*--*  Qmodem Session Capture File  *--*
*--*  Qmodem Capture File  09/07/88 21:48:02  *--*




The Orthodox Journal
806 South Euclid Street
Fullerton, California 92632
Telephone: (714) 526-6257
and (714) 526-2131
Computer Number
ISSN 0278-551X
USPS 679-570

November-December 1987,	Volume Seven, Number Seven.

Published bi-monthly by	Axios Newsletter, Inc.,	a non-profit  California
corporation,  established  in 1981.  AXIOS is designed to be a review of
public affairs,	religion, literature and the  arts,  and  is  especially
interested in the Orthodox Catholic Church (sometimes called The Eastern
Orthodox Church) and its world view.  Second Class Postage  is	paid  at
Fullerton, California.

Printed	in the U.S.A., copyright 1987 by Axios	Newsletter,  Inc.,  with
all  rights  reserved  under  International  and Pan-American copy-right
conventions.  Reproduction of any part without prior written  permission
is  strictly  prohibited.   Subscriptions:   Single copy:  $1.00; yearly
subscriptions $10.00; special two year rate:  $15.00.  All Canadian  and
foreign	 subscriptions	must  be paid in U.S.  dollars by  international
money-order or by check	on a  U.S.   bank.   POSTMASTER:   Send	 address
changes	 to  AXIOS, 806	South Euclid Street, Fullerton,	CA 92632.  AXIOS
is a member of the Associated Church Press.


Father Daniel, Editor
Deacon Joseph, Assistant
Brother	Richard, Assistant


If you would be	interested in learning more about the Monastery	of Saint
Michael	please write to	us at AXIOS.



After you have provided	for your family, you can do  something	for  the
future salvation of America -- support for the church.	A gift thru your
will can enable	us to continue to publish and to educate  and  to  plant
the  Orthodox  Church here in our own land.  We	need this support to aid
our efforts.  Tell your	attorney to add	this sentence to your will:   "I
give  to  Axios	 Newsletter, Inc., the sum of _______ dollars to be used
for the	general	purposes of the	corporation." What you leave behind with
those few words	can do much for	the world you leave behind.


A Problem of the Orthodox Church


Many people may	have heard the term 'canonical'	often used  in	Orthodox
circles.   It refers to	the laws or canons of the Church, created either
by ecumenical councils or  local  synods  and  approved	 by  the  entire
Church.	  To  be 'canonical' therefore	means that you follow faithfully
all of the laws	as enacted.

Now each of the	 Orthodox  organizations  within  the  English	speaking
world,	of  the	United States, England,	Ireland, Australia, New	Zealand,
etc., like to think of themselves as being fully canonical, and	 several
of  them  have	even  created a	committee to call themselves 'canonical'
(entitled, the Standing	Conference  of	Canonical  Orthodox  Bishops  in
America).   Here  they try to judge the	correctness of others on matters

One of the  major  problems  is	 that  Canon  Law  REQUIRES  within  the
traditional  apostolic	and  catholic regulations of the Orthodox Church
that in	each city, there would be only one bishop, and in each	province
there would be only one	metropolitan.	Because	of this	requirement NONE
of  the	 Orthodox  Churches  within  the  English  speaking  world   are
'canonical' ALL	are un-lawful, they are	UN-CANONICAL.

It is our own humble opinion, therefore, that none of the  Churches  may
presume	 to  speak  for	 the Orthodox Church within the	English	speaking

In the French speaking world, the problem has been solved  very	 simply,
an  autocephalous French Orthodox Church was established, and it now has
a good history going back to the 1870's.  Any other Church  that  should
find  itself  in  France is now	an  'outsider' and in good faith and for
the welfare of the whole church	should submit to  the  Bishop  of  Saint
Denis  in  Paris.   Any	 other	action	is unthinkable and would lead to
confusion and chaos.

In order to establish a	true native Orthodox American Church the  Bishop
de  Saint  Denis  has  establish  Churches  within America under his own
authority.  This is the	same as	has the	Greek, Russian,	Serbian, Syrian,
Bulgarian, Albanian, etc., have	done.

This action is neither more 'canonical'	nor less  'canonical'  than  the
actions	of the other foreign Orthodox Churches.

It is, indeed, more fruitful for the future of the  Orthodox  Church  in
America	that the Bishop	de Saint Denis has taken this step.  America  is
a 'western' nation, and	those forms of worship and  outlook  that  would
help  them  into  the  Truth of	the  One Church, can be	found within the
parishes under the Bishop de Saint Denis.

The parishes of	the American Church under Bishop Germain de Saint Denis,
use  the liturgy of Western Europe established before the year 800 A.D.,
they also use English, the language of the people, and	they  recognized
also the Eastern forms of  worship of the Church.  This	fulfills a great
need, and echos	the heart felt desire  of  the	native	American  to  be
allowed	 to  be	 American  within  the	truth  of the One True Church of

Nothing	else will do, nothing else  will  work,	 nothing  else	has  the
charity	of purpose that	opens itself to	all of the people.


The AXIOS BBS has been established.  This is a computer	bulletin  board,
operating  12 hours a day at telephone number (714) 526-2387.  The board
exists so files	may be transferred easily and information shared for the
benefit	 of  the  Church and its people.  AXIOS	itself may be downloaded
from the computer bulletin board.  We also hope	that suggestions will be
offered	for improvement	of this	new service.


An Important Step


	Some day the United States  Postal  Service  will  wake	 up  and
realize	 that its best future lies in privatization -- in the end of its
monopoly over first class mail and in its transformation into a	 private
company.   Such	 a change would	benefit	Postal Service employees most of
all.  They would cease being wards of the government, and  would  become
free men and women working for a free company.

	That transformation would best occur sooner rather  than  later.
Right  now,  Postal  Service employees can control their own fate.  They
could insist, for example, that	they be	given a	large chunk of the stock
of a privatized	postal company.

	But that time is limited.   Technological  changes  are	 already
undercutting  the  Postal  Service's  monopoly,	 a  trend that will only
accelerate.   The  lightning  advances	in  computers  will   son   make
electronic  mail  the  cheapest	 way  for  most	 businesses  to	 conduct
correspondence.	  And  private	overnight  companies,  such  as	 Federal
Express,  already  thrive  despite charging twice the rate of the Postal
Service's less reliable	overnight (sometimes) Express Mail.

	What may force the issue is the	Postal Service's  own  continued
inability  to  keep costs reasonable.  A Senate	budget-cutting proposal,
for example,  has  Postal  Service  officials  up  in  arms.   Complains
Postmaster  General  Preston  R.  Tisch:   "The	 plain	truth is if this
legislation is enacted we will be unable to provide the	level of service
we have	been working so	hard to	achieve."

	If the Senate proposal becomes law,  the  Postal  Service  might
eliminate Saturday deliveries and reduce post office hours.  "As a final
resort," threatens Deputy Postmaster General Michael  S.  Coughlin,  "we
would  have  to	 reconsider  the  possibility  of closing some 10,000 to
12,000 small post offices  --  most  of	 them  in  rural  areas	 of  the
country."  This	 is  an	 old  Postal Service trick:  Rile up Congress by
threatening local service.

	This time Congress and President Reagan	should call  the  Postal
Service's  bluff.  They	should say to the mailcarriers:	 "All right.  If
you can't provide decent service to rural areas	and elsewhere,	then  we
know something that can:  private enterprise."

