
to attain this Pearl of Great Price by which we inherit eternal life?
Parents, what are your priorities in bringing up your children:
education, financial well being, good careers? Government schools teach
a humanistic world view, that there is no objective truth, that it is
presumptuous to say that only one religion has the truth.
The Protestant statistician, George Barna, of the Barna Group, held a
research project polling over 1000 American adults (comprised of 707
parents, including 366 Protestants) asking various questions relating
to parenting and how to best raise the next generation. There was not
much difference between the Protestants and non-Christians.
Only one out of every five parents identified instilling a set of
religious beliefs as an important part of raising children. Almost
double the percentage of parents ranked a good education as a more
desired goal for their children than having a meaningful relationship
with Jesus Christ. When asked what makes a parent successful, only 4
percent identified prayer as an integral part of parenting and a scant
1 percent pointed to good character. Even exclusively among Christians,
the numbers were startling. "Only three out of 10 Protestant Christian
parents included the salvation of their child in the list of critical
parental emphases," Barna said.
We must ask ourselves, do we have a similar lack of understanding in
the true Orthodox Church? Do we seek to embrace love and understanding
of the truth and pass this as a legacy on to our children; or are we
concerned primarily with the things that pass away after our earthly
sojourn? Our Saviour declared, "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life."
Love of Truth incarnate is essential to our salvation.
The triumph of the holy icons is the triumph of Orthodoxy, the triumph
of the proper understanding of the incarnation and a recapitulation of
all the triumphs of the Church against error in the past. When we
venerate an icon of our Christ we testify and proclaim the incarnation
and the reverence we show passes to the prototype, according to Saint
Basil the Great. When we venerate an icon of a saint, we venerate
through that icon one who has become a new creation, a temple of God
and a god according to grace, a sun that reflects the rays of the Sun
of Righteousness, the uncreated energies of God. We thus proclaim the
doctrine of theosis, or in other words, the deification of the faithful
worshippers of God in Christ the new Adam, as is consistent with the
pattern of truth uncovered in sacred Tradition with the holy Scriptures
at its heart.
One constant source of reminder of the truth of Christian doctrine is
to remember those that have been deified, the holy saints on their
feastday.
I was speaking to a senior clergyman in our Church not long ago and he
made the observation that in the west up until the industrial
revolution, saints' feast days were kept and the remembrance of the
benefactions of the saints and the fact that they were sanctified were
before the mind of the people. But the captains of industry needed to
keep the machines of industrial production running, so the Church's
festivals had to stop, and this had a chilling effect on the piety of
the western Christians.
In our own day, it is important for us to somehow keep the feasts of
the saints. It would be a blessing to each family if they could acquire
a Horologion and read the brief life and the dismissal hymn of the
saint of the day. We need to know how the saints lived in their own
time. One of the most important lives for us to read is Saint Maximos
the Confessor. His days were very similar to ours. He fled heresy in
Constantinople and helped hold councils against the Monothelite heresy
both in Rome and North Africa. After the Byzantine Emperor captured and
starved Pope Saint Martin (who had joined St. Maximos in resisting this
pernicious heresy) to death, all of the ancient patriarchates were in
communion with Constantinople and the Monothelite heresy. His
interrogators told Saint Maximos that Rome and Antioch and Jerusalem
and Alexandria were in communion with the see of Constantinople,
asking, would he alone refuse to be in communion with them? Saint
Maximos replied, that if the whole world were in communion with
Constatinople he would still refuse as long as there was heresy.
"Remove the heresy and without anyone compelling me I will be the first
to enter into communion with Constantinople." We can see how he
responded to heresy and it is a guide for us and an explanation of why
we do things the way we do. Our Holy Synod is very careful in deciding
who we are in communion with.
It is only by being faithful to our Saviour's new Covenant, the Blood
of the New Testament, that we partake of the Mystical Banquet in this
age and in the age to come. Let us thank God that in this age of
confusion and unbelief we have found the Apostolic Faith, the Faith
once delivered to the saints, by faithfully holding fast to this
Testament. This revelation from God given unto us by the Holy Apostles
and Holy Fathers is our greatest possession, the Pearl of Great Price.
