material free

Orthodoxy a religion?

IS ORTHODOXY A RELIGION?
by Protopresbyter John Romanides

Many are of the opinion that Orthodoxy is just one religion among many and that its chief concern is to prepare the members of the Church for life after death, securing a place in paradise for every Orthodox Christian. Orthodox doctrine is presumed to offer some additional guarantee, because it is Orthodox, and not believing in Orthodox dogma is seen as yet another reason for someone to go to Hell, besides his personal sins that would otherwise send him there. Those Orthodox Christians who believe that this describes Orthodoxy have associated Orthodoxy exclusively with the afterlife. But in this life such people do not accomplish very much. They just wait to die, believing that they will go to paradise for the simple reason that while they were alive they were Orthodox Christians.

Another section of the Orthodox is involved with and active in the Church, interested not in the next life, but chiefly in this life, here and now. What interests them is how Orthodoxy can help them to have a good life in the present. These Orthodox Christians pray to God, have priests say prayers for them, have their homes blessed with holy water, have services of supplication sung, are anointed with oil, and so forth, all so that God will help them to enjoy life in the present: so that they do not get sick, so that their children find their place in society, so that their daughters

are ensured a good dowry and a good groom, so that their boys find good girls to marry with good dowries, so that their work goes well, so that their businesses go well, even so that the stock market goes well, or the industry they work in, and so on. So we see that these Christians are not so very different from other people who follow other religions, for those people do the very same things.22

From what we have said, we can clearly see that Orthodoxy has two points in common with all other religions. First, it prepares believers for life after death, so that they will go to paradise, whatever they imagine that to be. Second, Orthodoxy protects them in this life so that they will not have to experience sorrow, difficulties, disaster, sickness, war, and the like – in other words, so that God will take care of all their needs and desires. Thus, for this second type of Orthodox Christian, religion plays a major role in the present life and on a daily basis at that.

But among all these Christians we have just discussed, who cares deep down whether God exists or not? Who really yearns for Him and seeks Him out? The question of God’s existence does not even come up, since it is clearly better for God to exist, so that we can appeal to Him and ask Him to satisfy our needs, in order for our work to go well and for us to have some happiness in this life. As we can see, human beings have an extremely strong predisposition to want God to exist and to believe that God exists, because we have a need for God to exist in order to ensure everything we have mentioned. Since we need God to exist, therefore, God exists. If people were not in need of a God and could take measures to ensure sufficiency for the necessities of life by some other means, then who knows how many would still believe in God. This is what happens in Greece as a rule.

So we see that many people who were previously indifferent to religion become religious towards the end of their lives, perhaps after some event that has frightened them. This happens because they feel that they cannot live any longer without appealing to some god for help – that is, it is the result of superstitious beliefs. For these reasons, human nature encourages man to be religious. This holds true not only for Orthodox Christians, but also for adherents to all religions. Human nature is the same everywhere. Since as a result of the Fall the human soul is now darkened, people are by nature inclined toward superstition.

Now the next question is this: Where does superstition stop and real belief begin?

The Fathers’ views and teachings on these matters are clear. Consider first someone who follows, or rather thinks that he follows the teachings of Christ, simply by going to Church every Sunday, communing at regular intervals, and having the priest bless him with water, anoint him with oil and so on, without examining these things very closely.23 Does this person who remains at the letter of the law, but does not enter into the spirit of the law, stand to gain anything of any account from Orthodoxy? Now consider someone who prays exclusively for the future life, for himself and for others, but is completely indifferent towards this life. Again, what particular benefit does such a person stand to gain from Orthodoxy? The former tendency can be seen in parish priests and those who flock around them with the attitude described above. The latter tendency can be seen in some elders in monasteries, usually retired archimandrites waiting to die, and the few monks who follow them.24

Since purification and illumination are not their main focus or concern, both these tendencies, from the viewpoint of the Fathers, have set the wrong goals for themselves. But insofar as purification and illumination become their focus and the Orthodox asceticism of the Fathers is practiced with a view towards attaining noetic prayer, then and only then can everything else be placed on a firm foundation. These two tendencies are exaggerations that reflect two extremes and share no common core. But there is a common core, a structure that runs throughout Orthodoxy and holds it together. When we take into account this one core, this unique structure, then every subject that concerns Orthodoxy finds its proper place on a firm foundation. And this core is purification, illumination, and theosis.

What will happen to man after death was not an overriding concern for the Fathers. Their primary concern was what will man become in this life. After death, his nous cannot be treated. The treatment must begin in this life, because “in Hades there is no repentance.”25 This is why Orthodox theology is not outside of this world, futuristic, or eschatological, but is clearly grounded in this world, because Orthodoxy’s focus is man in this world and in this life, not after death.

Now why do we need purification and illumination? Is it so that we can go to Heaven and escape Hell? Is that why they are necessary? What are purification and illumination and why do Orthodox Christians want to attain them? In order to find the reason for this and to answer these questions, you need to have what Orthodox theology considers the basic key to these issues.

The basic key is the fact that, according to Orthodox theology, everyone throughout the world will finish their earthly course in the same way, regardless of whether they are Orthodox, Buddhist, Hindu, agnostic, atheist, or anything else. Everyone on earth is destined to see the glory of God. At the Second Coming of Christ, with which all human history ends, everyone will see the glory of God. And since all people will see God’s glory, they will all meet the same end. Truly, all will see the glory of God, but not in the same way – for some, the glory of God will be an exceedingly sweet Light that never sets; for others, the same glory of God will be like “a devouring fire” that will consume them. We expect this vision of God’s glory to occur as a real event. This vision of God – of His Glory and His Light – is something that will take place whether we want it to happen or not. But the experience of that Light will be different for both groups.

Therefore, it is not the Church’s task to help us see this glory, since that is going to happen anyway. The work of the Church and of her priests focuses on how we will experience the vision of God, and not whether we will experience the vision of God. The Church’s task is to proclaim to mankind that the true God exists, that He reveals Himself as Light or as a devouring fire, and that all of humanity will see God26 at the Second Coming of Christ. Having proclaimed these truths, the Church then tries to prepare Her members so that on that day they will see God as Light, and not as fire.27

When the Church prepares her members and everyone who desires to see God as Light, She is essentially offering them a curative course of treatment that must begin and end in this life. The treatment must take place during this life and be brought to completion, because there is no repentance after death. This curative course of treatment is the very fiber of Orthodox tradition and the primary concern of the Orthodox Church. It consists of three stages of spiritual ascent: purification from the passions, illumination by the grace of the Holy Spirit, and theosis, again by the grace of the Holy Spirit. We should also take note. If a believer does not reach a state of at least partial illumination in this life, he will not be able to see God as Light either in this life or in the next.28

It is obvious that the Church Fathers were interested in people as they are today at this moment. Every human being needs to be healed. Every human being is also responsible before God to begin this process today in this life, because now is when it is possible, not after death. Everyone must decide for himself whether or not he will pursue this path of healing.