	What's more, in	 many  rural  areas  private  companies	 already
deliver	 the  mail.   The  Postal Service contracts out	such deliveries,
usually	at wages lower than it pays its	 own  employees.   And	even  in
metropolitan areas, many drug or convenience stores now	provide	Saturday
postal services.

	Both rural and city people would best be served	by a  privatized
postal	company,  just	as  all	 of  us	 are better served by privatized
department stores or fast food chains.	If McDonald's can provide tasty,
cheap burgers everywhere across	the country (and indeed	the world), so a
private	postal service could  provide  efficient,  cheap  mail	delivery





	Most of	our other Christian churches seem to be	deeply infected.

	Take the example of the	Roman  Catholic	 faithful  who	attended
"Jesus	Day VII" at the	Quigley	Seminary in Chicago, Illinois, this past
October	10th.  Instead of hearing about	the Jesus of Tradition	and  the
New  Testament	from  the  speakers, many  gladly absorbed teaching from
speakers on the	 "Christ  consciousness"  of  the  New	Age,  a	 concept
differing  from	 traditional  Biblical concepts	of the person of Christ,
and from the teachings of the Church.

	One of the most	popular	speakers was  Dominican	 Father	 Matthew
Fox  of	Oakland, California who	is under investigation for heresy by the
Vatican.  According to an article in the Los  Angeles  Times,  areas  of
concern	center around Fox's views on feminism, homosexuality, premarital
sex, the doctrine  of  original	 sin,  and  charges  that  he  advocates
pantheism -- a central tenant of the New Age Movement.

	Fox would not allow his	lecture	to  be	taped.	 But  in  it  he
advocated  throwing out	traditional images of "the historical Jesus" and
concentrate on	the  "cosmic  Christ"  within.	 Fox  also  likened  the
Catholic  Church to a burning building.	 He thought  Christians	ought to
save  only  a  few  things  from  traditional  Christianity  and   adopt
traditions from	ancient	African	and Greek religions, and from nature.

	After the speech Fox told the press he rejects the  doctrine  of
hell,  and  he likens purgatory	to reincarnation.  When	asked about what
practices he would like	to see instituted in the church, he replied he'd
want  some  pews  removed  to  make  room  for "circle dances" which are
conducted by pagan and wiccan (witchcraft) groups.   Fox  also	defended
the  retention of Starhawk to his faculty at Holy Names	College.  She is
a self-described witch who teaches ritual-making.

	Fox's speech was not the only one laced	with  Eastern  mysticism
and   New   Age	  themes.   Richard  Woods,  O.P.   author  of	New  Age
Spirituality-Symbion advocated the redistribution of the world's  wealth
into  a	 new  world  order  (where have	we heard that before), worldwide
population control  by	central	 planners,  and	 he  lauded  the  "Green
politics"  of  Europe  which is	steeped	in New Age mysticism.  Following
his speech, he blamed the abundance of food in the U.S.	 for much of the
world's	poverty	and overpopulation.

	If this	isn't something	to be alarmed about,  then  we	are  all
totally	 lost,	since  so  many	 others	will absorb this false teaching.
This challenge posed by	the New	Age is great.

	There is much to weep about in the ways	that New Age and related
ideologies  have made their way	into the media,	the schools, and popular
culture	generally.  Since we have yet to find any Orthodox  writer  that
has  dealt  with  this	subject	 we will have to draw attention	to a new
book, Unmasking	the New	Age.  It is  by	 Douglas  R.  Groothuis	 and  is
published  by  InterVarsity  Press (Downers Grove, Illinois).  The title
makes the book sound more strident than	it  is.	  In  fact,  it	 is  not
strident  at  all,  being  a  very  judicious analysis of the teachings,
organizations and personalities	that constitute	the "New  Age  Network."
So  if	you  know people who have been confused	by listening too much to
folk such as John Denver and have begun	to think that they  are	 god  or
"into"	feminist  witchcraft  or suspect they are on the way to	becoming
Pharoah	in the XXIV Dynasty, run to your nearest Christian bookstore and
be enlightened by Mr. Groothuis.  We only need to remember while reading
him, that he does not carry the	entire truth with him, since he	 is  not



by D. H. Stamatis

	With the proliferation of world	wide evangelical preaching,  one
wonders	 what  is  the	Christian  Truth and if	indeed,	the Truth can be
isolated and identified.  Furthermore, if  the	TRuth  can  be	isolated
identified,  is	it possible to recognize it, amidst such a high	push for
'healing', 'born again', and 'speaking in tongues' and other euphemisms?

	For an	examination,  let  us  first  look  at	the  scriptures,
specifically,  the scriptural text of Matthew, chapter 16, verses 13-19.
(All scripture quotes are from the King	James Bible).

	"When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Phillippi,	He asked
His  disciples,	 saying,  Whom do men say that I the son of man	am?  And
they said, some	say that Thou art John the  Baptist:   some  Elias,  and
others,	 Jeremia,  or one of the prophets.  He saith unto them,	but whom
say ye that I am?  And Simon Peter  answered  and  said,  Thou	art  the
Christ the Son of the living God.  And Jesus answered and said unto him,
blessed	art thou, Simon	Bar Jona, for flesh and	blood hath not	revealed
it  unto  thee,	 but  my Father	which is in heaven.  And I say also unto
thee, that thou	art Peter, and upon this rock I	will  build  my	 church;
and  the  gates	 of  hell shall	not prevail against it.	 And I will give
unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven:  and whatsoever thou  shalt
bind on	earth shall be bound in	heaven:	 and whatsoever	thou shalt loose
on earth shall be loosed in heaven."

	One can	see without hesitation,	without	being a	 graduate  of  a
seminary  school  and  go without being	a theologian, that Jesus Christ,
our Lord, indeed founded ONE church and	not many.  It is  an  imperative
truth,	that  any  one can recognize, whether they have	any education or
not.  It is a definite truth, because Jesus  Himself  clearly  reassured
Peter,	that  He  would	 found	the  church (based on faith) and NOT ONE
satanic	power would be able to destroy it.  On the other hand,	it  will
remain	for  ever  and immortal; and the gates of hell shall not prevail
against	it.  (Matt.16:18).

	Powerful words are these, coming from Jesus, yet,  they	 clearly
state  that  His  Church  is One.  His words are uncompromising, without
hesitation and stated with authority.  We (Orthodox christians)	 believe
these  words  because  Jesus  is  our  Lord  and our God and furthermore
because	His credibility	is at the highest.

