Prelest and Positive Thinking

Those of our readers who want to know why we’ve been silent may be pleased to see that we have taken time off from our current time-consuming project to answer an email we have just received.  There are a number of other emails that are in the queue but we have been too busy to deal with them.  We hope to get to them in due time.

Someone, let us call her ‘Martha’, has written to us.  We replied to her as follows:

Our policy is only to answer emails publicly on the blog.  We remove all information that could be used to identify you.  We also edit for clarity and style.  Is this acceptable to you?

To which Martha replied:

Sure, as long as you keep my identity private!  Thank you!

Here is Martha’s email, extensively edited for clarity:

Hi Orthodox Monk,

I’m curious to know why you guys are promoting the ‘positive thinking’ idea that your neo-elders are teaching.  Such as in the books

Elder Paisios of the Holy Mountain

The Gurus, the Young Man and Elder Paisios

and the book Wounded by Love.

These teachings are nothing more than ‘New-Age’ and ‘Occult’ terminologies as well as practices!  They have never before been used by true orthodox elders and none of the holy fathers spoke about such things nor are they found anywhere in the Holy Bible.  To me this indicates that Orthodox Christianity is being blended in with the Occult, and thus slowly taken us away from God.  Are we not supposed to trust God in all matters?  Not our own self, and our positive or negative thoughts, given us through our own man-made power?  To attract this or that from energies or within ourselves (a power or energy that we do not possess) yet Elder Paisios claims that we do.  This is a demonic and completely un-Orthodox teaching!!!

Are these new elders in prelest?  Maybe you could shed some light as to why it is not only being promoted but encouraged for spiritual enlightenment.

And while we’re on the topic of enlightenment, here is my next question: why and how do all of Elder Ephraim’s Abbots and Abbesses obtain the gift of clairvoyance so easily?  Isn’t this supposed to be given (maybe) only to those who have accomplished great ascetic struggles in extreme humility, and only if God wills?  Not every elder obtains all the holy gifts or even seeks them, yet the Ephraim monastics work in a way opposite to this.  This is the exact same way that the Charismatic Protestant movement goes about obtaining the gifts of the Holy Spirit.

Anyway I didn’t mean to upset anyone; I’m only inquiring so as to obtain true answers and knowledge for myself (I hope in fact that you are a real monk).

Asking you to please keep my identity private.

Thank you, and waiting for your response.

Martha

Let us take the issues one by one.

First we didn’t realize that we, Orthodox Monk, were promoting the ‘positive thinking’ that is found in the books that Martha lists.  Also we didn’t realize that we were promoting the ‘neo-elders’ that Martha speaks about.  Indeed, as near as we can make out we have made a serious effort over the years not to promote or to denigrate one or another elder.  Guess we weren’t as careful as we thought we were.

Now, let us run through these books to make sure that we’re all on the same page.  The first book, Elder Paisios of the Holy Mountain, was written by Hieromonk Christodoulos who at the time he knew Elder Paisios was a monk at the Monastery of Koutloumousiou, a short walk from Elder Paisios’ cell or house.  We understand that Hieromonk Christodoulos met with Elder Paisios a number of times and that he took notes of his conversations as soon as he returned to Koutloumousiou after speaking with the Elder.  Our friend George who knows far more about Mt Athos than we do says that the conversations that Hieromonk Christodoulos presents ‘ring true’ as presenting the real Elder Paisios.  We ourselves have not read the next book,  The Gurus, the Young Man and Elder Paisios, and have no comment on it.

The third book, Wounded by Love, is the English translation of an early edition of a book called in Greek Bios kai Logoi.  That book came about as follows.  Elder Porphyrios permitted two of his disciples, now nuns, to record a number of conversations with him.  The transcripts of those conversations became the book in question.  So the book is really just the transcripts of a number of conversations or discourses of Elder Porphyrios with two of his disciples.  It is not a ‘set-piece’ theological work by the Elder.

We will discuss Elder Paisios, Elder Porphyrios and Elder Ephraim separately.

Now the first point to make is that Elder Paisios wrote a number of books himself, which are to be found in English translation.  It might be useful for Martha to find these books and read them so as to get direct from the horse’s mouth what Elder Paisios thought and taught.  Here is a list of those books (all available in English):

Saint Arsenios the Cappadocian

Elder Hadji-Georgis the Athonite

Athonite Fathers and Athonite Matters

Epistles

These books are published by the Holy Hesychasterion of St John the Theologian, Souroti, Greece.  That is where Elder Paisios was buried in accordance with his own wishes.

There is also a series of books published by the Holy Hesychasterion of St John the Theologian that have been constructed after the Elder’s death by assembling on a thematic basis notes and recordings of sayings by Elder Paisios collected by the nuns of the Hesychasterion, who are the Elder’s disciples and formal literary executors.  While these books are certainly of some weight in understanding Elder Paisios’ teaching, they would rank second to the books actually written and edited by Elder Paisios while he was alive.  The volumes presently published are (all available in English unless otherwise noted):

Spiritual Counsels 1: With Pain and Love for Contemporary Man

Spiritual Counsels 2: Spiritual Awakening

Spiritual Counsels 3: Spiritual Struggle

Spiritual Counsels 4: Family Life

Spiritual Counsels 5: Passions and Virtues (not translated)

In the third rank would be books written by someone who knew Elder Paisios and decided to write a book about him.  Elder Paisios of the Holy Mountain by Hieromonk Christodoulos, discussed above, would belong to this category.  Among such books, the best in our opinion is the one by Elder Isaac called Elder Paisios of Mount Athos.  Elder Isaac, since deceased, was a personal disciple of Elder Paisios.