Let us preserve this great gift by our love of the Truth and take the
time to learn more deeply the things of Holy Tradition. Doing
this, in line with all the Saints, we become partakers of salvation in
our Lord Jesus Christ, to Whom be all glory honour and dominion. Amen.
_______________________________________________________________________
2. PREPARE FOR END OF LIFE WITH "LIVING WILL"
By Fr. Stanley Samuel Harakas
(Hellenic Voice, March 9, 2005)
Editor's Note: Although Terri Shiavo may be dead by the time you read
this, we Orthodox Christians still have much to learn from this
incident. The article that follows gives some insights into how we
should prepare - in part- for the last moments of our earthly sojourn.
In October 2003, 1 wrote an editorial for The Hellenic Voice titled
"Keeping Alive? Murder? Allowing to Die?" which addressed the Terri
Shiavo Case. I held that the now 15-year-old case of a woman on a
feeding tube whose vegetative life was being artificially extended
should be allowed to die.
I argued this on the basis of a centuries-long
tradition based on the service and prayer in the Orthodox Great Prayer
Book (To Mega Euchologion) known by the title "At the tearing away of
the soul." In this prayer, God is asked that a person bearing great
suffering and "struggling to die" be taken, that is, be allowed to die.
This prayer is no justification for mercy killing, or assisted suicide,
or active killing of any person. It simply recognizes the common end of
us all, death, when there is no medically reasonable expectation that
therapeutic methods can succeed, be allowed to take its course.
While the legal maneuvering in the Terri Shiavo case
has drawn out the process another year and a half for her, it has
become clear that in the United States judicial system, a totally
different basis for addressing such situations has become the law of
the land.
Religious and secular arguments that address such
situations have essentially become irrelevant. Neither medically based
arguments regarding brain-death, nor religious "right to life"
arguments, nor "allowing to die" positions hold any sway for the
courts. Since the Karen Ann Quinlan case in the mid-1970s, the Nancy
Cruzan case in the 1980s, to the Terri Shiavo case stretching from 1990
to the present, the courts have come to base decisions on one essential
factor - whether the person ever expressed the desire not to be
artificially kept alive.
At present, in the Terri Shiavo case, it is
illustrated by the conflicting affirmations of Terri's parents and her
husband. The parents deny she ever said that she would not want to be
kept physically alive in an artificial way. In contrast, her husband,
who is her legal guardian, from the beginning has affirmed that Terri
actually confided in him that she would not want to be kept alive
artificially for no therapeutic reason.
Fifteen years of litigation, however, would have
never taken place and this agonizing drama would have been totally
avoided if Terri had prepared a "Living Will" in advance. For the
United States court system, a properly executed "Living Will" would
have resolved the issue. Such a document normally expresses the
person's desire that once all genuinely therapeutic efforts have been
exhausted the person be allowed to die with no extraordinary procedures
to be employed.
The only way for you not to become another Terri
Shiavo case is to prepare a "Living Will," otherwise known as an
"Advanced Medical Directive" or "Health Care Proxy." The whole issue is
up to you, now, when you are healthy and able to express your desires.
That is the only course open to us all today in the American judicial
system.
(Fr. Stanley S. Harakas, ThD, DD, is an editorial writer for The
Hellenic Voice and resides in Spring Hill, FL.)
________________________________________________________________________
3. THE CHIEF SINNER
Some seven years ago, an article appeared in the Greek periodical
The Holy Kollyvades (Sept.-Oct. 1998). This article was a response to a
new calendar writer, Demetrius Kokoris, who had castigated the
traditional Orthodox clergy and faithful, calling them "schismatics,"
"outside of the Church," and "garbage cans". At the same time, he
managed to overlook his own Church's doctrinal, canonical and moral
lapses (this is ironic, in view of the troubles the Patriarchate of
Jerusalem, the State Church of Greece, and others are presently
enduring).