	Let us examine what has	happened since Jesus spoke these  words.
In  the	 last  2000 years much has taken place.	 Specifically, countries
were destroyed,	kings and kingdoms fell, autocrats and empires were lost
and  science and theories have changed.	 The church, however, that Jesus
Christ	founded,  remains  and	will  remain   forever,	  standing   and
functioning.   Many  tried  to	prophesize  the	 demise	and death of the
church,	but  they  themselves  died  and  are  forgotten.   The	 church,
however,  the  one that	belongs	to Jesus, the one He founded and the one
He protects, is	alive and CONSTANTLY  CONQUERS.	  St.  John  Chrysostom,
regarding  the victory of the church states:  "Nothing can be equal with
the church.  The church	is higher than the sky.	  The  church  is  wider
than the earth.	 The church never knows	old age	because	it is constantly
finding	itself in its zenith.  Do not tell me about walls  and	weapons,
because	the walls with the passage of time will	definitely fail, but the
church never.  These words are not  bragging  but  truths  that	 can  be
substantiated  in  reality.  How many have declared war	with the Church?
Nevertheless everyone was lost and at  the  same  time	the  church  was
elevated  higher than the sky.	The church always conquers those who are
at war with it.	 It prevails when it is	pushed,	it becomes brighter when
they  try  to  defile it.  It allows itself to be bruised and or wounded
and yet	it never succumbs or rather falls down due to those wounds.   It
passes	thru  high  seas but it	never sinks to the bottom.  It goes thru
high hurricanes	but it never shipwrecks.  Always wrestles but never gets
defiled.  They always dare her to fight	but they do not	win."

	From the above,	we can deduct, that only ONE church  has  to  be
the  true one and the one that was indeed founded by Jesus Himself.  All
others must be fakes and or elusive of the truth.

	Let us examine the Orthodox Church.  The people	who  believe  in
the Triune God,	receive	Jesus as their salvation and believe in	all that
the Holy Scriptures and	Holy Tradition proclaim, they make up the visual
church	--  the	church that Jesus founded in this world.  This church is
loved by Jesus,	so much, so that, '....even as	Christ	also  loved  the
church,	and gave Himself for it.'(Eph.5:25).

	For us,	the Orthodox Christian,	it is a	dogma of faith that  the
church,	 the  one founded by Jesus, is One, Catholic, and Apostolic.  In
fact, St. Paul,	in his letter to Timothy proclaims that	 the  church  of
the  Living  God is 'the pillar	and ground of the truth' (1 Tim.  3:15).
Therefore, only	the church  possesses  the  whole  truth.   Or,	 as  St.
Cyprian	puts it	"Outside and distant from the church, salvation	does not
exist."	It is precisely	the issue of salvation,	that caused the	 Fathers
to name	the church 'the	vassal of salvation'.  St.Augustine, exemplifies
this point when	he declares that 'the church is	Christ in perpetuity'.

	After all this,	one might wonder and in	fact ask, why is it that
today there are	many churches (denominations) and all of them preach the
name of	Christ,	they hold the Holy Bible as foundation	of  their  faith
and they are asking the	populace to follow them?

	They tell us with all sincerity	that they are the 'real'  church
and that they are the holders of the 'truth'.  Between all of them which
one is the one and true	church which Christ Himself founded?  Is it  the
Protestants, is	it the Church of the Later Day Saints, is it the Jehovah
Witness, the Roman Catholic, or	is it the Orthodox Christians?	 Can  we
isolate	 the  truth?   Can  we	research  the question without being too
dogmatic and/or	academic?  I believe we	can.  In fact, we can answer the
question  without  hesitation and ambivalence -- just like Christ did --
that the true church, the one founded by Jesus is the  Orthodox	 Church.
One  might  say,  however,  that the other denominations claim the same,
with the same authority	and sureness.  Because of the significance  that
the  point  of	'church'  has  in  the ultimate	salvation of man, let us
examine	in a cursory fashion the facts of the  'church'	 before	 it  was
fragmented into	so many	'churches'.

	That Christ founded one	church and only	one church no  one  will
refute.	  In  fact,  even secular history refers to one	church up to the
9th century.  (During this century we begin to have major differences in
dogmas).   Up  to  this	point in time both the East and	the West had one
faith.	All Christians made up One Church and believed the same	 things.
In  the	 9th  century,	however,  Rome's  Pope	rebelled  from	the true
teachings and formed his own form of Christianity, i.e.	Catholicism.  In
the  16th  century a break was made from this new Catholicism because of
the inequities of the faith and	as a result the	Protestant movement came
into   existence.   Since  then,  the  Protestants  have  been	dividing
themselves into	groups,	such as	the Baptists, Pentecostals,  Methodists,

	All these churches that	left the  One  Church  of  Jesus  Christ
began  to  add	human  teachings  and  to  subtract Apostolic teachings,
because	of these changings, the	basic faith  does  not	agree  with  the
foundations of the original undivided church.

	This discrepancy happened because in their eagerness  to  defend
the  new  innovations,	all the	founders of these denominations	began to
misinterpret and misguide the words of the Bible to suite  their  flavor
of faith.

	We as Orthodox Christians, proclaim to the world and  especially
to  the	 heretics that we indeed hold the faith	and the	teachings of the
original  Christians,  pure  and  in  congruence  with	Jesus	Christ's
teachings.   To	 show  that  I	am not bending the truth or exaggerating
minute facts, let us look at the Holy Bible and	examine	the 'church'  of
Jesus  Christ.	 St.  Paul, in calling the bishops of Ephesus, proclaims
'Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock,  over  which
the  Holy  Ghost hath made you overseers (epescopoe), to feed the church
of God,	which He hath purchased	with His own blood'  (Acts  20:28).   We
see  that  the	words in addition to the apostles and people (flock) are
specific  in  identification  of  clerics  i.e.,  bishops   (epescopoe).
Elsewhere,  St.Paul  states:   'Paul and Timotheus the servants	of Jesus
Christ,	to all the saints in Christ Jesus which	are  at	 Phillippi  with
the   bishops	(epescopoe)   and   deacons'  (Philipp.	  1:1).	  Paul's
delineation  of	 the  clerics  is  quite  evident,  because   here,   he
unmistakenably	differentiates between lay people, bishops, and	deacons.
As a matter of fact, in	1 Timothy 3:2-7	and 8-13 he goes on to say, what
is  the	 requirement  of  becoming  a  bishop  and  deacon respectively.
Furthermore, in	Titus 1:5 he orders Titus to identify and set  'ordained
elders'	(presbyters) in	each city.

	We can see that	the church of Christ during the	apostolic years,
was organized and also was made	up of shepherds	(clerics) and sheep (lay
people).  In fact, the shepherds received  the	grace  and  their  title
(honor	of  ordination)	 of  cleric  via  the laying on	of hands (1 Tim.

	You then, judge	 if  your  Christian  denomination  follows  the
Tradition  of  church  organization  and  the  division	of clergy.  Upon
examination, you will find that	ONLY Orthodoxy has kept	this.

	Another	 characteristic	 of  the  True	Church	is  that  it  is
unconsumable:	'That thou are Peter, and upon this rock I will	build my
church;	and the	gates  of  hell	 shall	not  prevail  against  it'(Matt.
16:18).	  Here Jesus tells us in no uncertain terms that His church will
not succumb to any satanic power.  On the other	hand, it will  stand  up
onto  the ages of ages unwavering, so that, it can continue its	purpose,
i.e. the salvation of the people.  Again,  you	be  the	 judge	of  your
denomination.  Does your denomination have the roots to	Jesus?	You will
find that ONLY Orthodoxy (founded in 33	A.D.) was  always.   All  others
came  after 1054 A.D.  Since Jesus reassured us	that His Church	will not
be destroyed, to the contrary, it will be  in  existence  for  ever  and
since  all  the	denominations came after 1054 A.D.  what happened to the
church for the first 1021 years?