It should be noted that when we recommend a book, we recommend it in the original language.  We have no opinion one way or another on the quality of a translation.  A translation is an interpretation of the author’s meaning, and in the case of a group translation, an interpretation by a committee.

Now let us begin with Martha’s criticisms, as near as we can make them out.  First of all, we were rather surprised to be taxed with teaching the doctrine of Elder Paisios on positive and negative thoughts.  We didn’t think we had addressed the issue.  Be that as it may, we understand Elder Paisios’ teaching to be as follows.  A monk or nun or layperson would come to Elder Paisios and express dissatisfaction with their elder, their abbot, their abbess, their spouse, their children, their parents, their job and so on.  Often, we imagine—we weren’t there—these people would be depressed and would want to ‘vent’.  Forgive us, Martha, but your remarks seem similar.  Now what Elder Paisios would say—as we understand it!—to these people is that they were allowing themselves to be swept up in negative thoughts.  What they should do, Elder Paisios would say, was concentrate on positive thoughts.

Martha thinks this is wrong, New-Age and Occult if we understand her correctly.  Certainly not to be found among the elders of old and not to be found in Scripture.

The basis of Elder Paisios’ teaching is to be found in a tradition in the Philokalia that goes back to very early times.  The great systematizer of this method as it entered into the Orthodox Hesychastic tradition is Evagrius Ponticus (344 – 399) but the method is also found in Neilus of Ankara (died 430) and Mark the Ascetic (5^th Century), of whose works it was said, ‘Sell everything and buy Mark.’  The method is referenced in Diadochos of Photiki (5^th Century) and other writers of the period; the fullest discussion is perhaps to be found in the Ladder of Divine Ascent by John of Sinai (7^th Century).  It is an integral part of the Hesychastic program of Hesychius of the Burning Bush (8^th Century).  It is referenced by the Gregory Palamas (14^th Century).  So the foundation of what Elder Paisios is saying is certainly Orthodox and certainly taught by some very big names in Orthodox spirituality.

In brief what these authors discuss is the genesis of an impassioned thought in the mind.  Normally the cause of such an impassioned thought is a temptation by a demon, although Evagrius for example recognizes that people can quite often get on with a tempting thought without a demon on the basis of their own emotional tendencies to sin.  One of the demons is specialized for sowing thoughts of sorrow (depression) but there are other demons of envy, malice, rancour and so on.  And the demons would have no work if we didn’t have emotional tendencies to sin that corresponded to their specialties.

The best treatment of the emotional tendencies to sin and the evolution of a tempting thought is found in the Ladder of Divine Ascent.  John of Sinai’s treatment is largely based on Evagrius although he produces a much more refined analysis.

So basically what Elder Paisios was saying to these people is that they were allowing themselves to engage with tempting thoughts sown by a demon or by their own emotional tendencies to sin.  Since that was not healthy and interfering with these peoples’ lives, better for them to make an effort to think positive thoughts instead of the negative thoughts sown by a demon, their own passions or even on account of some biochemical imbalance.  (Since Elder Paisios on occasion sent people to see a secular psychiatrist he would surely have recognized the possibility that there might be an organic issue that needed medical attention.)

We ourselves would remark that there are people who always look on the dark side, always focusing on what can go wrong.  There are also people who always look on the bright side—the personal executioner employed by the late Ibn Saud, King of Saudi Arabia, was said to be a jovial fellow with nary a depressive bone in his body—and that is probably preferable to being depressive.  However, to make a serious decision it helps to be realistic, neither unrealistically depressive nor unrealistically optimistic.

Now this is our interpretation and we see nothing wrong with counselling people not to succumb to the temptation to think negative thoughts.  Now Martha is correct that for most people the only way for them to resist such negative thoughts is to pray.  We doubt that Elder Paisios would disagree.  However his point, we think, is that unless you recognize that you are being foolish in accepting to think such negative thoughts it’s not even going to occur to you to ask Jesus to save you from them.

Now for the rest, we do not know what Martha thinks that Elder Paisios taught that is so objectionable about inner powers and so forth.  We are quite sure, however, that Elder Paisios was quite Orthodox.

Now, as for Elder Porphyrios.  We are not aware of a similar teaching about negative thoughts by Elder Porphyrios, and certainly not in Bios kai Logoi.  What we recall from that book is a discussion of the eternal Church, Elder Porphyrios’ reliving of the Apocalypse to John on Patmos and so on.  Of course we could be wrong.  It’s been a while since we read the book.

Now is Elder Porphyrios teaching New Age and Occultism?  We hope not.  He was just made a saint of the Orthodox Church by the Ecumenical Patriarch at the beginning of December, less than a month ago.  So it’s not Elder Porphyrios any more, it’s Saint Porphyrios.

Next, Elder Ephraim of Arizona.  Martha’s complaint does not seem to be with Elder Ephraim himself, who George tells us is highly respected on Mt Athos, as having been a major factor in the renewal of Mount Athos by the disciples of Elder Joseph the Hesychast.  Martha’s complaint seems to be that all of Ephraim’s Abbots and Abbesses are also clairvoyant.  Too easy she thinks.  We ourselves have no doubt that Elder Ephraim is a holy man.  We ourselves do not doubt that he is also clairvoyant.  However, we have no information on his disciples, if they are clairvoyant and if so where they got it.  The statement in the Ladder of Divine Ascent by St John of Sinai, that it is shameful for an elder to pray that a disciple receive a charism that he himself does not have, says to us that if Elder Ephraim’s disciples are genuinely clairvoyant it is because Elder Ephraim prayed for them to receive the charism.  However, as we said, we have no opinion on the matter.