Christ said, “I am the Way.”29 But where does this Way lead? Christ is not referring to the next life. Christ is primarily the Way in this life. Christ is the Way to His Father and our Father. First, Christ reveals Himself to man in this life and shows him the path to the Father. This path is Christ Himself. If a man does not see Christ in this life, at least by sensing Him in his heart, he also will not see the Father or the Light of God in the life to come.30

NOTES:

22 As we noted in the Prologue, Father John’s words are at times caustic.
23 Of course, genuine Orthodox Christians do these same things and it is not wrong for them to desire to do them. The problem is when someone stagnates at this level.
24 As a rule, this is seen when the spiritual father and his monks are not interested in hesychasm.
25 St. John of Damascus, An Exact Exposition of the Orthodox Faith, Book II, Chapter IV.
26 Of course, all people have a partial experience of this vision of God immediately after the departure of the soul from the body at their biological death.
27 “In the fire of revelation on the final day, the deeds of each will be tested by fire as Paul says. If what one has built up for himself is a work of incorruptibility, it will remain incorruptible in the midst of the fire and not only will it not be burned up, but it will be made radiant, totally purified of the perhaps small amount of filth … ” St. Nikitas Stithatos, “On Spiritual Knowledge,” ?79, The Philokalia, vol. III, page 348 [in Greek] [in English, page 165].
28 “We have fallen so far from the vision of Him, corresponding to the dimness of our sight, since we have voluntarily deprived ourselves of His Light in this present life.” St. Symeon the New Theologian, Extant Works, Discourse 75 [in Greek].
29 John 14:6.
30″ … At Christ’s Second Coming, all mankind will be raised and will be judged according to their works. The sinners who did not acquire spiritual eyes will not cease to exist. They will continue to exist ontologically as persons, but they will not participate in God. The righteous will both participate in God and commune with Him. As Saint Maximos the Confessor teaches, the sinners will live with an ‘eternal lack of well being,’ while the righteous will live in a state of eternal well being.’” Metropolitan Hierotheos Vlachos, The Person in Orthodox Tradition (Levadia: Birth of the Theotokos Monastery, 1994), p. 162 [in Greek].

everyone shall see the Christ

+

“For we must all must be manifest before the judgment seat of the Christ,  in order that each one might receive for oneself the things done  through the agency of our body, according to what did, whether it be good or .”

~ II Corinthians 5:10 ~

+

Everyone will see the glory of God in Christ and reach that degree of perfection one has both chosen and worked for. Following Saint Paul and the Gospel of John, the Fathers support that those who do not see the resurrected Christ in glory in this life, either in a mirror dimly by unceasing prayers and psalms in the heart, or face to face in glorification, will see His glory as eternal and consuming fire and outer darkness in the next life. The uncreated glory that Christ has by nature from the Father is heaven for those whose selfish love has been cured and transformed into selfless love, and hell for those who choose to remain uncured in their selfishness.

Not only are the Bible and the Fathers clear on this, but so are the Orthodox Icons of the last judgement. The same golden light of glory within which Christ and His friends are enveloped becomes red as it flows down to envelope the damned. This is the glory and love of Christ, which purifies the sins of all but does not glorify all. All humans will be led by the Holy Spirit into all the Truth which is to see Christ in glory, but not all will be glorified. “Those whom he justified those he also glorified”, according to St. Paul (Rom. 8:30). The parable of Lazarus in the bosom of Abraham and of the rich man in the place of torment is clear. The rich man sees but he does not participate (Luke 16:19-31 ) .

The Church does not send anyone to heaven or hell, but prepares the faithful for the vision of Christ in glory, which everyone will have. God loves the damned as much as He loves His saints. He wants the cure of all but not all accept His cure. This means that the forgiveness of sins is not sufficient preparation for seeing Christ in glory.

It goes without saying that the Anselmian tradition whereby the saved are those to whom Christ supposedly reconciled God is not an option within the Orthodox Tradition. Commenting on 2 Cor. 5:19, for example, St. John Chrysostom says that one must “be reconciled to God. Paul did not say, `Reconcile God to yourselves’, for it is not He who hates, but we. For God never hates”.

It is within the above context that the State understood the Church’s mission of cure within society. Otherwise religions promising happiness after death are not much different from each other.

- Protopresbyter John S. Romanides: CHURCH SYNODS AND CIVILISATION

and from

The River of Fire

by Dr. by Alexander Kalomiros

XVII

I think that by now we have reached the point of understanding correctly what eternal hell and eternal paradise really are, and who is in reality responsible for the difference.

In the icon of the Last Judgment we see Our Lord Jesus Christ seated on a throne. On His right we see His friends, the blessed men and women who lived by His love. On His left we see His enemies, all those who passed their life hating Him, even if they appeared to be pious and reverent. And there, in the midst of the two, springing from Christ’s throne, we see a river of fire coming toward us. What is this river of fire? Is it an instrument of torture? Is it an energy of vengeance coming out from God in order to vanquish His enemies?

No, nothing of the sort. This river of fire is the river which “came out from Eden to water the paradise” of old (Gen. 2:10). It is the river of the grace of God which irrigated God’s saints from the beginning. In a word, it is the out-pouring of God’s love for His creatures. Love is fire. Anyone who loves knows this. God is Love, so God is Fire. And fire consumes all those who are not fire themselves, and renders bright and shining all those who are fire themselves (Heb. 12:29).

God many times appeared as fire: To Abraham, to Moses in the burning bush, to the people of Israel showing them the way in the desert as a column of fire by night and as a shining cloud by day when He covered the tabernacle with His glory (Exod. 40:28, 32), and when He rained fire on the summit of Mount Sinai. God was revealed as fire on the mountain of Transfiguration, and He said that He came “to put fire upon the earth” (Luke 12:49), that is to say, love, because as Saint John of the Ladder says, “Love is the source of fire” (Step 30, 18).

The Greek writer, Fotis Kontoglou said somewhere that “Faith is fire, and gives warmth to the heart. The Holy Spirit came down upon the heads of the apostles in the form of tongues of fire. The two disciples, when the Lord was revealed to them, said ‘Did not our heart burn within us, while He talked with us in the way?’ Christ compares faith to a ‘burning candle.’ Saint John the Forerunner said in his sermons that Christ will baptize men ‘in the Holy Spirit and fire.’ And truly, the Lord said, ‘I am come to send fire on the earth and what will I if it be already kindled? Well, the most tangible characteristic of faith is warmth; this is why they speak about ‘warm faith,’ or ‘faith provoking warmth.’ And even as the distinctive mark of faith is warmth, the sure mark of unbelief is coldness.