	The third characteristic of  the  church  is  the  infallibility
i.e., the True Church does not make errors.  The True Church does not go
astray because the Holy	Spirit guides it  'into	 all  the  truth'  (John
16:13).	  ONLY	the  church  that  was founded by Christ Himself is 'the
pillar and ground of the truth'	(1 Tim.	 3:15) and  never  the	churches
that were founded by mortals.

	Again, there is	only one church	that  fits  these  descriptions,
i.e., the Orthodox Church.  How	does your denomination compare?

	The fourth characteristic of the True Church  is  the  Apostolic
Tradition.   Since  the	 church	 was before the	total scripture	(the New
Testament was completed	some 70	 years	after  Christ's	 death	and  the
Pentecost -- the birthday of the Church	-- the True Church must	continue
the Tradition of the early and developing church.   In	fact,  John  the
Evangelist  explicitly identifies in his Gospel, in the	21st chapter and
25th verse, the	rationale for Tradition.  He  summarizes  it  as:   "and
there  are  also  many	other things which Jesus did, the which, if they
should be written every	one, I suppose that even the world itself  could
not  contain  the  books  that	should be written.  Amen.' Also, 'And we
commend	you brethren, in the name of our  Lord	Jesus  Christ,	that  ye
withdraw  yourselves from every	brother	that walketh disorderly, and not
after the tradition which he received of us' (2	Thes.  3:6).  Also, 'For
as much	as ye know that	ye were	not redeemed with corruptible things, as
silver and gold, from your vain	conversation received by tradition  from
your  fathers'	(1  Peter  1:18).   See	 also  (Matt  15:   2-3,6;  Mark
7:3,5,8,9,13; and Col.2:8).

	Again, you judge if your denomination follows the Holy Tradition
of  Jesus  Christ  and the Apostles.  You will find that the ONLY church
that follows, keeps and	guards thes commandments of  the  New  Testament
writers	 is  the  ONE, CATHOLIC	and APOSTOLIC Church, i.e., the	Orthodox

	After a	really short cursory, I	hope that you will agree with me
and  you  will not doubt that indeed there is only One,	True Church that
was founded by Christ.	In fact, it is in that Church that one may  find
salvation  and	become	God's  child,  with the	right of the everlasting
life.  What do you think?  What	are you	going  to  choose?   The  Church
that is	founded	in Jesus Christ	or a church that was founded by	a mortal
person?	 What are you going to choose, the light or  the  darkness,  the
absolute  truth	 or  the perceived truth, the Orthodoxy	or the heretical
denominations?	The choice is clearly yours.



	The Ecumenical Patriarch Dimitrios of Constantinople while on an
Apostolic  journey  thru out Europe, stopped off in Rome where Pope John
Paul II	recited	together with His All Holiness the Patriarch the  Nicene
Creed  without the 4th century Roman Catholic addition of the "filioque"
clause,	easing one of the oldest theological disputes between the Church
and  the  followers  of	 the Bishop of Rome.  The clause states	that the
Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father  and  the	Son,  but  the	Orthodox
Catholic  believe  He  proceeds	 from the Father only, a belief	that was
once the belief	of all Christians everywhere.  In the  other  concession
the  pope  said	 he  is	 willing to reevaluate the role	of the papacy to
reach a	compromise with	the Orthodox Catholic Church.  His All	Holiness
Patriarch  Dimitrios I is hoping to reunite the	followers of the pope of
Rome with the Church with a pope sharing authority with	the  council  of

	During the meeting the pope presented His All  Holiness	 with  a
golden	chalice,  an  11th  century  painting of Christ, an anthology of
sacred texts, and pontifical medals.

	The Patriarch reciprocated by presenting the pope with a replica
of  a  sixth-century  Byzantine	crucifix, a gold vase, and medals of his

	The historic journey of	the  Patriarch	covered	 visits	 to  the
Patriarchates  of  Alexandria and Jerusalem, the Patriarchate of Moscow,
and the	Church of Georgia, as well as  the  Church  of	Serbia	and  the
Patriarchate of	Romania.

	The journey also included visits to Geneva, Warsaw, and	 London.
In  London His All Holiness was	received by Queen Elizabeth; he	also met
with the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr. Robert Runcie, as well  as  other

	BOOK REVIEWS.............

The Anti-Soviet	Soviet Union, by  Vladimir  Voinovich;	Harcourt  Brace,
1986, 325 pp., $19.95.

	In December 1980, Vladimir Voinovich was exiled	from the  Soviet
Union.	 His  crime  was candor; his method was	satire.	 For years, he'd
been  committing  the  unforgivable  sin  of  describing   Soviet   life
realistically,	never  failing	to  see	 the  irony and	hypocrisy in the

	In his first book since	his exile, Voinovich depicts the  Soviet
Union	not  as	 a  well-oiled	man-eating  machine,  but  as  a  rusty,
broken-down collection of worn-out mechanisms and spare	parts.

	This is	a land where there are no rights, only privileges.   And
there  are two types of	people:	 those who resist, and live impoverished
lives, and those who acquiesce,	and live like caged animals.   Voinovich
shows each type	living side by side.

	He tells  of  Eremenko,	 46-year-old  10th  grade  night  school
student, who heads a district Party department.

	"He was	equally	poor in	all his	subjects, including history  ...
(But  the  substitute teacher's) job was entirely dependent on Eremenko,
and for	that reason she	was  always  well  disposed  to	 him  in  class.
'Comrade  Eremenko,  can  you  tell me when the	Fifteenth Party	Congress
took place?'


	"'In 1927, Is that correct?'

	"'It is,' Eremenko would answer. 'In 1927.'

	"'Look at that,' the teacher would say.	 'Excellent preparation.
I'm giving you an A.'"

	"There is Oleg,	a doctor living	poorly	because	 he  refuses  to
attend the absurd political meetings."

	"Whenever I think of that doctor, I also remember other	people I
met  in	 my  life ...  who often spent their entire lives working at the
lowest positions and at	the lowest pay ...  By avoiding	taking	part  in
the  lies and hypocrisy, they keep their souls from being violated; they
radiate	goodness, humanity, and	spiritual nobility...."

	Voinovich has not shown	the Soviet people  as  "just  like  us."
True,  they  are born, grow up,	get married, have children, grow old and
die just as we do here.	 But there is a	difference.  They cling	 to  the
chains of authoritarianism.  Freedom requires that they	conquer	fear and
shed their resignation.

	And if the state keeps throwing	out those who try,  Russia  will
never make it.



by Guthrie E. Janssen
[reprinted from	B & R Reviews, Fall 1987]

Hymn of	Entry, Liturgy and Life	in the Orthodox	Church,	by Archimandrite
Vasileios  of  Stavronikita, trans.  from the Greek by Elizabeth Briere;
St.Vladimir's Seminary Press,139 pp.  $6.95.

The Freedom of Morality, by Christos Yannaras, trans from the  Greek  by
Elizabeth Briere; St. Vladimir's Seminary Press, 278 pp.,$12.95.

Being as Communion, Studies in Personhood and the  Church,  by	John  D.
Zizioulas, St.Vladimir's Seminary Press, 269 pp.,$12.95.

The Deification	of Man:	 St.Gregory Palamas and	the Orthodox  Tradition;
by  Georgios I.	Mantzaridis, trans.  from the Greek by Liadain Sherrard;
St.Vladimir's Seminary Press, 137 pp.,$7.95.