What Martha could do is ask Elder Ephraim.

Now what about us?  Orthodox Monk?  Martha is worried that we might be a disciple of Elder Ephraim.  Well, again, she could always ask Elder Ephraim.  For how would she know if we were telling the truth if we said we were?  Or if we said we weren’t?

We said all we have to say on our monastic state and affiliation in a post called Who is Orthodox Monk?.

Martha replied with two emails, which she has also given us permission to discuss publicly.

Here they are, again edited extensively for clarity:

[1^st Email:]  Thanks for posting in reply, but let me correct you, Orthodox Monk.  I never said or implied that I was worried about your being affiliated with Elder Ephraim.  I only asked you to which monastery you belong (meaning name and country).  I did also ask from curiosity if you were under Ephraim (which you still have not answered).  Please do not confuse my words.

Secondly you made it sound like I was attacking the elders, which clearly I wasn’t!  If you read the books I mentioned you would clearly see where I got my questions of concern.  As for the Ephraimites I am sure you have heard all the rumours circulating about them, especially the death of Scott Nevins.  Now why couldn’t Elder Ephraim save his life?  And have helped him since he lived there 7 years?  That is, if Elder Ephraim is not in prelest?  Before you judge anyone on your blog or accuse them of criticizing, just remember that just because it didn’t happen to you, it doesn’t make it any less true.  I thank you for your response but obviously you are with world orthodoxy (ecumenism) so I expected no less.

[2^nd Email:]  Also one more thing: There are many cults and false elders out there.  There is nothing wrong with people doing their own homework by asking questions to learn and to discern the spirit of the times.  If this troubles anyone then this is an indication that they are trying to mask something.  True Orthodox Christian people should be proud of those who ask questions and want to learn the true meaning of things.  They should encourage questions and not oppose them, and not expect only blind obedience to whoever claims to be an elder or even Orthodox.

Here’s our answer:  Martha, first of all, no one is obliged to read our blog.  If you don’t like it you don’t have to read it.  We have written several hundred thousand words on the blog (enough for a number of books) and everything is there for anyone who wants to read it.  Our views should be quite clear.  No, we haven’t given you a direct answer whether we are or are not affiliated with Elder Ephraim.  To do so one way or another would be to say more about ourselves than we care to.  If that bothers you, then stop reading the blog.

Next, of the three books you mentioned, we have read two; we haven’t read the Gurus book.  It was admittedly some time ago that we read the two books but we don’t remember any questions arising in our mind of the sort you are posing.

Next, no we are not up to date on ‘the Ephraimites I am sure you have heard all the rumours circulating about them, especially the death of Scott Nevins’.  By and large we avoid that.  Sorry.  In particular we have not studied what happened in the case of Scott Nevins and have no intention of doing so.  Nor do we intend to spend any time on the possibility that Elder Ephraim is in prelest.  It’s just not who we are, Martha.

Next, you write ‘Before you judge anyone on your blog or accuse them of criticizing, just remember that just because it didn’t happen to you, it doesn’t make it any less true.  I thank you for your response but obviously you are with world orthodoxy (ecumenism) so I expected no less.’  We are not sure what you mean.  Do you mean that we are criticizing someone else or that we are criticizing you?  Our strongest criticism of you was that you have a tendency to listen to your bad thoughts.  If it is you that you mean we have been criticizing, then ‘because it didn’t happen to you, it doesn’t make it any less true’ suggests that you have had some bad experience, unless we completely misunderstand what you are saying.  If you have had a bad experience, then we suggest you speak to a clergyman face to face.  A blog is not the place to sort out personal bad experiences.

Martha replied.  We will let her have the last word:

I did not have nor do I have any intention to read your blog.  I only wrote a simple email on the ‘positive thinking’ idea, which you took way out of proportion to my intent, in cold heartless replies.  No, I have not had any bad experiences and even if I had that would not excuse the fact that the Ephraimites are in prelest!  Moreover, there are many complaints about them from thousands who have had similar experiences.  You can choose to cover up for the wrongdoings of the Ephraimites but just don’t forget that people are not stupid!!!  The truth always comes out in the end!  And I don’t even believe that you live in an Orthodox monastery let alone that you are a tonsured monk, just going by your cold accusatory, assuming replies.  I am done talking with you!

Martha later sent us another email:

Dear Orthodox Monk:

I have realized that I made a terrible mistake with regard to my ‘positive thinking’ query and about Elder Ephraim being in prelest.  I did some more research and I have found out that I was terribly wrong.  Thank you.

A Comment on our Post ‘A Charismatic Question by Email’

We have received a comment on our post ‘A Charismatic Question by Email’. We think that it is worth discussing this comment by ‘Commodus Firmus’ in a blog post. We have edited the comment for clarity.

Hi, the use of the name of Jesus is never in vain and what seems out of place and incompatible today might be a perfect fit tomorrow. If anyone wants to use the Jesus Prayer only good will come of it.

I grew up in Greece. On the one hand, I was steeped in Orthodoxy and the Jesus prayer from a very early age (I discovered the prayer when I was 8-10 and then when I was around 13 I tried it for the first time).

On the other hand, however, the institutionalized Orthodox Church of Greece (as a social structure) was so irrelevant and so unsuccessful in communicating its message that it was (and for many is) just repulsive. For years I was just one more ‘nominal Christian’. The Jesus prayer was the only indication that underneath the rather repulsive visible institutionalized ‘state religion’ there might be hiding a ‘pearl of great price’.