“Do you want to know how to understand if a man has faith or unbelief? If you feel warmth coming out of him — from his eyes, from his words, from his manners — be certain that he has faith in his heart. If again you feel cold coming out of his whole being, that means that he has not faith, whatever he may say. He may kneel down, he may bend his head humbly, he may utter all sorts of moral teachings with a humble voice, but all these will breathe forth a chilling breath which falls upon you to numb you with cold.”  ⁴³ Saint Isaac the Syrian says that “Paradise is the love of God, in which the bliss of all the beatitudes is contained,” and that “the tree of life is the love of God” (Homily 72).

“Do not deceive yourself,” says Saint Symeon the New Theologian, “God is fire and when He came into the world, and became man, He sent fire on the earth, as He Himself says; this fire turns about searching to find material — that is a disposition and an intention that is good — to fall into and to kindle; and for those in whom this fire will ignite, it becomes a great flame, which reaches Heaven…. this flame at first purifies us from the pollution of passions and then it becomes in us food and drink and light and joy, and renders us light ourselves because we participate in His light”(Discourse 78).

God is a loving fire, and He is a loving fire for all: good or bad. There is, however, a great difference in the way people receive this loving fire of God. Saint Basil says that “the sword of fire was placed at the gate of paradise to guard the approach to the tree of life; it was terrible and burning toward infidels, but kindly accessible toward the faithful, bringing to them the light of day.” ⁴⁴ The same loving fire brings the day to those who respond to love with love, and burns those who respond to love with hatred.

Paradise and hell are one and the same River of God, a loving fire which embraces and covers all with the same beneficial will, without any difference or discrimination. The same vivifying water is life eternal for the faithful and death eternal for the infidels; for the first it is their element of life, for the second it is the instrument of their eternal suffocation; paradise for the one is hell for the other. Do not consider this strange. The son who loves his father will feel happy in his father’s arms, but if he does not love him, his father’s loving embrace will be a torment to him. This also is why when we love the man who hates us, it is likened to pouring lighted coals and hot embers on his head.

“I say,” writes Saint Isaac the Syrian, “that those who are suffering in hell, are suffering in being scourged by love…. It is totally false to think that the sinners in hell are deprived of God’s love. Love is a child of the knowledge of truth, and is unquestionably given commonly to all. But love’s power acts in two ways: it torments sinners, while at the same time it delights those who have lived in accord with it” (Homily 84).

God is love. If we really believe this truth, we know that God never hates, never punishes, never takes vengeance. As Abba Ammonas says, “Love never hates anyone, never reproves anyone, never condemns anyone, never grieves anyone, never abhors anyone, neither faithful nor infidel nor stranger nor sinner nor fornicator, nor anyone impure, but instead it is precisely sinners, and weak and negligent souls that it loves more, and feels pain for them and grieves and laments, and it feels sympathy for the wicked and sinners, more than for the good, imitating Christ Who called sinners, and ate and drank with them. For this reason, showing what real love is, He taught saying, ‘Become good and merciful like your Father in Heaven,’ and as He rains on bad and good and makes the sun to rise on just and unjust alike, so also is the one who has real love, and has compassion, and prays for all.”  ⁴⁵

NOTES:

⁴³ Fotis Kontoglou, “EKKLHSIASTIKA HMEROLOGIA,“ OrqodoxoV TupoV, “Church Calendars,” Orthodoxos Typos] 131 (Athens), 1 January 1971.

⁴⁴ St. Basil the Great, Homily 13. 2, Exhortation to Holy Baptism (PG 31. 428 and 95, 1272).

⁴⁵ “BIBLIOQHKH ELLHNWN PATERWN” [Library of Greek Fathers], vol. 40, pp. 60-61.

PARADISE AND HADES

The Second Coming of Christ, the resurrection of the body, the appearing of all men before the dread judgement seat of Christ and, naturally, the final judgement, culminate in Paradise and Hell. The righteous will attain Paradise, eternal life, and the sinners Hell.

Paradise is at the beginning of man’s history, while at the end there will be Paradise and Hell. Therefore both Paradise and Hell are spoken of in the whole Bible.

A basic teaching in the Bible is that after his creation man was placed in Paradise, and then he lost his communion with God. From that time on there has been within man the quest for this life of Paradise. By His incarnation Christ gave every man the possibility of returning to Paradise and attaining communion with the Triune God. Thus throughout one’s life, especially if one lives within the Church and strives to keep God’s commandments and to participate in His grace, one is struggling to be saved and to enter into Paradise.

Therefore the subject “Paradise and Hdes”is one of the central themes of the Bible and of the Church. However, we need to study and analyse just what Paradise and Hell are, how they are interpreted in the Orthodox patristic Tradition. This work is necessary and indispensable for the additional reason that in this way we shall be able not only to interpret Holy Scripture, but also to see the work of the Church. As will be seen in what follows, this subject is most important, because it shows the essence and work of the Church. We cannot see the mission of the Church without examining the orthodox conception of Paradise and Hell. Hence the consequences of this interpretation are immense.

- Met. Hierotheos of Nafpaktos

intercede for us !

surrogates to the demons?

“The holy Fathers have said that the devil, though bodiless, finds his pleasure in enjoying the bodily pleasures of men. And, metaphorically speaking, these are but the dirt and dust that he was condemned to eat through the serpent: “And dust you shall eat all the days of your life” (Gen.3:14). St. Gregory the Sinaite wrote on this point: “Humanly speaking, because the devils lost their angelic joy and were deprived of divine pleasure, they have acquired a sort of materialistic nature through their physical passions and suffer to eat, as we do, the dust of the earth.”

-From A Handbook of Spiritual Counsel by St. Nicodemos of the Holy Mountain

Fasting

Living an Orthodox Life: Fasting

Gluttony makes a man gloomy and fearful, but fasting makes him joyful and courageous.
And, as gluttony calls forth greater and greater gluttony, so fasting stimulates greater and greater endurance.
When a man realizes the grace that comes through fasting, he desires to fast more and more.
And the graces that come through fasting are countless….

~Saint Nikolai of Zicha~

Fasting is an essential aspect of practicing the Orthodox life. You cannot be Orthodox and not fast. Unfortunately, many in the Church today do not participate in this grace-bestowing and life-giving ascetic practice. They do this to the loss of their own spiritual and bodily health.