The Communion of Love,	by  Matthew  the  Poor;	 St.Vladimir's	Seminary
Press, 234 pp.,$8.95.

        On the fourth of July, A.D.  1054, a star exploded, a  supernova
so  brilliant  that  for  twenty-three  days  it was visible thruout the
northern hemisphere in broad daylight.  Eventually it subsided to become
what we know today as the Crab Nebula in the constellation of Taurus.

        Twelve days later, on the 16th of July, delegates from Pope  Leo
IX,  who may have been acting under duress as a prisoner of the Normans,
entered the Cathedral of Hagia Sophia (Holy Wisdom)  in  Constantinople,
advanced to the great altar during a celebration of the Eucharist, flung
down the Pope's sentence of excommunication  of  the  Orthodox  Catholic
Patriarch, and departed, shaking the dust off their feet as they went.

        The Emperor, who was conciliatory toward the West, nevertheless,
convoked   a   synod   of   Orthodox   Catholic  bishops  that  promptly
excommunicated the papal legates.  Thus was sealed the Great  Schism  of
Christendom  that  persists  to this day.  The super-nova may or may not
have been a sign from heaven, but it dramatically underscored the cosmic
importance  of  the  event.   For  in  rending the two great branches of
Christendom, the Schism of 1054 was to adumbrate many future fracturings
of  the  Church  that  Christ  had  prayed  might  be forever one -- the
fourteenth  century  Schism  of  the  West  with  its  "antipopes,"  the
Reformation,  the  repeated  splintering of Protestantism, and the human
suffering that was to follow in religious wars in the West.

        The East also suffered.  One hundred and fifty years  later,  in
1204,  the knights of the Fourth Crusade in what the Byzantine historian
Sir Steven Runciman has called "the greatest crime in  history"  burned,
raped  and  pillaged  Constantinople.   For  years  they shipped back to
Venice and other cities of the West an immeasurable  loot  of  Byzantine
gold,  jewels and art treasures, at a time when Rome had been reduced to
a muddy backwater of empire.  The Crusader's sack of Constantinople  was
motivated  as  much  by  jealousy  and  monumental  avarice  as  by  any
theological scruples.  However, Byzantium's loss introduced the West  to
Greek  culture  and  laid  the  foundation  for  the Renaissance and the
subsequent flowering of Western civilization.  It  is  ironic  that  the
West  was  to  adopt  not  the profound patristic theology and spiritual
perceptions of the East but, in a roundabout way, the pagan  culture  of
ancient Greece, and in particular Aristotelian philosophy, which it then
used  to  shape  and  define  the  peculiar  Western  epistemology   and
theological methods characteristic of both Roman Catholic and Protestant
thought.  We  will  have  more  to  say  about  this  later,  for  these
differences were the crux of the East-West schism and remain so today.

        Rome's repudiation of the East has been superfically  attributed
to  language  and cultural differences, politics, theology and a dispute
over the locus of  authority  in  the  Church.   Latin  had  become  the
theological  language of the West while the East had retained Greek, and
there were difficulties of translation.  The  West  emphasized  Christ's
suffering as "atonement" for man's sin, the East His "frenzy of love" in
which He took on human nature  and  thru  His  death,  resurrection  and
Ascension made possible the "deification" of man.  The West asserted the
absolute authority of the Pope, the East perceived him as a primus inter
pares.   The  West  had  tampered  with  the Creed by adding the filoque
clause (the Holy Spirit proceeding from the Father and  the  Son);  such
tampering was anathema to the East.  And political motives lurked on the
periphery.   Rome,  by  arrogating  to  itself  absolute  ecclesiastical
authority  could  control as well the temporal affairs of Europe against
the twin threats of the northern barbarians and the  "caesaropapism"  of
the  Carolingian  emperors.   In that enterprise the East had nothing to
offer but nagging interference.  Thus an East/West cleavage was all  but

        Today of course most of the historic reasons are long past,  and
we  in  the  West  are prone to treat the Great Schism as an accident of
history.  But as the historic causes have disappeared, so now the extent
of underlying doctrinal and "philosophical" differences is becoming more
apparent.  At the same time  in  the  West,  where  churches  are  being
increasingly  invaded  by worldly counsels of compromise and expediency,
and where the  faith  is  constantly  being  diluted  by  a  variety  of
syncretions,  there  is  a growing curiosity about the understandings of
Orthodoxy, which are derived from apostolic and patristic  teaching  and
experience.   There appears to be a hankering after the ancient vitality
and depths of the faith which nothing in the  West,  not  even  (perhaps
especially not) the Church of Rome, seems able to satisfy.  Thus we find
such an erudite  Protestant  and  thoroughly  Western  scholar  as  Paul
Tillich writing:

        "...the  Eastern  Church  represents  something  which  we  have
lost....  We should not imagine that we have nothing to learn from them.
It may  happen  that  with  centuries  of  more  intimate  contact,  the
dimension  of  depth may again enter Western thinking." [Paul Tillich, A
History of Christian Thought, New York:  Simon and Schuster, 1968, p.97]

        Meanwhile Orthodoxy in America is shedding much  of  the  ethnic
wrapping  in  which  it was imported and is increasingly emphasizing its
essential perceptions.  Today it is as large as some mainline Protestant
denominations,  and growing, with converts accounting for between thirty
to fifty percent of its membership.

        Yet the West remains  largely  ignorant  of  Orthodoxy.   For  a
Western  scholar  to  write  as  Paul  Tillich did is unusual; most have
either a distorted view of Orthodoxy or dismiss it as just  "mysticism,"
which  it  is  not.   As for reconciliation, the popular attitude in the
West is that the differences are nothing but a matter of style,  and  if
we  will  just sit down in a spirit of mutual forbearance, a little give
and take will heal the great breach.  But that  very  attitude  typifies
the  problem.  The West is prone to overestimate what can be achieved by
verbal fiat framed in a spirit of  naive  good  will.   The  East  says,
"Talking is not knowing.  You must experience the depths of the truth in
the  Liturgy."  Vasileios  quotes   the   pseudonymous   Dionysius   the
Areopagite,  "...what  is known is known only thru participation in it."
This, in Orthodox understanding,  is  "doing  the  truth"  (John  3:21).
Words,  not  even  the  words  of scripture, are enough, for as St. Paul
wrote, it is the Church, a living entity, not  scripture  (which  is  of
necessity  words)  that  is the 'pillar and foundation of the truth'" (1
Timothy 3:15).

        Furthermore, while a strong "spirituality" is justly  attributed
to  the East, Orthodoxy places yet greater emphasis on the incarnational
--  experiencing  the  reality  of  the  godhead  in  its   divine-human
hypostasis,  which  is  Jesus  Christ.   Because  the East is older, its
perspective longer, it stresses the  apophatic  nature  of  God  --  His
undefinability  in  human  "philosophical"  terms, least of all those of
Western scholasticism.  Scripture it  perceives  and  venerates  as  the
written  apostolic  witness to Christ in the stream of living tradition,
which is the Holy Spirit alive and at work  in  the  continuity  of  the
historic    Church.     Reconciliation   will   require   some   Western
acknowledgment and appreciation of all this.