Then I met Protestants—some (nominally) still Greek ‘Orthodox’ but with evangelical tendencies—and also Pentecostals. In sharp contrast to the state church, these people looked as if they practiced what they preached and they taught me to read the Bible too. I was still trying the Jesus prayer every now and then, never ‘breaking’ its secret yet on every occasion I was left with the impression that there is a secret in this short repeated prayer. So I always returned to it. First every 2-3 years, then every 1-2 years, then even more often, until 30+ years after I discovered the Jesus Prayer it became a regular part of my life and returned my heart to the Orthodox Church. I still feel ashamed of the quality of leadership of the Orthodox Church—but then, am I any better? Yet every time some (over?)zealous Orthodox—seemingly out of petty antagonism—speaks ill of other denominations it pains my heart because I learned good things from them. Wasn’t it the Lord who said, ‘from their fruit you will know them’? Well, they are not perfect. It pains my heart too to see some of the doctrinal errors of the non-Orthodox, yet I see the good fruit as well and close my mouth.

The bottom line of all this: If some people want to practice the Jesus prayer, let them practice it—even help them to practice it—be they atheists, Buddhists or Protestants or whatever. The Name of Jesus has a power of its own to work unexpected wonders in the hearts of those praying, no matter who or what they are. Thank God no one has copyrighted the Jesus Prayer and no one has trademarked it! If fact I sometimes think that it works a ‘secret operation’ to bring people back to Orthodoxy. I don’t fear that the Jesus Prayer is something people can exploit commercially but see it more as a cornerstone that can be the foundation for the return [to Orthodoxy? to Jesus?] of those who will put their trust on it or a stumbling block that will crush those who will try to exploit it.

This comment is interesting for its clear expression of a person who although nominally Orthodox is a Protestant in spirit.

Back Beat 4

The easiest thing to do is to respond to specific passages of Alice’s two emails.

Thank you again for your answer. I was very relieved and happy to hear your wise words and I am very grateful for you for answering my questions. If you still have time to help me in my journey I would be most grateful but I understand completely if this subject has taken too much of your time.

The problem is not so much our time, although we often delay because we are preoccupied, but the issue of our not being the appropriate person to answer some of the questions we receive, and the Internet not being the appropriate place to solve intensely personal issues—not to mention that some of the issues raised in this and other emails are actually quite difficult.

I know that one of the reasons that I have thoughts that music is somehow sinful and does not lead to God and maybe even leads people to idolatry, is that I am not yet a member of the Orthodox Church. Because of that I have no one to rely on in regard to questions like this. It would really mean a lot to me if I could find some spiritual father who could help me with my spiritual life. But this is a question of me, not of you I suppose.

Spiritual direction, counselling and fatherhood have to happen face-to-face; they can’t happen—for a variety of reasons, including the lack of confidentiality in email—over the Internet. Admittedly it is hard to find a good Orthodox spiritual father at any time, and especially in countries that have only a minority Orthodox population. However, it is impossible to engage in a serious personal discussion by email: in the very nature of things there is a great deal of filtering that goes on so that it is very hard to get a sense of who exactly the stranger is who has approached you by email. This is true not only of Alice but of all our interlocutors who approach Orthodox Monk. We, Orthodox Monk, really do not feel that we are getting a full image of anyone who sends us an email. Perhaps a great saint with gifts of clairvoyance might be able to handle such a ministry but we cannot. Hence we discourage our blog readers from expecting us to guide them. Alice quite rightly and quite sensibly does not expect that from us but we want to say this clearly for the sake of all of our respected blog readers.

As you probably understand, the Internet is full of all sorts of stuff and sites like this list of the passions by St Peter of Damascus, where ‘flute-playing’ is listed as one of the passions. This does not make me feel comfortable in the least.

As we understand it, in pagan times music was used in pagan rituals which verged on debauchery, apart from the fact that they were devil worship. Flute-playing was part of that. So when we see flute-playing in such a list as this we are really encountering an ancient attitude to pagan ritual. It might be similar today to consider what a pious Orthodox reaction might be to heavy metal with satanic lyrics. However, we doubt that playing a Bach partita on the violin is to be considered in the same light.

The only thing I’ve understood is that in Orthodox Church the Tradition and the Holy Canons are not understood in legal terms but more as a guide to Christian life and ascesis.

It’s a little more complicated. While Roman Catholicism developed in a very legalistic way, especially in the work of Thomas Aquinas, and while Tradition is properly defined in the Orthodox Church as the presence of the Holy Spirit in the Church, we cannot completely relativize the canons. However, we can certainly look at what they were intended to accomplish when they were formulated and consider whether the same conditions obtain today. We personally think that in cases where there is not a serious moral issue—say, abortion—then a case can be made for flexibility in the application of the canons given different circumstances today. Certainly if there is a canon of Hippolytus that one should not baptize a music teacher (we do not know), surely today one would be flexible if someone approached for baptism who was teaching little kids to play the violin so they could play Bach.

I hope I have understood this correctly. I might also answer to this that I might possibly understand this better as a member of the Church.

It is true that some things we understand better having entered the Church.

As for my questions, if you have time I would like to ask you what the difference is between the sentiments and the passions. You wrote about the sentiments, how we Westerners are used to thinking of Christianity as being only about the sentiments. Are emotions and passions the same thing?

