Homily for the Nativity: 2015
December 25, 2015
G.D.O'Bradovich III
Truth is singular. Its 'versions' are mistruths.
Cloud Atlas
Cloud Atlas
1
It is seldom that we find ourselves in a situation where there is a clearly defined goal, let alone a path towards that goal. While we do not expect a handbook for life, it would be beneficial if organizations were explicit in their statement of goals and how these objectives are to be accomplished. Of course, we do not expect esoteric organizations to be forthcoming, but many times esoteric organization, such as universities and churches, hide their light under a bushel. We note that classrooms have syllabuses and churches have catechisms, but many times the important elements are inexplicably left to the enterprising student to discover for himself.
If the goal of Christianity is good behavior, however defined, then we would expect Christianity to degenerate into various sects of pharisees, all claiming to be correct while vilifying those not under their roofs. We concede that the reality of the western churches is one of continuous fragmentation, coupled with moralizing behavior. These “churches”, by their existence, hear the words of the Master- “I will build tens of thousands of denominations upon this rock.”
If Christianity exists to create morality among their members, then its raison d'etre has failed, for there is no reason to be an adherent of Christianity over Judaism or any other religion. With Judaism, all is behavior, so all acts can be conveniently categorized as acceptable or not acceptable.
Fred wrote that the symbolism of Christianity was corrupted almost form the beginning and we demonstrate the veracity of his statement by “the word of God”. The word of God is the second person of the Trinity-Jesus Christ. This concept has been clearly and explicity taught for centuries, but what is the result of this forthrightness in the western world? Utter confusion and misunderstanding. Many “adherents” do not identify the word of God with Jesus, but in their ignorance, the Bible is understood as the word of God. Clearly, if the Trinity can not be understood...
If modern Christian teachers can not understand the common monograph of “IHS” that is frequently found in churches, can they be trusted with more important Chronological issues? While there are some plausible and many fanciful solutions to the meaning of “IHS”, there is only one true and correct answer-”IHS” is the abbreviation for Jesus-and nothing more significant.
The idolatry of the Bible is a direct result of misunderstanding a Christian term . The idolatry of the “inerrant word”, not Christ, but the Bible has sown the seeds of endless moralizing among Protestants. If the goal of Christianity were morality, then it has failed and should rightly be discarded. For the moral law, as Saint Paul wrote, is written on the heart. The result of this morality for a Christian is a life of failure- failure to become a perfectly moral creature and failure to convince others to behave accordingly.
If the goal of Christianity is “the salvation of souls”, then we are confronted with a subjective goal and it is impossible to know if one has been successfully saved-the “saved” person is indistinguishable from the “unsaved” person. If, however, the “saved” individual does behave differently, then it is because they adhere to precepts of the law that is found on stone tablets, not the Master's voice.
If we dismiss the accident of the “Reformation”, then we left with the Roman church where, except for a handful of saints, all members go to the fires of purgatory, and the Orthodox church. We will dismiss the Roman church for two reasons-multiple additions to dogma during the preceding five centuries and the almost impossibly of being released from purgatory. Therefore, we are left with the Orthodox Church and while they do have an understanding of morality, as does every religion that has existed, at least in this regard, they are not exceptional. However, for the Orthodox Church morality is not the goal, it is the means to the end; the steps along the path. Any objection from the Protestant faction that this position amounts to works and not faith has no basis in reality or experience. One can have faith or a belief in anything, no God required, but regardless of “belief” one must still exist in this world and works are the result of life-how one understands life is another way of stating how one interprets works. Any other definition of works than the interaction between individuals is pseudo-intellectualism. Therefore, works is one inherent aspect of being human.
Since, in the course of the liturgical year, the Orthodox church does not explicitly state that the goal of the individual is to become divine, we can state the Orthodox Church is an esoteric organization. I doubt if one in 1, 000 or two in 10,000 individuals could ever understand this mystery if left to their own wisdom. The goal of Divinity should be stated at least once a year and I suggest the homily of the Nativity would be the appropriate time “since God became man, so man could become god.” We suggest that the Divine Liturgy predates the goal of theosis. If theosis were anterior to the creation of the Liturgy, we would expect more explicit statements to the effect that “Brothers and Sisters in Christ, you are part of the Divine Faith whose purpose is your divinization.” We hear the rending of garments from the Protestants, but what can they reply to a historical and long established fact of Orthodoxy? Christ came to forgive sins, but if sin is separation from God, then what could be closer to God than becoming Divine? Existing in heaven, playing harps surrounded by cherubs? This vision is so insipid as to border on blasphemy.
Protestants have altered the sublime goal of Christianity and replaced it with an endless farce of backsliding, sin and forgiveness that can only appeal to those who have neither no higher longing nor self satisfaction than “I am saved”. But to what end? Their “purpose” has been fulfilled, they are saved, and the result is that world is seen as evil, full of sin. Clearly, this world view can not appeal to the majority, but to a minority, or to those who have come sick enough to accept this delusion as truth.