But since you are not one of those people, you will need an Orthodox calendar to help you know which days we are to fast, and which type of fasting is prescribed. There are many good ones available: I prefer the one in English published by St. John of Kronstadt Press. But St. Herman of Alaska Press and St. Nectarios Press each produce good calendars in English. They all combine both the Church (“Old”) Calendar and the Civil (“Papal”, or “New”) Calendar.

The Rule of Fasting in the Orthodox Church, by Father Seraphim (Rose) of Platina.

The Meaning of the Great Fast. From the introductory material in the Lenten Triodion. By Mother Mary and Archimandrite [now Bishop] Kallistos (Ware).

Concerning Fasting on Wednesday and Friday, by St. Nikodemos the Hagiorite. An excerpt from the Exomologetarion: A Manual of Confession.

Three Helpful Principles of Fasting: Simplicity, Satiety, and a Litmus Question. An Anonymous Letter to a New Convert.

Rules of Piety: basic and helpful information on fasting. Provides the seasons and guidelines for fasting.

An Answer to a Question About Sexual Abstinence During Fasting Periods, by Archbishop Chrysostomos.

On the Spirit of Gluttony. Book V from the Institutes of St. John Cassian.

The Catechetical Homilies and Testament of St. Theodore the Studite, Homilies 47 (Concerning Fasting, Dispassion, and Purity) and 48 (Concerning Now We Should Adorn Our Eternal Habitation with Virtue).

Various Replies to Questions on Fasting, from Orthodox Tradition.

Thoughts on Fasting and Temperance, by Archimandrite Sebastian Dabovich.

When Are We to Fast?: Midnight-to-Midnight, or Vespers-to-Vespers. From The Shepherd, Vol. XV.

Fasting and the Church Year, helpful information from the Greek Orthodox Church of the Transfiguration in Lowell, MA.

Introduction to the Philokalic Book of St. Gregory of Sinai. Covers a range of topics including prayer and fasting. From Elder Basil of Poiana Marului: Spiritual Father of St. Paisy Velichkovsky.

How Should We Conduct Ourselves During Meals?: Chapter 1 from How to Live a Holy Life, by Metropolitan Gregory of St. Petersburg (1784-1860).

On Fasting: Ch. VIII from Field Flowers, by St. Paisy of Neamt.

Antiochian Innovation: Comments on the May 26-May 27, 1997, decision of The Holy Synod of the Patriarchate of Antioch: 1) to abolish fasting during the post-Paschal period from Bright Week to Ascension; and 2) to allow women to commune at any time and to remove from the Church’s “liturgical texts” any reference to women as “unclean” or “tainted.”

Prayer, Feasts, and Fasts, by the Ever-Memorable Metropolitan Philaret of New York.

Various Writings of Archbishop Averky of Blessed Memory. Translated and distributed on the Internet by the Brotherhood of St. Niphon.

Recommended Books

Fasting in the Orthodox Church, by Archimandrite Akakios, Abbot of St. Gregory Palamas Monastery in Etna, CA (The Center for Traditionalist Orthodox Studies). This is the best summary of the Orthodox teaching on fasting. Read Chapter 3, “Fasting and Contemporary Orthodoxy in the Americas”.

The Lenten Triodion (see above description in the “Orthopraxis & the Divine Services” section).

Fasting and Science by Constantine Cavarnos, (The Center for Traditionalist Orthodox Studies): this is the best short work I have read on the subject. Dr. Cavarnos knows this subject well. In his famous Anchored in God he writes (pp. 29-30):

Fasting takes into account both the quantity and the quality of food. The idea is to eat a smaller amount of food during a fasting day; to abstain from fats and oils, as these tend to fatten the body and thereby to arouse lust and make one physically and spiritually lazy; to abstain from meat, fish, and products of animal origin, as these tend to excite carnal desire; and also to abstain from mere delicacies, as the consumption of these is a form of self-indulgence. St. John Climacus (c. 525-605) says: “Satiety of food is a begetter of unchastity.” He also says, “Let us cut down fatty and greasy foods that inflame carnal desire, and foods that sweeten and tickle the larynx” (The Ladder, Migne PG 88, 864, 865).

The practice of fasting is not regarded as an end in itself, as something having instrinsic value, but only as a means, as a necessary condition for the spiritual life. It belongs to the category of what the Eastern, Byzantine Fathers call “bodily virtues,” among which are prostrations, standing, and vigils. Referring to these, St. John Damascene (c. 676-c. 754) says that they “are rather instruments for the virtues; they are necessary, in one practices them with humility and spiritual knowledge. For without them neither do the virtues of the soul come into being, but in themselves they are of no benefit, any more than plants without fruit” (Philokalia, 2, 17). And St. Gregory the Sinaite (1289-1360), speaking specifically of fasting, observes: “Constant fasting whithers lust and gives birth to self-restraint” (Philokalia, 2, 272); while Callistos and Ignatios Xanthopoulos remark: “Fasting and self-restraint are the first virtue, the mother, root, source and foundation of all good” (Philokalia, 2, 370).

Other food for thought, from the wise Nicephorus Theotokis:

“When we fast, we search the earth and sea up and down:  the earth in order to collect seeds, produce, fruit, spices, and every other kind of growing edible; the sea to find shellfish, mollusks, snails, sea-urchins, and anything edible therein.  We prepare dry foods, salted foods, pickled foods, and sweet foods, and from these ingredients we concoct many and motley dishes, seasoned with oil, wine, sweeteners, and spices.  Then we fill the table even more than when we are eating meat.  Moreover, since these foods stimulate the appetite, we eat and drink beyond moderation.  And after that we imagine that we are fasting….

“And whoever taught those who fast in this way that such a variety and such quantities of food constitute a fast?  Where did they read or hear that anyone who simply avoids meats or fish is fasting, even if he eats a great amount and different kinds of food?  Fasting is one thing, great variety in food another; fasting is one thing, eating great amounts of food another.” [Fasting and Science,  18-19]

The Publican and Pharisee.

“The publican, standing afar off, would not lift so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast saying, God be merciful to me a sinner!” (Lk.18:13).

And involuntarily one turns to last week’s Gospel. There it also told about a publican — Zacchaeus. We saw how the Lord overturned his whole soul. We saw how, after all his sinful life, he repented; and how he was ready to give half his possessions to the poor, and everyone he had defrauded, he would repay fourfold. And undoubtedly he did this. Involuntarily, Zacchaeus the Publican and the publican in today’s Gospel blend into one image, into one person. After all, both of them were publicans, sinful men, and both repented. If we accept that today’s Gospel is the continuation of last Sunday’s Gospel, that today’s publican, beating himself on the breast, is really Zacchaeus, at least psychologically, then a great science will be revealed to us, a great lesson in the life of one who repents. You see we must all repent.