We think that this is important. In the West, since the day of Thomas Aquinas especially, one thinks that there is only the intellect and the emotions. In the Orthodox spiritual tradition there is the intellect and the emotions and the heart as the spiritual centre of the person. In the West, if one is not intellectual he is emotional—in the good or neutral sense. In the Orthodox Church when one is spiritual he is not necessarily either intellectual or emotional. This issue crops up in the practice of the Jesus Prayer, since in the Orthodox Church the Fathers speak of bringing the mind into the heart there to practice the Jesus Prayer. In terms of Western received psychology this makes no sense whatsoever and can only be interpreted as an emotional or sentimental practice of the Jesus Prayer with a mental concentration on the region of the heart. But that is not what is meant. What is meant is that the person enters consciously into the heart as into their spiritual centre, not their emotional centre. Now the person who brings the mind into the heart does not cease to have an intellect and emotions, and these are harnessed to the practice of the Jesus Prayer in the spiritual centre of the person.

The connection between the sentiments, or emotions, and the passions is this. The passions are the emotions directed towards vice, not virtue. The goal of the ascetic is to purify his emotions so that his emotions are directed to the virtues not to the vices. For every emotional drive in a person, there is a virtue and there is a vice. Fallen man has his emotions directed to the vices; the goal after baptism is to work to direct our emotions to the virtues. This is called ‘purifying the passions’.

Now when we say that Western music concentrates on the sentiments or emotions, what we mean is that Western music does not appeal to the spiritual part of the person centred in the heart as described briefly above, but to the emotions. In particular, demonic music works on the emotions to direct them to the vices, whereas healthier music works on the emotions to direct them towards virtue, or at least towards a greater serenity or even an Aristotelian tragic catharsis. Spiritual music would work more on the spiritual part of the person, so as to harmonize with raising the mind to God, either through the services of the Church or through the Jesus Prayer, or through prayer in a more general sense.

I quite often have the feeling that good music can teach us a small bit of truth. It is not the Truth but it can at least maybe lead people closer to Truth.

As Fr Seraphim Rose of Platina wrote, music can warm the soul; as St Barsanuphius of Optina wrote, ‘When you have children, teach them music. But of course real music—angelic music, not dances and songs. Music assists the development of spiritual perception. The soul becomes refined. It begins to understand spiritual music as well.’ I also think that Theophan the Recluse also said things similar to this. Of this, however, I am again not fully sure.

While this should be understood in light of what is said just above, it should be recognized that in its main outlines 19^th Century Russian religious music was actually Western classical romantic music.

Perhaps I am not totally wrong in thinking that this means ‘good music’, which nowadays (maybe not at the time of Fathers?) can also be instrumental music or songs not specifically composed for liturgical use in the Church. The exhortation of St Basil to young men concerning Greek literature comes to mind as it says ‘There is also good music that David, the Sacred Psalmist, used.’ Tradition also reports that Pythagoras, by changing the melodic scale of the flautist that was leading a merry-making, changed the mood of a drunk crowd so that they became ashamed and went back home. (Quotations not exact but in my own words since I don't have the source here at the moment)

This should make sense in light of what is said above. It doesn’t surprise us that changing the melodic scale of the flute would change the mood of the drunken crowd. That is what we would expect.

I’m the most grateful for you for letting me write these words to you. I don't remember whether I told you before but I suffer from panic attacks and from depression and I see a therapist for that condition. I know that one of the reasons behind all these doubts is that condition. That and a promise I once made to God, during one of my first panic attacks, that if this terrible feeling goes away, I will do for God anything He wants me to do. For this I am at the same time both afraid (for not doing what He wants from me) and not afraid (since I trust that He will lead me if I try to find His meaning for my life).

We are not professionally qualified to address this condition.

I just wanted to say that so that I can be honest. I am not crazy and I hope that you will not worry about me; I just hope that maybe someone like me and with questions like me, will find at least some answers while reading your lovely blog.

...

When I wrote to you about suffering from panic attacks and depression, if it somehow is needed or helpful for your answer, I really don’t mind if you mention it. I just meant that perhaps that is not what your blog is all about if I’ve understood rightly. I had the feeling that your blog is more about issues that are of a more universal type than personal problems such as my health.

This is quite true for the reasons given above.

Still, at the same time I have the feeling that somehow it is because of pride that I won’t give up thinking all the time about music and questions about its dangers in regard to my becoming a member of the Orthodox Church and in regard to my wish to get a bit closer to God. I sometimes feel that if even God Himself were to say to me that no one is going to tell me to stop being a musician and a music teacher, I would not believe Him.

This is something that should be discussed face-to-face with the priest.

This is actually the feeling I get when I pray for God to help me [that no one is going to tell me to stop]. But again, I am not sure about the answers I receive in prayer and for that reason I seek outside assistance on the matter. My prayer answer is a feeling I get that somehow my place in the world is in music. For that I seek to find help from the Church, to find trust and not to get lost in my own thoughts and feelings.

Alice quite sensibly does not want to rely on her own discernment, and God will respect her for that, but as we pointed out the Internet is not the appropriate venue; a face-to-face meeting with a priest is the appropriate venue. For that reason we cannot go into as much detail as a priest might.

We hope that all goes well in your life, Alice. May God bless you.

Back Beat 3

We have had a bit of a correspondence with Alice the violinist from Manhattan, our interlocutor and friend in Back Beat and Back Beat 2. As we have pointed out, Alice is most definitely not Alice and she’s definitely not from Manhattan. We have delayed replying to her because of the delicacy of the issues of personal health that she raises in her emails below. However, we think that we are now in a position to reply to her. Her emails also follow on from our previous posts since they again concern issues in converting to the Orthodox Church. We will again post the emails—edited for grammar, syntax and style—and then reply in the next post.