Here are a few excerpts from that response in The Holy Kollyvades:
"We thank you for your friendly thoughts, which are so loving, noble,
and Christian, perhaps even pietistic, and may God keep you in good
health, so that you may always 'give it to us,' because in this way you
can only bring us benefit, and not harm. However, since we have never
been taught this type of theology, nor these types of arguments, we are
unable to lower our conversation to this level.
"But from our Church's viewpoint, I am obliged to remind you of some
things. . . We have been taught that each of us should have his eyes
turned towards his own sins, as every true Orthodox Christian should.
Consequently, he will have neither eyes, nor time, nor the ability, nor
the disposition to occupy himself with the sins of his neighbor. We
have been instructed to be disturbed by our own sins and not by the
sins of those near us.
"So, I would like to ask you discretely: Have you ever read the
Compline prayer to our all-holy Mother, which begins, 'O spotless,
undefiled, incorrupt, immaculate, pure Virgin'? Have you ever read the
Service of Preparation for Holy Communion? If the answer is 'yes,' then
what is your reaction when, for example, you come to the point where it
says, 'I have sinned more than the harlot' and 'neither do Thou abhor
my mouth, yet more defiled and polluted than hers'? By any chance, does
your Prayer Book also have that prayer that is printed in mine, where
it says, 'I believe, O Lord, and I confess that Thou art truly the
Christ, the Son of the Living God, Who camest into the world to save
sinners, of whom I am chief'? And if you read the same prayers as the
rest of us sinners, permit me to ask you: Did the Holy Spirit,
perchance, write them only for us? Do they not apply to you also? What
do you feel when you read those dread words? Are they words that speak
to you perhaps? Do they express what you feel? Do you espouse what they
say? Or when you reach that point, do you simply skip them, and say,
'These words are only religious prose or poetic license,' or, 'These
words apply only to the old calendarists'?
"Is this how you propose to convert us from our error?! Well, good for
you! May God keep you in good health! Would that you always corrected
us in whatever matter we go astray. We will even raise up a statue in
your honor! It doesn't matter to us who corrects us. Within the Church,
we are all 'taught of God'.
"But in order to do this, you have to prove that you also are within
the Church of Christ, that you believe in Him correctly, and that you
glorify Him rightly . . .
"Do you know the story about that monk who wanted to be freed from his
warfare with the temptation of fornication? The devil offered to free
him from this temptation, providing the monk would no longer venerate
the icon of the Theotokos. And what did an Abba tell that monk by way
of counsel? 'It would be better for you to visit all the brothels of
Syria, rather than to refuse to venerate the icon of our Lady
Theotokos!' Likewise in your case, Mr. Kokoris, it would be better for
you to visit all the world's brothels rather than to violate the
Tradition and order of the Catholic Church! Truly, as the Gospel says,
it were better for you 'to enter into the Kingdom of Heaven halt or
maimed' (cf. Matt. 18:8) rather than, having both hands and feet, to
create this gehenna of fire, this contemporary chaos, confusion and
uncertainty that has overtaken us thanks to your apostasy!
"Indeed, the commandments 'Thou shalt not commit adultery; Thou shalt
not kill; Thou shalt not steal; Thou shalt not bear false witness; Thou
shalt not covet; and if there be any other commandment' (Rom. 13:9) are
only degrees on the spiritual thermometer that show how much the body
is ailing. However, the thermometer cannot, of itself, cool the fever.
And neither can the various 'anti-inflammatory' good works-which have
their place, and are also required for those that are ailing-neither
can they, I say, kill the virus of sin. This virus can be killed
completely only by the "deifying Blood" of Christ the Master. Only this
Blood 'deifieth the spirit, and wondrously nourisheth the mind,' and,
in God's infinite love, is offered to us from Christ's wounded side
'unto healing, and purification, and enlightenment, and protection, and
salvation, and sanctification of both soul and body, unto the averting
of every phantasy and evil deed and diabolical operation working
noetically in our members, unto confidence and love toward Him, unto
amendment of life and stability, unto an increase of virtue and
perfection, unto fulfilment of the commandments, unto communion with
the Holy Spirit, as a provision for life everlasting, and as an
acceptable defence at Christ's dread tribunal' (cf. Second Communion
Prayer of St. Basil the Great).