All the injustice which Zacchaeus did, he did for gain, to be dominant. And here, when this dominance came and he considered himself to be a man of power — at this very moment came the Truth of God. The Truth of God tells us that if a person is in his mother’s womb for nine months, then he abides in the womb of the earth if strong eighty years, and after this begin suffering and sickness (Psalm 89:10 (90:10 King James Version). And finally, through death man passes into the womb of eternal life for ever.

Zacchaeus saw all this now: he understood all his foolishness, his wrong way of life. And then he began to search for a way out. He was in such a state of mind when he saw Christ walking by. For him this was a rabbi. He couldn’t just go up to Him, and he didn’t want to. First he wanted to find out what kind of rabbi He was. Here we see the fig tree, then we see him in the fig tree, this man who was virtually a dignitary of the Jewish people. And then the crowd. Imagine what this proud man was going through. But Christ approached and said: Today we will be together, I will be in your home. And when Christ was in his home, then He revealed to him that power which immediately filled his heart. Here Zacchaeus said: I will give away everything, and whomever I have cheated I will repay fourfold (Lk. 19:1-10). And so he did all this.

But what is the matter now? Now he is standing and beating himself on the breast, saying: “God be merciful to me a sinner!” And here, right next to him stands someone else, maybe his peer in society — a Pharisee. He stands there and, on the contrary, in complete satisfaction says: I have done everything, I did this and this, I.. .1. Why didn’t the publican say: I also did this. I gave away half of my possessions. To that one I paid back fourfold. Why didn’t he say this? But on the contrary, he said: “Merciful God, be merciful to me a sinner!”

The point is that the Lord endowed him with a gift — He expanded his heart. But as active life resumed, then a tragedy resulted: habit…habit. His inner man was the slave of habit; and this habit was a terrible force. Involuntarily, there appeared thoughts of avarice and the thirst for more and more gain. His looks were already in temptation which came through thought. The heart which had been liberated by Christ suddenly became dirty again. And he felt all this. “Lord God, be merciful to me a sinner!” What to do?

Today the Holy Church brings us the full strength of this psychological moment, the full strength of this question: what are we to do? And with similar force, she gives us the answer to this question through the teachings of the Holy Fathers. In fact our Holy Fathers show us precisely what was going on in the soul of the publican. Because his conscience was now free, liberated by Christ, his heart was expansive, there was peace in his heart. His will was also free, and the freedom was in God. But the distance between the heart and God is sin. And here it happened to the publican that shadows started to appear in his heart, and he began to cry to the Lord for help.

How do these shadows come about? As Bishop Theophan the Recluse explains in one of his letters, they come about like this. Thought — it comes, and only if it does not captivate the feeling of the heart, then this is still not sin. It comes and, as today’s snow melts tomorrow, so it will not exist, and the heart remains clean. Even if the thought captures the heart, enters the heart — even this is not yet a misfortune; there is still a moment in which it is possible to cry, “Lord have mercy!” and the heart will be clean. But when the thought has already entered the heart, and when you have already said, “I desire,” this is when shadow appears. The mere fact that a shadow has entered, then here sympathy has already taken place, an action. Then, as the Bishop says, a fall has resulted. Sin has become action, and a fall has occurred. And as soon as one has fallen spiritually, sin has entered the heart, a deed has been accomplished, the person has departed from God and has begun to suffer, just as with a man who has fallen physically. We know what a tragedy spiritual sufferings represent. Pride, greed, ambition, all kinds of lust gnaw at a man, and he is tormented. The heart of such a man becomes like stone.

As we see from the Gospel reading, this is what happened after Zacchaeus the Publican recognized his sin and repented. Christ absolved him of his sin. His conscience became free. But now he had to act; and when he started to act, then thoughts arose, and from thoughts came feelings. What to do? Here he cried: “God be merciful to me a sinner; don’t let this happen.” And the Lord gives the Grace to prevent it from happening and saves the sinner. What must we do in order to receive this Grace? An active exertion of the will is needed. And next Sunday the Holy Church will teach us how this is acquired.

~ + ~

Baptism of the Lord

Have you noticed, brothers and sisters, how the Holy Church continually connects our life with events from the life of Christ? During the days of Christmas, while worshipping at the manger of Christ, we received the “spirit of adoption/’ On the day of the Lord’s Circumcision, we gave our heart to Christ and began our spiritual New Year. And here, for these past days, the Holy Church has been calling us to the shores of the Jordan, and today, on the day of the Baptism of the Lord, she reveals to us a great mystery — the Manifestation of God.

Placed before us is the purpose of our whole life, and this is Communion with God. And we are given Grace, divine help for this kind of life. This help, this Grace comes to us from the One God worshipped in Trinity, Who is revealed to us in today’s Gospel reading. And as material proof, as a symbol of this Grace, we are given this Baptismal water, the blessing of which we will now perform. It is tangible. So often, through something tangible the Holy Church unites us with the intangible, with the Grace of God.

Be attentive to what the Holy Church says to us today through the Apostle’s reading: “For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men, teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world; looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Savior Jesus Christ” (Titus 2:11-13).

Today we are given not only knowledge, but also renewal. While present at our church service, perhaps we haven’t heard everything or understood everything; but at the same time, just as it happens in God’s world, when you walk out — it is spring and there is the breath of a kind of mysterious power. Maybe this is incomprehensible to us, intangible. But today, for all of those who were expecting this power of Grace, it must visit us and prepare us for our future way of life which will be bound up with our will.

Therefore, following these days begins the week after Baptism, where it will be said: “Repent: for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand!” (Mt. 4:17). And so begins a whole academy, the great Lenten Triodion (Lenten Triodion — a liturgical book which contains the cycle of services for Great Lent and the four weeks that precede it, dealing especially with the Passion of Jesus Christ), which will reveal to us the laws of life and the laws of our heart which we need so much. It may happen that even this year we will join our fathers and forefathers who are already in eternal life. For this reason, let us strive to fill our hearts with everything the Holy Church now gives us.

- Archbishop Andrei (Rymarenko)

Psyche

The Soul (`Psyche’) What the soul is

“The word `soul’ is one of the most difficult words in the Bible and in Christian literature” (1). `Soul’ has many meanings in Holy Scripture and in patristic literature. Professor Christos Yannaras says: “The Septuagint translators of the Old Testament carried over into Greek with the word `psyche’ (`soul’) the Hebrew `nephesh’, a term with many meanings. Anything which has life is called a soul, every animal, but more commonly within the Scripture it pertains to man. It signifies the way in which life is manifested in man. It does not refer just to one department of human existence – the spiritual in opposition to the material – but signifies the whole man, as a single living hypostasis. The soul does not merely dwell in the body, but is expressed by the body, which itself, like the flesh or heart, corresponds to our ego, to the way in which we realise life. A man is a soul, he is a human being, he is someone…” (2). The soul is not the cause of life. It is, rather, the bearer of life (3).