Subject: From the classical musician who wrote to your blog

From: Alice

Date: 10/10/12

To: Orthodox Monk

Dear Monk,

Thank you again for your answer. I was very relieved and happy to hear your wise words and I am very grateful for you for answering my questions. If you still have time to help me in my journey I would be most grateful but I understand completely if this subject has taken too much of your time.

I know that one of the reasons that I have thoughts that music is somehow sinful and does not lead to God and maybe even leads people to idolatry, is that I am not yet a member of the Orthodox Church. Because of that I have no one to rely on in regard to questions like this. It would really mean a lot to me if I could find some spiritual father who could help me with my spiritual life. But this is a question of me, not of you I suppose.

As you probably understand, the Internet is full of all sorts of stuff and sites like this list of the passions by St Peter of Damascus, where ‘flute-playing’ is listed as one of the passions. This does not make me feel comfortable in the least. There are also other sayings of Saints and Church Fathers against ‘secular’ instrumental music. As I wrote to you before, I think that this is due to the fact that in the time of St Peter of Damascus flute-playing was something quite different from flute-playing in our time. The same probably goes also for other famous sayings of Church Fathers condemning instrumental music. But of course I am not sure of this. I read that some Canon of Hippolytus even forbids the Church to baptize a music teacher(!) but nowadays I think, as you wrote, that music is even thought of as something good (or maybe it’s better to say ‘good music is even thought of as something good ’ where what is good is a matter of spiritual discernment, just as you wrote). I think this is because music has changed, not because Tradition has changed. Tradition has always been the same (‘Music that arouses passions is bad whereas music that calms and soothes us and perhaps draws us nearer to God is good’). The only thing I’ve understood is that in Orthodox Church the Tradition and the Holy Canons are not understood in legal terms but more as a guide to Christian life and ascesis. I hope I have understood this correctly. I might also answer to this that I might possibly understand this better as a member of the Church. But as I said, I don’t know and maybe this is something I would want to study more.

As for my questions, if you have time I would like to ask you what the difference is between the sentiments and the passions. You wrote about the sentiments, how we Westerners are used to thinking of Christianity as being only about the sentiments. Are emotions and passions the same thing?

I quite often have the feeling that good music can teach us a small bit of truth. It is not the Truth but it can at least maybe lead people closer to Truth.

As Fr Seraphim Rose of Platina wrote, music can warm the soul; as St Barsanuphius of Optina wrote, ‘When you have children, teach them music. But of course real music—angelic music, not dances and songs. Music assists the development of spiritual perception. The soul becomes refined. It begins to understand spiritual music as well.’ I also think that Theophan the Recluse also said things similar to this. Of this, however, I am again not fully sure.

Perhaps I am not totally wrong in thinking that this means ‘good music’, which nowadays (maybe not at the time of Fathers?) can also be instrumental music or songs not specifically composed for liturgical use in the Church. The exhortation of St Basil to young men concerning Greek literature comes to mind as it says ‘There is also good music that David, the Sacred Psalmist, used.’ Tradition also reports that Pythagoras, by changing the melodic scale of the flautist that was leading a merry-making, changed the mood of a drunk crowd so that they became ashamed and went back home. (Quotations not exact but in my own words since I don't have the source here at the moment)

This is a very big question in my life and has been for quite a number of years already and, as I wrote before, I have never got an answer that fully satisfied me. This is maybe except for your answers and some quotations I've read from Elder Porphyrios (who said that music is good but spiritual chanting better, if I understood right) and Seraphim Rose and some Optina Elders. That the answers don't satisfy me, I think, can be also due to pride and thinking that I know better than everyone else.

I am the most grateful for you for letting me write these words to you. I don't remember whether I told you before but I suffer from panic attacks and from depression and I see a therapist for that condition. I know that one of the reasons behind all these doubts is that condition. That and a promise I once made to God, during one of my first panic attacks, that if this terrible feeling goes away, I will do for God anything He wants me to do. For this I am at the same time both afraid (for not doing what He wants from me) and not afraid (since I trust that He will lead me if I try to find His meaning for my life).

As for the last paragraph, I don't think was absolutely necessary for your blog and maybe these kind of things would be more suitable for confession than writing in email since I understand that your blog is more of common things than questions concerning spiritual health of people.

I just wanted to say that so that I can be honest. I am not crazy and I hope that you will not worry about me; I just hope that maybe someone like me and with questions like me, will find at least some answers while reading your lovely blog.

Thank you once more and I honestly hope that I have not been of a trouble to you.

Best regards from Manhattan,

Alice

Subject: From the classical musician who wrote to your blog

From: Alice

Date: 12/10/12

To: Orthodox Monk

Dear Monk,

Thank you once more.

Yes, I am a violin player and teacher here in Manhattan. I’ve been playing chamber music all my life and I’ve been a teacher for a number of years.

When I wrote to you about suffering from panic attacks and depression, if it somehow is needed or helpful for your answer, I really don’t mind if you mention it. I just meant that perhaps that is not what your blog is all about if I’ve understood rightly. I had the feeling that your blog is more about issues that are of a more universal type than personal problems such as my health. Of this I am not sure of as well. Of course it would be of greatest help if you can help me with that question as well but as I mentioned it most certainly is not something that I ask from you.

What I was trying to write in that rather messy ending of my email was that it may help you to understand why I am being almost obsessive about this matter of music. I want to write both that I really respect your answers and that I don’t keep on asking the same questions again and again because of distrust or disbelief or, even worse, lack of respect. No, it is because of my problems.