"Since you new calendarists and ecumenists have sinned in matters of
the Faith, therefore, and since you have changed the Tradition and
order of the Catholic and Apostolic Church, it is ironic that you
should condemn us now for reasons of morality. . .
"As I said above, however, we bypass these subjects and we don't get
involved in straining out such gnats. As long as the Faith is kept
inviolate, that which the Holy Spirit addresses in our liturgical texts
to Christ our Lord is applicable to all: 'Withhold not, because of my
sins, the grace of Thy Holy Spirit from these Gifts here spread forth.
. .for Thou Thyself art He that offereth and is offered, and that
accepteth and is distributed. . . Thou that sittest on high with the
Father, and that art invisibly present here with us.' Therefore, by the
degree that the priest or the bishop is unworthy (as long as they do
not stray from the exact confession of the Faith by even one jot or one
tittle), by such a degree is the [grace of God] that which in actuality
imparts the holy Mysteries to us more radiantly and resplendently.
The matter, however, has an ecclesiastical dimension, and this alone is
what is of interest to us. Perhaps you will hit the ceiling, Mr.
Kokoris, but that is your problem. We, 'the garbage cans'-according to
your own loving and noble expression-we, 'the weak things, the base
things, and the things which are despised' (cf. I Cor. 1:27, 28), we
'the poor,' (James 2:5) and 'offscouring' (I Cor. 4:13), we who bear
'the reproach of Christ' (Heb. 11:26)-even if only three of us are left
upon the earth-whether you like it or not, whether you agree or
not-are, according to the Fathers, authentically and truly the Orthodox
Church, 'having this treasure in earthen vessels' (II Cor. 4:7).
Editorial Note: The Synods of the Ecumenical Patriarchate (in 1975),
the Moscow Patriarchate (in 1969) and the Syrian Patriarchate (in 2001)
have officially and synodically resolved that it is allowable, under
certain circumstances, to impart holy communion to the non-Orthodox.*
This directly contravenes the patristic dictum: "If anyone be found
sharing communion with excommunicated persons, let him also be
excommunicated" (Antioch, Canon 2).
* See http://www.homb.net for additional information.
________________________________________________________________________
4. How odd that nine out of ten Canadians believe in God,
While 78 % also believe in abortion
by TED & VIRGINIA BYFIELD
[THE REPORT, December 16, 2002]
Wasn't it Philip Johnson, the man whose persistent questioning of
Darwinism has roused such ire among certain scientists, who once
described what he called America's established religion? Every country,
he said, whether aware of the fact or not, has an "accepted" religious
view. It's a sort of social orthodoxy, to which its intellectual
community - media, bureaucrats and most politicians - subscribe. We
believe he's right. Here, for instance, is a noteworthy current
manifestation of Canada's national religion.
It arises from a National Post-Global poll on Canadian views about
abortion. Back in the mid- I980s, support for abortion rights ran
somewhere around 50%. By the turn of the century, it stood at 66%. Now,
abortion approval averages 78% across Canada, the poll found, standing
highest in Quebec at 83%.
But let's set these figures beside what other polls have shown about
Canadian religious beliefs. Something like 90% of us say there is a
God, and close to 70% believe in the divinity of Jesus Christ. However,
the National Post-Global poll now shows us what kind of a God we
believe in.
For one thing, he obviously finds nothing seriously wrong with
abortion. To the contrary, Canada's God seems a tolerant sort of chap,
chiefly concerned that we enjoy ourselves here on earth, uninhibited by
all those old-fashioned notions about morality. For example, He gave us
sex chiefly for our amusement. Should pregnancy unhappily result, He
will cheerfully approve clinical disposal of "the product," which can
then be dumped in the garbage (like the condoms provided in our high
schools).
Above all, our God is a nice God, not so much our Heavenly Father as
our Heavenly Grandfather, who wants all of His grandchildren to have a
good time. He emphatically is not "judgmental," so all those old
warnings about a final verdict consigning us to inexpressible bliss or
inconceivable misery can safely be ignored. Canada's God doesn't carry
on like that.