Soul is the life which exists in every creature, as in plants and animals. Soul is the life that exists in man, and it is also every man who has life. Soul is also the life which is expressed within the spiritual element in our existence, it is that spiritual element in our existence. Since the term `soul’ has many meanings, there are many places where things have not been clarified.

In what follows we shall try to look at some uses of the term `psyche’ in texts from the New Testament and the texts from the Fathers of the Church.

The term is used by the Lord and the Apostles to mean life. The angel of the Lord said to Joseph, who was betrothed to the Mother of God: “Arise, take the young child and his mother, and go to the land of Israel, for those who sought the young child’s life are dead” (Matt.2,20). The Lord, describing Himself, said: “I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd gives his life for the sheep” (Jn.10,11). Likewise the Apostle Paul, writing about Priscilla and Aquila, says they “risked their own necks for my life” (Rom.16,4). In these three cases the term used for `life’ is `psyche’.

`Psyche’ is used further, as we said, to indicate the spiritual element in our existence. We shall cite a few scriptural passages to confirm this. The Lord said to his disciples: “Do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. But rather fear him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell” (Matt.10,28). Men cannot murder the soul, whereas the devil can, which means that if the soul is without the Holy Spirit, it is dead. The devil is a dead spirit, for he has no part in God and he transmits death to those who join with him. He is a living entity, but he does not exist in relation to God. In the parable of the rich young man the Lord says to him: “You fool! This night your soul will be required of you; then whose will those things be which you have provided” (Luk.12,20)?

The difference between soul (psyche) on the one hand, as the spiritual element in human existence, which is mortal by nature but immortal by grace, and life (psyche) on the other hand appears also in another of Christ’s teachings: “Whoever cares for his own safety (psyche) is lost; but if a man will let himself (psyche) be lost for my sake, he will find his true self (psyche)” (Matt.16,25,NEB). In one case the Lord uses the term `psyche’ to mean the spiritual element in our existence and in the other case it means life. In a letter to the Thessalonians the Apostle Paul prays: “May the God of peace himself sanctify you completely; and may your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ” (1Thess.5,23). Here it is not a question of the so-called tripartite composition of man, but the term `spirit’ is used to mean the grace of God, the charisma, which the soul receives. What we wish to point out here is that there is a distinction between soul and body. John the Evangelist writes in his Revelation: “I saw under the altar the souls of those who had been slain for the word of God and for the testimony which they held” (Rev.6,9). The body was slain, but the soul is close to God and is certainly in converse with God, as the Evangelist says in what follows.

The word `soul’ is also used to refer to the whole man. The Apostle Paul recommends: “Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities” (Rom.13,1).

I believe that this little analysis demonstrates that the term `psyche’ has many meanings in Scripture. The term is used to mean the whole man and the spiritual element in his existence, as well as the life which exists in man, plants and animals, in all things that participate in the life-giving energy of God. St. Gregory Palamas, speaking of the uncreated light which comes to be in the God-bearing soul “through the indwelling God”, says that this is God’s energy and not His essence, and as the essence is called light, so also the energy is called light. The same is true of the soul. The spiritual life and the biological life are both called `soul’, but we are well aware that the spiritual and the biological are different: “Just as the soul communicates life to the animated body – and we call this life `soul’, while realising that the soul which is in us and which communicates life to the body is distinct from that life – so God, Who dwells in the God-bearing soul, communicates the light to it” (4).

We have cited this passage in order to show that the Fathers are well aware that the term `soul’ refers both to the spiritual element in our existence and to life itself, and that there is a great difference between the two meanings. We shall see this better later on, when we examine the difference between the souls of animals and of men.

To attempt a definition of `soul’ in the sense of the spiritual element in our existence we turn to St. John of Damascus, who says: “Now a soul is a living substance, simple and incorporeal, of its own nature invisible to bodily eyes, using the body as an organ and giving it life endowed with will and he body, so is the mind to the soul. It is free, endowed with will and the power to act, and subject to change, that is, subject to change of will because it is also created. “And this it has received according to nature, through that grace of the Creator by which it has also received both its existence and its being naturally as it is” (5).

The soul is simple and good “because created thus by its Master” (6).

Almost the same definition as that of John of Damascus had in fact been given before him by St. Gregory of Nyssa: “The soul is an essence created, living, and noetic, transmitting from itself to an organised and sentient body the power of living and of grasping objects of sense, as long as a natural constitution capable of this holds together” (7).

St. Gregory Palamas, interpreting the Apostle Paul’s: “The first man Adam became a living soul” (1Cor.15,45), says that `living soul’ means “ever-living, immortal, which is to say intelligent, for the immortal is intelligent; and not only that, but also divinely blessed with grace. Such is the living soul” (8).

He says that the soul is immortal. We are well aware that this idea of the immortality of the soul is not of Christian origin, but the Christians accepted it with several conditions and several necessary presuppositions. Prof. John Zizioulas writes: “The idea of the immortality of the soul, even though it is not of Christian origin, passed into the tradition of our Church, permeating even this hymnography of ours. No one can deny it without finding himself outside the climate of the very worship of the Church…The Church did not accept this Platonic idea without conditions and presuppositions. These presuppositions include, among other things, three basic points. One is that souls are not eternal but created. Another is that the soul should by no means be identified with man. (Man’s soul is not man. The soul is one thing and man, who is a psychosomatic being, is another.) And the third and most important is that the immortality of man is not based on the immortality of the soul, but on the Resurrection of Christ and on the coming resurrection of bodies” (9).

We have emphasised that man’s soul is immortal by grace and not by nature, and yet it must be stressed that in the Orthodox patristic tradition man’s immortality is not the soul’s life after death, but a passing over death by the grace of Christ. Life in Christ is what makes man immortal, for without life in Christ there is dying, since it is the grace of God that gives life to the soul.

Having presented several elements that make up the definition of the soul, we must proceed a little further to the topic of the creation of the soul. The soul is created, since it was made by God. Our basic source is the revelation which was given to Moses: “The Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being” (Gen.2,7). This passage describes the creation of man’s soul. In his interpretation of it, St. John Chrysostom says that it is essential to look at what is said with the eyes of faith and that these things are said “with much condescension and because of our weakness”. The phrase “God made man and breathed into him” is “unworthy of God, but Holy Scripture explains it in this way for our sake because of our weakness, condescending to us so that, being made worthy of this condescension, we may have strength to rise to that height” (10). The way in which God formed man’s body and made him a living soul as described in Holy Scripture is condescending. It is described thus because of our own weakness.