        Fortunately, Orthodoxy is  awakening  to  the  need  to  explain
itself,  not only to the West but to its own people, many of whom remain
bound to a blind ethnic traditionalism.  And if the  experience  of  the
Liturgy  cannot be expressed in words, it can at least be illuminated by
some felicious descriptions of the mind of Orthodoxy now being published
in the United States.

        An especially bright aura of illumination is  being  cast  these
days  by a series being published by St. Vladimir's Seminary Press under
the general rubric, "Contemporary Greek Theologians." Four volumes  have
appeared to date, and a fifth is projected.  Although they are scholarly
works,  they  are  well  within  the  grasp  of  a  moderately  informed
layperson.    The  authors  present  no  innovative  theology,  for  the
wellspring of their understanding is the early Fathers.  They will  seem
novel  only  to the extent that many in the West are unfamiliar with the
light the Fathers shed on what they took from the beginning  to  be  the
Christian  intendment:   the  deification  of humanity thru God's mighty
incarnational act.  But for those with an eye to see and to accept,  the
sense  of  novelty  may  quickly turn into an illuminating and rewarding

        As the title of his book  suggests,  Vasileio's  Hymn  of  Entry
links  liturgy  with theology, and both with life in the body of Christ,
which is Church.  Each mirrors the other two.  If to  the  Western  mind
this seems "mystical," it is no more so than the Lord's Prayer or Jesus'
commands to eat His flesh and drink His blood.  Bear  in  mind  what  we
said  earlier  about  liturgy and life in Orthodoxy as not mysticism but
experience.  The experience  is  not  that  of  the  intellect  nor  the
emotions,"  least  of  all  in  passions,  which are of the fall, but of
living the liturgical life of the Church  in  all  that  it  implies  of
quiet, humble obedience to the commands of Jesus Christ.  Thus excessive
reliance  on  cerebral  formulations  must  be  curbed.   Vasileios   is

        "This theological life and witness is a blessing which  sweetens
man's  life.   It is a food which is cut up and given to others; a drink
poured out and offered in abundance for man to consume  and  quench  his
thirst.   In this state one does not talk about life, one gives it.  One
feeds  the  hungry  and  gives  drink  to  the  thirsty.   By  contrast,
scholastic  theology  and intellectual constructions do not resemble the
Body of the Lord, the true food, nor His blood, the true  drink;  rather
they are like a stone one finds in one's food.  This is how indigestible
and inhumanly hard the mass of scholasticism seems to the taste and  the
mouth of one accustomed to the liturgy of the Church, and it is rejected
as something foreign and unacceptable."

        It is apparent at once how alien  this  is  to  the  traditional
thought  patterns  of  the  West.  The implications are far-reaching.  A
strong case can be  made  for  saying  that  every  time  Orthodoxy  has
seriously  stumbled  it has been because of an invasion from the West of
Aristotelian-Thomist scholasticism or its many  cousins,  all  of  which
tend  to  defeat  the  spirit and essential understandings of Orthodoxy.
That is not to say that the Greek Fathers were  ignorant  of  Aristotle.
On  the contrary, they knew him intimately, being thoroughly schooled in
classic  Greek  philosophy.   But  unlike  Western   theologians,   they
perceived  its total inadequacy as a basis for defining theology.  Human
philosophy must itself pass thru the baptism of Golgotha.

        A Protestant may at this point interject, "But in breaking  with
Rome,  we  rejected  scholasticism."  Technically,  perhaps yes, but not
really.  The thought patterns derived from pagan philosophy remain.  The
verbal manipulation of technicalities characteristic of scholasticism is
no  less  characteristic  of  much  of  Protestantism,   especially   in
Evangelical-Fundamentalist  camps,  where dependence on scripture (words
of necessity) and verbal rationalities deduced therefrom  (still  words)
prevails  over  the experience of "taste and see." So great, however, is
human yearning after experience that in the West  we  are  witnessing  a
growing  "charismatic"  movement  that  seeks non-verbal realizations of
spiritual truth.  It is  the  stones  crying  out  against  the  sterile
rationalism  of  the  seminaries  and  of much preaching, both Roman and
Protestant.  The experience of Orthodoxy, on the  other  hand,  stresses
silence.   It  is  aware  that  "the  thoughts of men are all miserable"
(Wisdom 9:14).  Vasileios asserts,

        "Patristic theology is an area of  silence;  it  is  a  heavenly
affirmation, a state.  It is not an occasion for an exchange of blows or
for verbal battles.  It is the "Yes" and "Amen" of eternity."

        And he quotes Abba Isaac of Syria (sixth century), "Words are an
instrument of the present age; silence is a mystery of the age to come."
Orthodoxy proclaims that "the age to come" begins here and  now  in  the
experience of the living Church.

        Ask almost anyone schooled in Western habits of thought,  "Where
will  I find theology?" and they will say, "Why, in books, of course; or
in seminaries; or in the minds of scholars." "No," says Orthodoxy, "that
is  not  theology  but  only  a superficial, argumentative aspect of it.
Theology  is  not  a  head  trip.   It  embraces   the   whole   person,
experientially.    Every  Christian  is  to  be  a  living  textbook  of
theology." The "depth" of which Tillich spoke is hinted at in Vasileio's
explanation  that "Orthodox theology ...  does not assert a proposition;
it bears witness.  It is  not  contradiction,  but  confession;"  "...it
seeks the person and his salvation;" and, "How beautiful it is for a man
to become theology."

        Today on Mt.Athos, a vast peninsula of  ancient  monasteries  in
northeastern  Greece  often  called  "The  Holy  Mountain,"  there  is a
burgeoning renewal -- an  influx  of  young  Orthodox  monks  from  many
nations  seeking  to live their theology in total dedication and prayer.
Archimandrite (his title) Vasileios is Abbot of  Stavronikita  Monastery
and  one  of  the  pioneers  of  this  modern  revival.  As we mentioned
earlier, the theology here is not innovative but a reassertion  of  what
was  known  in  apostolic  times  and  immediately following.  Nor is it
unique even now, for a number of  modern  Orthodox  writers  in  Western
Europe  and  the  United  States  have set forth the ancient insights in
their works.  However, even some of  the  most  knowledgeable  of  Roman
Catholic  and Protestant scholars remain only too likely to regard their
views somewhat askance, as a peculiarly Eastern  "aberration"  to  which
they accord a certain charitable indulgence.  But who is indulging whom?
To the  Orthodox  the  West  is  the  aberration,  having  strayed  from
apostolic  understanding  into  a  theology bearing in virtually all its
aspects the stamp of pagan philosophy.  Perhaps the  super-nova  was  no
accident -- heaven was alarmed.

        The Freedom of Morality is likely to prove even more exciting to
Western  minds  than  Hymn.   It  reveals  that  the Orthodox, and truly
scriptural (uninfluenced by philosophy) understanding of freedom and  of
passions  is  in  certain crucial aspects the very antithesis of Western
understanding.  This will alarm some and gratify others.

        Throughout my own Calvinst upbringing it was implicit in  all  I
was taught that the truth of the Bible is to make you virtuous.  Sermons
were packed with exhortations to "right" behavior.  That this curbed  my
earthly  freedom  was  obvious  on  the  face  of it.  Imagine, then, my
astonishment at reading for the first time the two quotations  from  the
Fathers with which Yannaras introduces his book:

        "Virtue exists for truth; but truth does not exist for  virtue."
(Maximus the Confessor, d.655).