A couple of questions do arise, however. Not having seen a parallel
U.S. poll, we don't know the comparative American figures. But there's
an interesting similarity between the proportion of Canadians who
attend church and the proportion who oppose abortion. Both are in the
vicinity of 20%, and, we suspect, are largely composed of the same
people. And since American church attendance is nearly double ours
(between 35% and 40%); it's probable that opposition to abortion is far
stronger in the U.S.
The other question is: what happened? Why is church attendance
declining? Why is abortion approval rising? The answer, we suggest, is
that we've been successfully educated - educated, that is, to the
precise goal that our modern educator intended us to reach. His
objective was not that we should be well educated in the old sense of
that term, but rather that we should be well adjusted. He sought to
produce people who could fit unresistingly into his approved
philosophy. He wanted conformists, folks who could receive and
instantly embrace establishment values. Well, in eight out of 10 cases,
he seems to have got them.
In response to the abortion poll, pro-life spokesmen make certain
pertinent observations. A general question on woman's choice has
always, they note, produced an overwhelming approval rating. However,
when the question becomes more specific centering, for example, on
late-term abortions - the approval rating drops sharply. To a
Gallup question last year (should abortion be allowed under all
circumstances?), 66% said "No." Moreover, a Leger poll this year found
that 66% of us oppose state funding of abortion.
Even these convictions, however, are frequently preceded by such
phrases as "I feel," or "In my own opinion" or "My sense of it is."
Notice that all such expressions serve to couch the response in
subjective terms. There are no absolutes. In every instance abortion is
rejected, not because it's wrong, but because the individual has the
sensation within himself that it's wrong.
On this point, one of us some years ago got very much into the bad
books of a certain Southam newspaper publisher, who had declared that,
although he was "personally opposed" to abortion, he would never
"impose his views" on others. Speculation as to what he might mean by
this was too tempting to resist. He would not prohibit abortion by law,
of course. But if a woman he knew had an unwanted pregnancy, would he
advise her against it? How about his daughter, or his wife? Would he
"impose his view" in any of these cases? Surely not. So when would his
opposition take effect? Only in one eventuality, it seemed. If he
himself were to become pregnant, he would defiantly carry the baby to
term. He did not find this analysis at all funny.
You will often notice this same peculiar phenomenon among devotees of
our national religion. Tell a man: "You believe there's a God. Well,
now, many people don't. Are you saying that you're right and they're
wrong?" Likely as not, he'll reply: "Good heavens, no. I wouldn't go
that far. I'm just telling you how I feel." They have indeed been
superbly "educated."
______________________________________________________________________________
5. Moral values 101
by Joel Belz
[World, November 27, 2004]
Christians need not apologize for focusing on single issues
Please read this as an unambiguous call for Christians to set aside all
embarrassment over putting such an emphasis on issues like abortion,
homosexuality, and traditional marriage. "Life is more complicated than
that," say our liberal critics. "Reality is more nuanced. There are too
many shades of gray to allow folks to reduce the public debate to those
few issues."
"Christians run the risk," I heard one leader say last week right after
the election, "of allowing themselves to look simple-minded."
Christianity Today devoted its main editorial during the recent
electoral frenzy to a warning against "single-issue politics."
The condescending arrogance of such a caution is rooted in two giant
falsehoods:
Falsehood No. 1 is the assertion that abortion, homosexuality, and
marriage are just not the black-and-white issues some of us would like
to suggest they are. They all probably need - ahem - a good bit more
discussion.
Falsehood No. 2 is the assumption that those of us who harp on
abortion, homosexuality, and marriage have never given thought to
issues like poverty and economic justice, to racism and minority
rights, to war and international fairness, to healthcare and
environmental concerns.
Both those falsehoods have gotten lots of ink and air-time since the
discovery by the media, right after the Nov. 2 election, that "moral
values" had played a big part in motivating those who voted for
President Bush. Neither comprehending what this was all about, on the
one hand, nor being willing, on the other hand, to concede such moral
high ground to Mr. Bush's backers, many in the media and on the
Democratic left have repeatedly stressed these two points. But like so
many falsehoods, they sound much more plausible than they really are.