St. John of Damascus writes that whatever is said about God in human terms is “said symbolically” but has a higher sense, since “the divine is simple and formless”. And since Scripture says that God breathed into man’s face, we may look at the interpretation by St. John of Damascus concerning the mouth of God: “By His mouth and speech let us understand the expression of His will, by analogy with our own expression of our innermost thoughts by mouth and speech” (11). Certainly mouth and breath are two different things, but I mention this as indicative, since there is a relationship and a connection. Generally, as St. John of Damascus says, everything that has been affirmed of God in bodily terms, apart from what was said about the presence of the Word of God in the flesh, “contains some hidden meaning which teaches us things that exceed our nature” (12).

Therefore the soul, like the body, is created by God (13).

St. John Chrysostom interprets this breath of God by saying that it is “not only senseless but also out of place” to say that what was breathed into Adam was the soul and that the soul was transmitted to the body from the substance of God. If this were true, then the soul would not be wise in one place and foolish and senseless in another, or just in one place and unjust in another. The “substance of God is not divided or changed but is unchangeable.” So the divine breath was the “energy of the Holy Spirit”. As Christ said “Receive the Holy Spirit”, so also the divine breath “humanly heard is the venerated and holy Spirit”. According to the saint, the soul is not a piece of God, but the energy of the Holy Spirit, which created the soul without becoming soul itself. “This Spirit proceeded, it did not become soul, but created a soul; it did not change into a soul, but it created a soul; for the Holy Spirit is a creator, it has a share in the creation of the body and in the creation of the soul. For Father and Son and Holy Spirit by divine power create the creature” (14).

Another important point emphasised by the holy Fathers is that we have no existence of the body without a soul nor existence of a soul without the body. The moment God creates the body He creates the soul too. St. Anastasios of Sinai writes: “Neither does the body exist before the soul nor the soul exist before the body” (15). St. John of Damascus emphasises in opposition to Origen’s view: “Body and soul were formed at the same time, not one before and the other afterwards” (16). St. John of the Ladder says this as well (17).

Man is made in the image of God. This image certainly does not refer to the body, but mainly and primarily to the soul. The image in man is stronger than that in the angels, for as we shall see, man’s soul gives life to the attached body. In general we can say that the soul is in the image of God. And as God is threefold -Nous, Word and Spirit – so also man’s soul has three powers: nous, soul and spirit (18). In all nature there are “iconic examples” of the Holy Trinity (19), but this appears mainly in man. The image in man is stronger than the image in the angels. St. Gregory Palamas, speaking of the baptism of Christ in the Jordan River and explaining why “the mystery of the created and recreated (man) reveals the mystery of the Holy Trinity”, writes that this came about not only because man alone is an initiate and earthly worshipper of the Holy Trinity, but also because “he alone is in its image”. The sentient and irrational animals have only a vital spirit and this cannot exist of itself; they have no nous and word. The angels and archangels have nous and word, since they are noetic and intelligent, but they have no life-giving spirit, since they have no body which receives life from the spirit. So since man has nous, word and life-giving spirit that gives life to the body joined to it, “he alone is in the image of the three-personal nature” (20).

St. Gregory Palamas develops the same teaching in his natural and theological chapters. As the Trinitarian God is Nous, Word and Spirit, so is man. Man’s spirit, the life-giving power in his body, is “man’s noetic love”, “it is from the nous and the word, and it exists in the word and the nous and possesses both the word and the nous within itself” (21). While the noetic and rational nature of the angels has nous, word and spirit, yet “it does not have this spirit as life-giving” (22). As we have indicated, the image refers primarily to the soul, but since the body is given life by the spirit, therefore the image in man is stronger than that in the angels.

St. Gregory also sees the difference between the image of man and the image of the angels from another point of view. His teaching is well known that in God there is essence and energy, and these are connected separately and separated connectedly. This is the mystery of the indivisible joining of essence and energy. The essence of God is not shared by man, while the energies are shared. And since man is in the image of God, this teaching about essence and energy applies to the soul as well. So the soul is inseparably divided into essence and energy.

In comparing the soul of man with that of animals, St. Gregory says that animals possess a soul not as essence, but as an energy. “The soul of each of the irrational animals is the life for the body it animates, and so animals possess life not essentially but as an energy, since this life is dependent on something else and is not self-subsistent.” Therefore since the soul of animals has only energy, it dies with the body. By contrast, the soul of man has not only energy but also essence: “The soul possesses life not only as an activity but also essentially, since it lives in its own right…For that reason, when the body passes away, the soul does not perish with it.” It remains immortal. The intelligent and noetic soul is composite, but “since its activity is directed towards something else it does not naturally produce synthesis” (23).

In his teaching St. Maximus the Confessor states that the soul has three powers: a) that of nourishment and growth, b) that of imagination and instinct, and c) that of intelligence and intellection. Plants share only in the first of these powers. Animals share in that of imagination and instinct as well, while men share all three powers (24). This shows the great value of man relative to irrational animals. Likewise what was said previously shows clearly also how angels differ from men. Therefore when Christ became man he received a human body and not the form of an angel, he became God-man, and not God-angel.

What has been said makes it possible for us to see the dividedness of the soul. We do not intend to enlarge on this topic but we shall present those things which have an essential bearing on the general topic of this study.

St. John of Damascus says that the soul is intelligent and noetic. God gave man “an intelligent and noetic soul for proper breathing” (25). It is a basic teaching of the Fathers that nous and intelligence are two parallel energies of the soul. St. Gregory Palamas, referring to the fact that the soul is in the image of the Holy Trinity, and writing that the Holy Trinity is Nous, Word and Spirit, says that the soul, created by God in His image “is endowed with nous, word and spirit.” Therefore she must guard her order, relate entirely to God. She must look at God alone, adorn herself with constant memory and contemplation and with the warmest and ardent love for Him (26).

The soul is broken up by passions and sins. Therefore it must be unified, offered to God. Unification takes place in many ways, mainly by putting Christ’s word into practice. Theoleptos, Metropolitan of Philadelphia, emphasises particularly the value of prayer. “Pure prayer, after uniting in itself nous, word and spirit, invokes the name of God in words, looks up at God Whom it is invoking, with a nous free from wandering, and shows contrition, humility and love. Thus it inclines towards itself the eternal Trinity, the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit -One God” (27). With the word we constantly remember the name of Christ, with a nous free from wandering we gaze at God, and with the spirit we are possessed of contrition, humility and love.