        "When you enter upon the path of righteousness,  then  you  will
cleave to freedom in everything." (Abba Isaac the Syrian)

        Is Orthodoxy topsy-turvy?  Or is there here a greater  depth  of
insight  into  the  fallen and redeemed states?  Already, the answer has
been suggested by  Vasileios  in  a  chapter  headed,  "Spirituality  as
'Bondage' to Freedom." For perfect freedom is to love; it is "an exodus,
a departure from the narrow prison of self-love for the  promised  land,
the  land  of  the Other." Vasileios even goes so far as to suggest that
the human attitude reflected  in  Calvinist  "morality"  is  a  kind  of
heresy,  because  of  it  s  self-assurance,  "its  attachment  to human
reasoning and sanctity which are its idols." Could this  be  one  reason
for  youthful  rebellion against conventional "morality"?  Yannaras, for
his part, pulls no punches:

        "Increasingly, Christian life seems to be nothing  more  than  a
particular  way  of  behaving,  a code of good conduct.  Christianity is
increasingly alienated, becoming a social attribute adapted to meet  the
least  worthy  of  human  demands  --  conformity, sterile conservatism,
pusillanimity and timidity; it is  adapted  to  the  trivial  moralizing
which seeks to adorn cowardice and individual security with the funerary
decoration of social decorum.  The people who really  thirst  for  life,
who  stand  daily  on  the  brink  of  every kind of death, who struggle
desperately to distinguish some light in the  sealed  mystery  of  human
existence  --  these  are  the people to whom the Gospel of salvation is
primarily and most especially addressed, and inevitably they all  remain
far  removed from the rationalistically organized social conventionalism
of established Christianity."

        And he adds:

        "What distances man from Christ and the  Church  is  falsity  of
life, the "existential lie" of the masks of the superego, and conformity
to the external formalities of conventional behavior."

        It appears that Orthodoxy, ancient  though  it  is,  can  indeed
explain  much  of the confrontational attitude and alienation of today's
youth, and may possibly hold a cure for it.

        But the Westerner  will  at  once  ask,  "Of  what,  then,  does
morality  consist?"  Yannaras  answers  that it is not even a measure of
character or behavior but the ultimate expression of human freedom, "the
dynamic  response  of  personal  freedom  to  the  existential truth and
authenticity of man."

        And how is that "authenticity" to be found that  is  so  eagerly
sought  at  vast  cost  in  the  consulting  rooms of psychologists, and
psychiatrists and by youth in their rebellious capers with  forays  into
drugs  and  sex?   Orthodoxy  insist  that the only way is thru humility
learned in suffering, by  death  to  self-will  and  self-love,  letting
Christ lead us by way of the cross, for His command was:  follow me!  As
Yannaras writes:

        "...one has to make the fullness of the saving  truth  incarnate
in  oneself.   The shocking freedom of the fools ["fools for Christ"] is
first and foremost a total death,  a  complete  mortification  of  every
individual  element in their lives.  This death is the freedom which can
break and destroy every conventional form; it is resurrection  into  ...
the life of love which knows neither bounds nor barriers."

        It is also ultimate morality.  Nor is death such  a  bad  thing,
for  it generates love.  Yannaras quotes Isaac the Syrian concerning the
person who has died to all self-desire and surrendered to  the  will  of
God:   "...   striving,  fear,  trouble and toil in all things pass from
him.  And he is exalted above nature, and attains love."

        A Westerner will naturally ask, "What about  worship  then?   If
Orthodox  worship  does  not  consist  of  exhortations to morality, and
proclamation of the word is peripheral, then of what does  it  consist?"
It  consists of the Divine Liturgy, the Eucharist, which gives life, for
Jesus said that unless we eat His flesh and drink His blood we  have  no
life  in  us (John 6:53-58).  Yannaras offers this succinct statement of
the relevance of the Orthodox understanding of this in our time:

        "Orthodox worship is a direct answer to  the  peculiarly  modern
quest  for immediate, experiential knowledge of God, beyond any abstract
intellectual schemes or anthropocentric sentimental elevations.  In  the
Orthodox  eucharist  nothing  is theory, autonomous doctrine or abstract
reference;  all  is  action,  tangible  experience  and   total   bodily

        The Orthodox notion of freedom cannot be fully explained without
some  understanding  of the Orthodox notion of passions.  To the Western
mind, passions are the affective part of our nature, the  more  personal
part  of  us,  linked  with  the  warmth of feelings and emotions.  Thus
American youth are likely to insist that they are most  fully  realizing
themselves  when  they  have  the  "freedom"  to indulge their passions,
whatever these may be.  This posture dates back to  the  "Enlightenment"
and  its  "free t hinkers," of whom Rousseau was a chief exemplar, a man
who regarded his periodic bouts with venereal disease as the price to be
paid  for his exercise of personal "freedom." The age sought a return to
"nature," and to pursue one's passions was deemed me rely "natural."

        This is precisely the opposite of the Orthodox understanding  of
the  meaning of "freedom," "passions," and "natural," and while Yannaras
does not treat of it at any length, it is implicit in all that he  says.
The  Fathers  listed dozens of passions, as many as a hundred:  avarice,
lust, gluttony, every inordinate desire, hate, fear, envy,  and  so  on.
Love  is  emphatically  not  one  of  them.  Not even an emotion, it is,
rather, an act of will, a commitment, a decision  taken  in  freedom  to
concern  one-self  solely  for  others.   It  is  obedience  to the "new
command" of Christ that we love one another in exactly the same way that
he  loves  us  (John  13:34).   If love were a passion or an emotion, it
could not be commanded of us.  Rather, it is commitment and  obedi  ence
to  love  that  quenches  passions.   Passions  are  to  the  Fathers an
unnatural state, a consequence of the fall.  The committed Christian  is
dispassionate,  as  spelled  out by Georges Florovsky, another prominent
Orthodox writer:

        "Passions are always impersonal; they  are  a  concentration  of
cosmic  energies  which  make  the human person its prisoner, its slave.
They are blind and they blind those whom they possess.  The  impassioned
man, "the man of passions," does not act on his own, but is rather acted
upon:  fata trabunt.  He often loses the consciousness of being  a  free
agent.   He  doubts  the  existence  and  the  possibility of freedom in
general.  He adopts  rather  the  "necessarionist"  concept  of  reality
[psychological  determinism]  ...   And  as  a consequence, he loses his
personality, his personal identity.  He becomes chaotic,  with  multiple
faces,  or  rather  -- masks.  The "man of passions" is not at all free,
although he can give the impression of activity and energy.  He  is  not
hing  more  than a "ball" of impersonal influences.  He is hypnotized by
those influences which actually have a power over him.  Arbitrariness is
not freedom" (George Florovsky, "The Darkness of Night," in Creation and
Redemption, Vol.  3 of Collected Works of  Georges  Florovsky,  Belmont,
MA.:  Nordland, 1976, p.87)