So what makes the debate about abortion, homosexuality, and traditional
marriage quite different from the debate about the other issues? The
answer is amazingly simple -and don't let anyone talk you out of that
fact! The answer is that on the issues of abortion, homosexuality, and
marriage, one side is claiming that certain behavior is just plain
wrong while the other claims it is not only right, but to be defended.
On the other issues, the debate is not about right and wrong, but about
extent and about appropriate methodology.
Where, for example, among mainstream conservatives or Christians do you
find those who are affirming the moral rightness of racism? Where do
you find those who say we should expand oppression of the poor, or
withhold justice from them? Most of us, to be sure, might be rightly
charged with having insufficient concern for the ravages of racism or
for walking by on the other side of the road when we see our brothers
and sisters in need. But that is quite different from proclaiming that
disinterest as a virtue.
Yet that is precisely what defenders of abortion, homosexual rights,
and new forms of marriage are doing. They are saying that the act of
killing human babies is behavior that should be defended. They are
saying that those committed to homosexual behavior should be encouraged
to take pride in that choice. And they are saying that same-sex
marriages might well be models of commitment from which heterosexuals
might properly learn.
Let's quit pussyfooting. Besides claiming that all the wisdom of human
history concerning such matters has been wrong, these assertions are
outrages against our basic humanity. What is there to discuss about
killing a baby? Or, as a friend of mine noted several years ago,
anybody who's ever played with Tinkertoys knows that homosexual
behavior just doesn't work. And the claim that Heather Has Two Mommies
is preposterously false on the face of it; nobody in biological history
ever had two moms or two dads.
So here's a word to our liberal critics:
Nail us to the wall for having overly hard hearts. Hang us out to dry
for sometimes seared consciences. Demonstrate for all to see that we
are inconsistent when we may have used the government to feather our
own nests while opposing programs that would have improved the lots of
others. We confess our hypocrisy - sometimes inadvertent, sometimes too
calculating.
But don't ask us to pretend that wobbling carelessly around the road,
or even crossing the middle line sometimes, is the same as deliberately
driving at 80 miles an hour the wrong way on a one-way street. Some
"moral values" deserve a good bit of discussion. Some need none at all.
________________________________________________________________________
6. NEW FROM THE BOOK CENTER
(EOC) ENTERING THE ORTHODOX CHURCH: The Catechism and Baptism of Adults
by Met. Hierotheos of Nafpaktos. This book presents a concise
preparation of catechumens in the spiritual life and worship of the
Church drawn from Tradition. Starting with a section on the historical
preparation of catechumens, it goes on to the spiritual life and
finally the theology in the Symbol of Faith. 203pp. Paper
e$17.50
(OPE) ORTHODOX PRAYERS FOR EVERYDAY translated and compiled by Maureen
Girard. A small format (4-1/2 x 7-1/4) book containing the daily
cycle of services, morning and evening prayers and pre-Communion
prayers arranged (and somewhat abridged) for personal use. 147pp.
Cloth d$17.00
(DIV) THE GREAT DIVIDE: The Failure of Islam and the Triumph of the
West by Alvin J. Schmidt. A comparison of the normal
practices of Islam and Christianity from both a historical and
religious view, with interesting sections on the attitude of both
towards woman and slavery. Refutes the notion of Islam as a religion of
peace. 352pp. Paper d$20.00
(GD) O GOD OF DEMETRIOS: The Story of Saint Demetrios of
Thessaloniki. . Angeline Eliakopoulos, illustrations by Tom
Linden. A fine account of the life of St. Demetrios, his martyrdom and
his impact on the Church. Excellent book for teen-agers. 50pp d$16.00
(LAN) LANTERN OF GRACE: Seven Homilies in Memory of Our Father Among
the Saints, John, Archbishop of Shanghai and San Francisco by Fr.
Valery Lukianov. A beautiful, full-color volume with many
illustrations and photographs (some never before published). Prefaced
by a brief survey of the life of the saint, the homilies contain a
wealth of information and vivid descriptions of uncovering of his
relics and the glorification services. 142pp. Cloth d$25.00