Still, at the same time I have the feeling that somehow it is because of pride that I won’t give up thinking all the time about music and questions about its dangers in regard to my becoming a member of the Orthodox Church and in regard to my wish to get a bit closer to God. I sometimes feel that if even God Himself were to say to me that no one is going to tell me to stop being a musician and a music teacher, I would not believe Him. This is actually the feeling I get when I pray for God to help me [that no one is going to tell me to stop]. But again, I am not sure about the answers I receive in prayer and for that reason I seek outside assistance on the matter. My prayer answer is a feeling I get that somehow my place in the world is in music. For that I seek to find help from the Church, to find trust and not to get lost in my own thoughts and feelings.

That I don’t really trust anyone, I think, is pride and for that I seek help from the Church. Maybe some day I will find at least some trust again. Maybe that is what the ascetical struggle is about.

Again I’m sorry for writing to you such a long and personal message. It is just as I’ve said that I don’t have any spiritual father to write to and the monastery is so far away from Manhattan that it would be hard to get there. That is also because I work as a musician all the time including weekends and I really do not have much time, which is most certainly not good. Maybe some day.

I am the most thankful to you,

Alice

Non-closed Communion 2

There are two separate issues in Jonah Wilders’ first email. First is the objective reality of what Jonah describes about inter-communion in a small Orthodox parish with a number of mixed marriages. Second is the fact that as Jonah later remarks, it appears his fear was, for the moment at least, unfounded. Let us dispose of the second issue first.

There is a special kind of temptation that sneaks up on recent converts. It is a temptation that something is happening that is not according to the rules. That is not to say that the rules are unimportant; quite the contrary, the temptation works because the rules are important. In such a case where a recent convert feels that something might not be happening according to the rules they should discuss it with the parish priest, with whom they presumably have a trust relationship since otherwise why did they join that parish? If necessary they should also discuss it with older trusted members of the parish and even with the Bishop. In other words in such a case a person should establish the objective reality of the situation in such a way as to send the temptation running through shining the light of reality on the situation.

Now let us look at the first issue, the objective issue of inter-communion in an Orthodox setting. We would like our readers to reread Some ranting and some questions 2 before continuing since we will be treating this post as a continuation of that one: the underlying issues are closely related.

In the classical understanding of the Orthodox Church, one becomes Orthodox by baptism, as discussed in Some ranting … 2. Of course the Orthodox Church chrismates immediately after baptism so that the mystery that corresponds to the laying on of hands by the Apostles for the reception of the Holy Spirit is performed right after baptism. The Orthodox believer, even the infant, is a full member of the Orthodox Church at this stage. The next stage, performed immediately after baptism and chrismation even for infants, is for the newly received member of the Orthodox Church to be communicated with the Body and Blood of Christ. It is the communion in the Body and Blood of Christ that perfects the joining of the newly received member of the Orthodox Church to Christ. As Christ himself says:

I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world. The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying, How can this man give us [his] flesh to eat? Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you. Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him. As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father: so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me. This is that bread which came down from heaven: not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead: he that eateth of this bread shall live for ever. (John 6, 51–59, KJV)

In the classical self-understanding of the Orthodox Church, communion is received after baptism and chrismation. It is never received before. Moreover, the Apostle Paul writes the following:

For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, That the Lord Jesus the [same] night in which he was betrayed took bread: And when he had given thanks, he brake [it,] and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me. After the same manner also [he took] the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink [it,] in remembrance of me. For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink [this] cup, ye do shew the Lord’s death till he come. Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of [that] bread, and drink of [that] cup. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord’s body. For this cause many [are] weak and sickly among you, and many sleep. (1 Corinthians 11, 23–30, KJV)

So on the one hand the reception of the Body and Blood of Christ joins us to Christ and to the other members of the Orthodox Church; on the other hand it is extremely dangerous for someone to receive the Body and Blood of Christ who is not a member of the Orthodox Church, or even a member of the Orthodox Church but unworthy. This is not merely a matter of ‘obeying the rules’ but clearly a matter of the danger of ‘eating and drinking damnation’ with the possible result that the person become ‘weak and sickly’ or even die. There’s a downside risk to the person doing this. However, it should be pointed out that confession before each communion is not a dogmatic requirement. What is a dogmatic requirement is that there should not be serious unforgiven sin before communion.

Now Jonah describes a situation of a struggling parish in a country where the Orthodox are in a small minority, and where many of the parishioners are married to non-Orthodox and where the children of such marriages might not even be raised Orthodox. It so happens that Jonah’s country is very secularized with a very small minority of practising Christians of any denomination.

Now some very liberal priests and even Bishops of the Orthodox Church are willing to give communion to non-members of the Orthodox Church. This is completely separate from the issue we discussed in Some ranting … 2 concerning how non-Orthodox Christians are to be received into the Orthodox Church. In other words it might be quite easy to become Orthodox in these circumstances but the person approaching for Orthodox communion might not want to become Orthodox. But since they are Christian they are communicated anyway. We have not studied the reasoning of these priests and Bishops but we suspect that what is involved is an extreme form of the ‘Branch Theory’. They believe, we think, that the non-Orthodox Christian is equally Christian with the Orthodox and is fully entitled to receive Orthodox communion. These people seem to believe that divisions among Christians are a matter of unimportant ecclesiastical politics which can be dispensed with in the interests of higher spiritual practice.