        Christos  Yannaras  is  a  leading  Greek  lay  theologian   and
Professor  of Philosophy at Panteios Institute, and the author of over a
dozen books on ethics, theology, and modern religious theology.  John D.
Zizioulas  is  an  academic  colleague  of his, Pro fessor of Systematic
Theology at the University of Glasgow, Scotland, and  a  major  Orthodox
spokesman  in  ecumenical  discussions.   Yannaras  is  a  member of the
editorial committee in charge  of  the  Contemporary  Greek  Theologians
series,  together  with Bishop Kallistos (Timothy Ware) of Diokleia, who
is one of the most articulate Western  authorities  on  Orthodoxy.   The
book  by Zizioulas, Being as Communion, is of particular significance to
those desiring to understand and appreciate the spirit and experience of

        Being is in some respects a more technical  and  more  difficult
work  than Hymn and Freedom.  Complex and extremely sophisticated in its
argument, it probes the depths of Orthodoxy even further than the  other
two,  though  still  within  the capacity of an informed layperson.  Its
far-reaching implications are likely to  shock  Westerners  schooled  to
think   in  terms  of  categories,  of  either/or  dichotomies  and  the
exaltation of the individual, for being in  the  Orthodox  understanding
consists  not  of sterile entities but of persons related to one another
in communion.  "A human being left to himself cannot be a  person."  The
model  is  the Holy Trinity, a communion of persons.  St. Paul expresses
it in Ephesians 4:25:  "...  we are members of one another."  Th  is  is
the  "grand  co-inherence"  of all in Christ so familiar to the Fathers.
Individualism is of the fall, and ultimately fruitless.   As  Antony  of
Egypt put it, "Your life and your death are with your neighbor."

        The implications of this can carry us far  into  the  depths  of
Orthodox  theology.  "Truth as communion ...  [leads] to the affirmation
of otherness in and through love" ...the fall consists in the refusal to
make  being  dependent  on  communion,  in  a  rupture between truth and
communion." For truth is not a "concept," nor even primarily a matter of
epistemology  "but is connected with what we might call life," and if we
are to have life and truth we must,  in  a  reciprocal  relationship  of
love,  identify  ourselves  with the person of Jesus Christ who asserted
that He was in Himself truth and life (John 14:6).   "His  knowledge  is
nothing  other than His love.  If He ceases to love what exists, nothing
will be.  Being depends on love.  The substratum  of  existence  is  not
being but love," and love by its very nature implies relationship.

        Such is the thesis of Being.  In addition Zizioulas  delves  yet
further  into  themes  of  Vasileios  and of Yannaras already mentioned:
freedom of love in morality and obedience, theology as praxis (doing the
truth),  the  distortions  of  scholasticism  and of pagan philosophy in
general, and much else.  Heavy sledding, but well worth the effort.

        Deification is in a sense yet more difficult, and the work lacks
something  of  the  excitement  of the other three.  Its subtitle is St.
Gregory Palamas and the Orthodox Tradition.  Interestingly,  the  author
holds  the  chair  of  Moral  Theology  and  Christian  Sociology in the
Theological School of the University of Thessalonki, which was Gregory's
home ground.

        Gregory,  however,  was  not  the  source  of  the   notion   of
"defication,"  which  is  very ancient, harking back to Genesis and Adam
and Eve's having been made "in the image and likeness of  God,"  and  to
St.  Paul  in Galatians 2:20, "...it is no longer I who live, but Christ
lives in me..." and to the great Athanasius who in  the  fourth  century
summed  it  up  saying, "God became man that man might become God." This
has never ceased to be the "ideal" of Orthodoxy and the "chief  aim"  of
the Church.

        Gregory's role had to do  once  again  with  scholasticism.   He
resisted  Barlaam  of  Calabria,  who  in the fourteenth century came to
Constantinople attempting to impose scholasticism on the East, believing
that  "a knowledge of pagan wisdom was an indispensable prerequisite for
human perfection." Gregory denied this, and prevailed, and Orthodoxy was
spared the straitjacket of over-intellectualization.

        The West, however, still predominantly cerebral in its  approach
to  the  faith,  tends  to  have  deep  misgivings  about  the notion of
"deification." It is not, however, that we  as  created  beings  are  to
become  part  of the Holy Trinity, but rather that w e become identified
with Christ, who was also God.  Mantzaridis explains:

        "...the deification of human nature  was  accomplished  for  the
first  time  in the person of Jesus Christ.  His human nature was united
with the Logos of God...Christ's human  nature  became  the  vessel  for
uncreated  divine  energy, and henceforth communicates this grace in the
Holy Spirit to all believers...Christ's uncreated life and energy became
the  property  of  the  man  who is united with Him, and in whose person
Christ Himself lives and operates."

        Any repair of the  East-West  schism  will  require  the  West's
somehow  coming  to terms with deification (or theosis), which as Bishop
Kallistos says in his "foreward" is no "abstract theory" but "the living
experience  of  the  saints."  This  volume  expounds  it well for those
desiring to comprehend it.

        The author of Communion of Love (Foreward by  Henri  J.M.Nouwen)
is  in  a  sense  a "living saint." A pharmacist by profession, he owned
several stores in Cairo and was quite successful by age 29, when he felt
Jesus's call to "follow," obeyed the command to "sell what you have" and
became a Coptic monk.  Today, as head of Deir el Makarios  monastery  in
the  desert  50  miles  southwest  of  Cairo,  he devotes himself to the
ascetic life and delivers short homilies to as many as 500 persons a day
who come to hear him.

        This collection of the words of "Matthew the  Poor"  holds  meat
and   drink   for  the  mind  of  every  searching  Christian.   Nothing
innovative, it simply articulates Orthodox understanding in a lucid  and
cogent   way   deeply   satisfying  to  modern  hunger.   "There  is  no
intellectual means of entering into  the  Gospel,"  he  says,  "for  the
Gospel  is spiritual." And, '...spiritual understanding expands with the
knowledge [experience] of the truth, and the truth, in its  turn,  opens
up 'all the fullness of God'." He reiterates the powerful Orthodox theme
of Dionysius mentioned earlier that what is known  is  known  only  thru
participation in it:

        "God is truth and life and everlasting  light.The  knowledge  of
truth  is participation in the truth; the knowledge of life is life; the
knowledge of light is illumination.  Man, thru his loss of the knowledge
of God, has lost the truth within himself, and has lost eternal life and

        Matthew is as eminently quotable as he is readable.  In the  end
he  sums  up why Christ's Church has not achieved the "catholicity," the
all-embracing unity that Jesus intended, and again the spoiler proves to
be human reliance on fallen intellect:

        "It has not yet  conceived  its  divine  concepts  as  pure  and
elevated above logic or human reason; i.e., its concepts are still bound
to articulate and philosophical interpretations which hinder the  vision
of the serenity of the catholic nature of Christ."

        All this we now find to be linked to the present day in a rather
startling  way.   Science, it is often admitted, has taken on for us the
character of deity, as Zizioulas writes in Being:

        "If theology  creatively  uses  the  Greek  patristic  synthesis
concerning truth and communion and applies it courageously to the sphere
of the Church, the split between the Church and science can be  overcome

        An eminent science  writer,  D.E.Thomsen,  intimates  that  "the
history  of  science  represents  in  some ways an emancipation from the
Hellenic intellectual heritage." (Science News,  Vol.131,  No.12,  March
21, 1987, p.184).  Orthodoxy escaped that entrapment.  How ironic, then,
if Orthodoxy, thought by many to be so ancient and passe should  in  our
computer age turn out to be exceedingly up to date.