If Protestants misunderstand the word of God, can we reasonably ask them to explain Christianity, that is, the subtle or less blatant aspects of Christianity? Already, they have turned one aspect of the church (chrismation) into a belief system that can not be reasoned with, it can only be confronted and denied-denied by history, denied by reason and denied by facts. What passes itself as Christianity is not historical, reasonable or factual. What is modern Christianity, but the multiform spirit of Anti Christ confounding the one truth?
Long and painful experience has taught us that there is no reason or fact or truth that can convince Protestants that they are in error regarding what Christianity is, let alone the sublime goal, that is, becoming divine.
If the goal of Christianity is good behavior, however defined, then we would expect Christianity to degenerate into various sects of pharisees, all claiming to be correct while vilifying those not under their roofs. We concede that the reality of the western churches is one of continuous fragmentation, coupled with moralizing behavior. These “churches”, by their existence, hear the words of the Master- “I will build tens of thousands of denominations upon this rock.”
If Christianity exists to create morality among their members, then its raison d'etre has failed, for there is no reason to be an adherent of Christianity over Judaism or any other religion. With Judaism, all is behavior, so all acts can be conveniently categorized as acceptable or not acceptable.
Fred wrote that the symbolism of Christianity was corrupted almost form the beginning and we demonstrate the veracity of his statement by “the word of God”. The word of God is the second person of the Trinity-Jesus Christ. This concept has been clearly and explicity taught for centuries, but what is the result of this forthrightness in the western world? Utter confusion and misunderstanding. Many “adherents” do not identify the word of God with Jesus, but in their ignorance, the Bible is understood as the word of God. Clearly, if the Trinity can not be understood...
If modern Christian teachers can not understand the common monograph of “IHS” that is frequently found in churches, can they be trusted with more important Chronological issues? While there are some plausible and many fanciful solutions to the meaning of “IHS”, there is only one true and correct answer-”IHS” is the abbreviation for Jesus-and nothing more significant.
The idolatry of the Bible is a direct result of misunderstanding a Christian term . The idolatry of the “inerrant word”, not Christ, but the Bible has sown the seeds of endless moralizing among Protestants. If the goal of Christianity were morality, then it has failed and should rightly be discarded. For the moral law, as Saint Paul wrote, is written on the heart. The result of this morality for a Christian is a life of failure- failure to become a perfectly moral creature and failure to convince others to behave accordingly.
If the goal of Christianity is “the salvation of souls”, then we are confronted with a subjective goal and it is impossible to know if one has been successfully saved-the “saved” person is indistinguishable from the “unsaved” person. If, however, the “saved” individual does behave differently, then it is because they adhere to precepts of the law that is found on stone tablets, not the Master's voice.
If we dismiss the accident of the “Reformation”, then we left with the Roman church where, except for a handful of saints, all members go to the fires of purgatory, and the Orthodox church. We will dismiss the Roman church for two reasons-multiple additions to dogma during the preceding five centuries and the almost impossibly of being released from purgatory. Therefore, we are left with the Orthodox Church and while they do have an understanding of morality, as does every religion that has existed, at least in this regard, they are not exceptional. However, for the Orthodox Church morality is not the goal, it is the means to the end; the steps along the path. Any objection from the Protestant faction that this position amounts to works and not faith has no basis in reality or experience. One can have faith or a belief in anything, no God required, but regardless of “belief” one must still exist in this world and works are the result of life-how one understands life is another way of stating how one interprets works. Any other definition of works than the interaction between individuals is pseudo-intellectualism. Therefore, works is one inherent aspect of being human.
Since, in the course of the liturgical year, the Orthodox church does not explicitly state that the goal of the individual is to become divine, we can state the Orthodox Church is an esoteric organization. I doubt if one in 1, 000 or two in 10,000 individuals could ever understand this mystery if left to their own wisdom. The goal of Divinity should be stated at least once a year and I suggest the homily of the Nativity would be the appropriate time “since God became man, so man could become god.” We suggest that the Divine Liturgy predates the goal of theosis. If theosis were anterior to the creation of the Liturgy, we would expect more explicit statements to the effect that “Brothers and Sisters in Christ, you are part of the Divine Faith whose purpose is your divinization.” We hear the rending of garments from the Protestants, but what can they reply to a historical and long established fact of Orthodoxy? Christ came to forgive sins, but if sin is separation from God, then what could be closer to God than becoming Divine? Existing in heaven, playing harps surrounded by cherubs? This vision is so insipid as to border on blasphemy.
Protestants have altered the sublime goal of Christianity and replaced it with an endless farce of backsliding, sin and forgiveness that can only appeal to those who have neither no higher longing nor self satisfaction than “I am saved”. But to what end? Their “purpose” has been fulfilled, they are saved, and the result is that world is seen as evil, full of sin. Clearly, this world view can not appeal to the majority, but to a minority, or to those who have come sick enough to accept this delusion as truth.