The Roman Catholic position is a little better thought out. The Roman Catholic Church permits members of the Roman Catholic Church to receive Orthodox Communion if a Roman Catholic church and communion are unavailable (we don’t think that there has to be a serious situation such as a danger of death). This is consistent with Roman Catholic ecclesiology. However, the Roman Curia didn’t bother to get permission from the Orthodox Church for this practice before promulgating it, so we have a situation in majority Orthodox countries where Roman Catholics approach the Orthodox chalice with a good Roman Catholic conscience only to be turned away because they are not permitted by the Orthodox Church to receive communion.

Of course the Roman Catholic Church reciprocates, happily communicating Orthodox, something the Orthodox Church considers a serious sin. We know of a case where a member of the Roman Catholic Church was living in Saudi Arabia and attending a ‘secret’ Roman Catholic church—the Saudi authorities knew about it but turned a blind eye to the presence of a practising Roman Catholic priest on their soil. However this person later thought of becoming Orthodox. He told us that he discussed with the local Roman Catholic priest the idea that the company that was sponsoring the ‘secret’ Roman Catholic church—along with the ‘secret’ Protestant church and pastor—could arrange for a ‘secret’ Orthodox church and ‘secret’ Orthodox priest to complete the set of ‘secret’ Christian churches. The Roman Catholic priest, who was happily communicating members of the Greek Orthodox Church, was none too happy with the idea.

Moreover, in more Protestant ecumenical circles there is a tendency to want to use inter-communion as a means of ecumenism, as a means of establishing closer ecclesiastical relations among Christian denominations, rather than to see it as the prize to be attained once the ecumenical movement reaches its goal of the full union of all Christians. Moreover, for obscure reasons, the ‘Holy Grail’ of inter-communion for some of these ecumenists is inter-communion with the Orthodox. We occasionally hear of episodes where a non-Orthodox sneaks up to the Orthodox chalice knowing full well that they are not allowed hoping that the presiding priest or even Bishop will communicate them anyway so as to avoid an embarrassing scene. Sometimes they do.

The Orthodox Church has never accepted that non-members of the Orthodox Church can receive communion in the Orthodox Church. There is no sense that this is an elastic norm that can in certain cases be relaxed by economy.

Now clearly the parish situation that Jonah is describing is even more complicated because of the issue of mixed marriages. However, the fact remains that the Orthodox Church has never sanctioned the communion of non-Orthodox.

Let us look at what Jonah writes:

… If heterodox are admitted to communion is this something we should just accept as being in line with God’s will as revealed to the bishop and priest?

In our opinion, no.

Or should this matter be taken up with the priest and bishop and synod if necessary?

Knowing something about Jonah’s ecclesiastical situation we would recommend discussing it with the Bishop when and if there is a serious issue.

Or would it be better to leave things alone and find another parish which does not have this ‘custom’?

In our opinion, yes. If they are set on doing inter-communion, the best thing is to go elsewhere, although admittedly there may be practical problems in a setting in which the Orthodox are a small minority.

Is it spiritually damaging to partake of communion when we suspect that there may be heterodox partaking of it although we lack certainty?

In our opinion, no. At the point that it becomes objectively clear that the practice is happening, then we think that a member of the parish would have to inquire into what is going on and, if the practice is systematic and intentional, to go elsewhere. If of course there is some confusion and a mistake has been made, that is quite different.

In summary, then, my questions/concerns are:

1a. If we think communion is being given to heterodox in our parish, is this permissible by economy and if so do we have a duty to understand what this economy comprises?

In our opinion no for inter-communion by economy but yes for a duty to understand what this economy is all about. See above.

1b. If communion for heterodox cannot be given ‘by economy’ should we raise this with the parish council, priest, bishop in that order?

In our opinion, yes. See above.

1c. Is this really none of our business as parishioners and if we are properly prepared, through confession prayer and fasting, should we receive the Eucharist with joy and thanks and not concern ourselves with anything else?

In our opinion, it is our business. See above.

2. If we have received communion at the same time as heterodox does this invalidate the sacrament and/or require us to undertake some form of penance even though we did so unknowingly?

In our opinion, no. The mystery of the Body and Blood of Christ can not be invalidated in this sense. It remains the Body and Blood of Christ. But see what St Paul says above about receiving unworthily. If someone who is not Orthodox receives communion without our knowledge, that has nothing to do with us. But if we know and consent then there is an issue with our own conscience.

I sincerely hope that my questions are, and continue to remain, hypothetical. I apologize in advance if it appears that I am judging others or jumping to conclusions. It's not a ‘them’ and ‘us’ situation. Though myself unworthy I am never the less concerned for the spiritual welfare of all in our parish, Orthodox and heterodox.

We did not have the sense that there was any judgement.

Pretty quiet on your blog...

Well, we’ve managed to wake up.

I can't find any evidence of inter-communion in my parish so I've stopped worrying about it.

We were not surprised. It seemed likely to us that this was the temptation spoken of earlier.

Of more concern is legislation to be introduced about same-sex marriage which will have an impact on education and further undermine family values. Trying to raise this in the parish has only been divisive with some concerned that we’re being ‘obsessive’.

In our opinion, this is a serious matter of Orthodox morality. However, there is another temptation, that of joining with hard-right Christian Protestants motivated by a spirit of pride and hatred to engage in unseemly political agitation. As we remarked in Some ranting … 2, the Holy Spirit is the Spirit of Truth and Love; it is not a spirit of pride, anger and hatred—or even of unseemly political agitation in the streets.

So not much I can do about this (Orthodox count for very few votes in relation to the population of my country) except pray that God will have mercy on us.

May God help you, your parish and your country.