In this way the three powers of the soul are united and offered to the Holy Trinity. This is how the healing of the soul takes place, and we shall deal with it at greater length elsewhere. The scattering of the powers of the soul is sickness and their unification is healing.

Nicetas Stethatos divides the soul into three parts but speaks mainly of two, the intelligent and passible parts. The intelligent part is invisible and unrelated to the senses, “as if existing both within and outside them”. I think that he is referring to the nous here. Later we shall distinguish between intelligence and nous, but now we must emphasise that the nous has a relationship with God, it receives the energies of God; God reveals Himself to the nous, while intelligence, as an energy, is that which formulates and expresses the experiences of the nous. The passible part of the soul is divided into the sensations and the passions. The passible part is so called because it is “subject to the passions” (28).

St. Gregory of Sinai, analysing the powers of the soul and describing precisely what takes hold in each power, says that evil thoughts work in the intelligent power; bestial passions in the excitable part; recollection of animal lusts in the appetitive part; fantasies in the noetic part; and notions in the reasoning part (29).

The same saint says that when by His life-giving breath God created the intelligent and noetic soul, “He did not make it have rage and animal lust; He endowed the soul only with the appetitive power and with the courage to be lovingly attracted” (30). With the creation of the soul “neither lust nor anger was included in its being” (31). These came as a result of sin.

Here we shall not develop further the subject of the divided soul because the relevant material is described in the fourth chapter, which deals with the passions. We had to include a little about the soul’s dividedness at this point because we are on the particular subject of the soul.

Yet there does exist a relationship and a connection between the soul and the body. But what is this relationship and to what extent does it exist? It is a topic which we shall look at here.

Man is made up of body and soul. Each element alone does not constitute a man. St. Justin, the philosopher and martyr, says that the soul by itself is not a man, but is called `a man’s soul’. In the same way the body is not called a man but is called `a man’s body’. “Though in himself man is neither of these, the combination of the two is called man; God called man into life and resurrection, and he did not call a part, but the whole, which is the soul and the body” (32).

The soul, as we have pointed out, was created with the body at conception. “The embryo is endowed with a soul at conception.” The soul is created at conception and “the soul at that time is just as active as the flesh. As the body grows so the soul increasingly manifests its energies” (33).

There is a clear distinction between soul and body, since “the soul is not body but bodiless” (34). Besides, it is altogether impossible for the body and soul to exist or be called body or soul unrelated to and independent of each other. “For the relationship is fixed” (35).

The ancient philosophers believed that the soul is at a specific place in the body, that the body is the prison of the soul and that the salvation of the soul is its release from the body. The Fathers teach that the soul is everywhere in the body. St. Gregory Palamas says that the angels and the soul, as incorporeal beings, “are not located in place, but neither are they everywhere”. The soul, as it sustains the body together with which it was created “is everywhere in the body, not as in a place, nor as if it were encompassed, but as sustaining, encompassing and giving life to it because it possesses this too in the image of God” (36).

The same saint, seeing that there are some people (the Hellenisers) who locate the soul in the brain as in an acropolis and that others place it at the very centre of the heart “and in that element therein which is purified of the breath of animal soul” as the most genuine vehicle (Judaisers), says that we know precisely that the intelligent part is in the heart, not as in a container, for it is incorporeal, nor is it outside the heart, since it is conjoined. The heart of man is the controlling organ, the throne of grace, according to Palamas. The nous and all the thoughts of the soul are to be found there. The saint affirms that we received this teaching from Christ Himself, Who is man’s Maker. He reminds us of Christ’s sayings: “It is not what goes into a man’s mouth that defiles him, but what comes out of it” (Matt.15,11), and: “For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts” (Matt.15,19). The saint adds further that St. Makarios said: “The heart directs the entire organism, and when grace gains possession of the heart, it reigns over all the thoughts and all the members, for it is there in the heart that the nous and the soul have their seat.” Therefore the basic aim of therapy, he says, is to bring back the nous, “which has been dissipated abroad by the senses from outside the heart”, which is “the seat of thoughts” and “the first intelligent organ of the body” (37).

We shall return to this subject, but what we mainly wish to underline is that according to the teaching of the Fathers, the soul uses the heart as its organ and directs the body. The soul is in union with the body; it is no stranger to it. Nemesius of Emesa teaches that “the soul is incorporeal, and not circumscribed to a particular portion of space, but spreading entire throughout: like a sun that spreads wherever its light reaches as well as throughout the body of the sun, not being just a part of the whole that it illuminates, as would be the case if it were not omnipresent in it.” Furthermore, “the soul is united to the body and yet remains distinct from it” (38).

The soul activates and directs the whole body and all the members of the body. It is a teaching of the Orthodox Church that God directs the world personally without created intermediaries, by His uncreated energy. Thus, just as God activates the whole of nature, in the same way “the soul too activates the members of the body and moves each member in conformance with the operation of that member” (39). Therefore just as it is God’s task to administer the world, so also it is “the soul’s task to guide the body” (40).

St. Gregory Palamas, who dwelt much upon the theme of the relationship between soul and body, says that what takes place through God takes place through the soul. The soul has within it in simple form “all the providential powers of the body”. And even if some members of the body are injured, if the eyes are removed and the ears deafened, the soul is no less possessed of the providential powers of the body. The soul is not the providential powers but it has providential powers. In spite of the presence in it of the providential powers, it is “single and simple and not composite”, not “compound or synthetic” (41).

It is very characteristic that in this passage St. Gregory links what takes place through the soul in relation to the body, with God’s relation to the whole of creation. God directs the world with His providential powers. God had the providential powers even before the world was created. Yet God, who not only possesses many powers but is all-powerful, is not deprived of His unicity and simplicity because of the powers that are in Him (42). This shows clearly that the soul is “in the image of God”. What takes place in God takes place analogously in the soul of man.

St. Gregory of Nyssa says that the soul is immaterial and bodiless “working and moving in a way corresponding to its peculiar nature, and evincing these peculiar emotions through the organs of the body” (43). The same saint epigrammatically teaches that the soul is not held by the body but holds the body. It is not within the body as in a vessel or bag, but rather the body is within the soul. The soul is throughout the body, “and there is no part illuminated by it in which it is not wholly present” (44).

The general conclusion with reference to the relationship between soul and body is that the soul is in the whole body, there is no sector of a man’s body in which the soul is not present, that the heart is the first intelligent seat of the soul, that the centre of the soul is there, not as in a vessel but as in an organ which guides the whole body and that the soul, while distinct from the body, is nevertheless most intimately linked with it.

All these things have been said because they are very closely connected with the subject of this study. For we cannot understand the fall and sickness of the soul if we do not know just what the soul is and how it is linked with the body.