If Protestants misunderstand the word of God, can we reasonably ask them to explain Christianity, that is, the subtle or less blatant aspects of Christianity? Already, they have turned one aspect of the church (chrismation) into a belief system that can not be reasoned with, it can only be confronted and denied-denied by history, denied by reason and denied by facts. What passes itself as Christianity is not historical, reasonable or factual. What is modern Christianity, but the multiform spirit of Anti Christ confounding the one truth?
Long and painful experience has taught us that there is no reason or fact or truth that can convince Protestants that they are in error regarding what Christianity is, let alone the sublime goal, that is, becoming divine.
2
What is received freely is given freely.
Theosis is available not only to the Orthodox clergy, but to the laity, the faithful servants of the Master. The inclusiveness of Orthodoxy is contrasted to the Roman laity who, unless they are martyred, must go to Purgatory where they are refined in the fires of Hell. Since the Orthodox Church does not “make saints” as the Roman church does, there is an untold number of departed servants who have attained divinity with the Master. Whereas Protestants offer the certainty of “salvation”, Orthodoxy can only offer hope for theosis. Since the Master knows what is good for his faithful servants, we suggest that the Orthodox teaching is well founded in the words of Christ, rather than in the second hand opinions of assuredly errant “ministers” whose only qualification is “belief” in their inerrant scripture, where inerrant scripture is understood as the Bible with the Apocrypha removed, that is, those Bibles published after the year 1800.
Protestant “preachers” who demand belief in the power of God, yet deny that his energy can bring Divinity to mere mortals. What is the reality of their position, but a denial of God's ability and denial of the power of the Master himself?
Therefore, these modern Christians have two options-either acknowledge their “beliefs” are contrary to both reason and history or continue as their predecessors have and wrestle with the false dichotomy of “works” and “faith” whose stated goal is the “salvation of the soul” [the Orthodox Church does not teach the immortality of the soul]. The only observable results of their “salvation” is an individual who is morally stunted, corrupted by unreason and can not distinguish truth from error. They lack the ability to distinguish because there is no standard of value that can not be twisted to render their sought after and desired conclusion.
If we were skeptical of Christianity, it the version of Christianity that is found and aggressively promoted in the west-uncertain of itself and fearful of an honest inquiry. How refreshing it would be to hear a self professing modern Christian to honestly state “I don't know” instead of evasions and shallow retorts. Why can't modern Christians study history and realize that their beliefs have no basis in reality?
I fear that the reason is that those studious individual would realize, sooner rather than later, that their assumptions and opinions are erroneous, that is, they would be forced to admit to making a mistake, possibly several mistakes, because our modern Christians are all too human and acknowledging mistakes is a painful experience. Gentle Reader, this is another example of modern Christians professing to “know” Christ, but denying that the Master said that he is the truth.
Theosis is available not only to the Orthodox clergy, but to the laity, the faithful servants of the Master. The inclusiveness of Orthodoxy is contrasted to the Roman laity who, unless they are martyred, must go to Purgatory where they are refined in the fires of Hell. Since the Orthodox Church does not “make saints” as the Roman church does, there is an untold number of departed servants who have attained divinity with the Master. Whereas Protestants offer the certainty of “salvation”, Orthodoxy can only offer hope for theosis. Since the Master knows what is good for his faithful servants, we suggest that the Orthodox teaching is well founded in the words of Christ, rather than in the second hand opinions of assuredly errant “ministers” whose only qualification is “belief” in their inerrant scripture, where inerrant scripture is understood as the Bible with the Apocrypha removed, that is, those Bibles published after the year 1800.
Protestant “preachers” who demand belief in the power of God, yet deny that his energy can bring Divinity to mere mortals. What is the reality of their position, but a denial of God's ability and denial of the power of the Master himself?
Therefore, these modern Christians have two options-either acknowledge their “beliefs” are contrary to both reason and history or continue as their predecessors have and wrestle with the false dichotomy of “works” and “faith” whose stated goal is the “salvation of the soul” [the Orthodox Church does not teach the immortality of the soul]. The only observable results of their “salvation” is an individual who is morally stunted, corrupted by unreason and can not distinguish truth from error. They lack the ability to distinguish because there is no standard of value that can not be twisted to render their sought after and desired conclusion.
If we were skeptical of Christianity, it the version of Christianity that is found and aggressively promoted in the west-uncertain of itself and fearful of an honest inquiry. How refreshing it would be to hear a self professing modern Christian to honestly state “I don't know” instead of evasions and shallow retorts. Why can't modern Christians study history and realize that their beliefs have no basis in reality?
I fear that the reason is that those studious individual would realize, sooner rather than later, that their assumptions and opinions are erroneous, that is, they would be forced to admit to making a mistake, possibly several mistakes, because our modern Christians are all too human and acknowledging mistakes is a painful experience. Gentle Reader, this is another example of modern Christians professing to “know” Christ, but denying that the Master said that he is the truth.
[There] are a good many points upon which I agree with Christ a great deal more than the professing Christians do. I do not know that I could go with Him all the way, but I could go with Him much further than most professing Christians can. Bertrand Russell