Saint Paul ends his letter to the Romans with a chapter most people skip. Chapter 16 is just names—Tryphaena, Tryphosa, Persis, Rufus, Asyncritus, Phlegon. Thirty-some people, most of whom we know nothing about except that Paul loved them and wanted to say so. It reads like a man scrolling through his contacts and pausing on each one: “she worked hard for you... they were in Christ before me... greet my beloved Epaenetus.”

I’ve been thinking about that chapter a bit lately, because I owe you an explanation for my periodic silence, and the explanation isn’t just a list of things I’ve been up to—the reality is more like a list of names.

Localized Ministry at Saint Mark

The catechism ministry at Saint Mark Greek Orthodox Church in Boca Raton has grown again, currently to about 60 inquirers and catechumens. New people walk through the door every week, and the team that receives them is real: Father Mark, Father Anastasios, Frank, John, Romy, the deacons, several other volunteers, and me. We have a Discover Orthodoxy table every week at coffee hour—a place to greet newcomers and give them somewhere to land—and a dual team during our annual cultural festival. I meet people pretty regularly for coffee and catechetical conversation—I sit with them and walk through the Bible. I teach. In the last month alone, I taught two evening evening class and a Sunday catechism session.

Probably the biggest thing I’ve done over the summer is put together a 26-week written lesson plans for our Discover Orthodoxy ministry. What we are moving into now is having a teaching rotation so the team can carry it together—handouts, schedules, the whole infrastructure for two “semesters” of catechesis.

This Substack is an extension of that ministry. When I’m not posting, it’s usually because I’m doing the work the posts are about—and doing it with people who make such a difference in the 3D world here in South Florida.

The Baptism

We baptized Alexandra (“Sasha”) Sophia. I need to tell you about that day, because it was the kind of day that makes everything else make sense.

Sasha, our daughter who was born earlier this year—went under the water and came up belonging to Christ, and the church was full of people who brought her there. My mother flew in from California. My mother-in-law and father-in-law came from Arizona. Sasha’s godmother was there. They sat in the nave alongside people I never could have predicted would be in my life five years ago.

There were my godsons—young men who came into the Church and who I’ve walked with, and who showed up for my daughter the way you show up for family. There were long-time and cradle Orthodox friends who’ve become essential to us, the kind of people who are just always there, quietly, reliably. There were partners in ministry—people I teach alongside, plan alongside, build things alongside, run things by. And there were whole families who came to Saint Mark in the last couple of years as curious outsiders and converted and are now our good friends. Our lives have become intertwined.

After the baptism, 25 of us went out to brunch. Twenty-five people. Our kids played together at breakfast as we broke bread together at a very, very long table and enjoyed each other’s company. I looked around that restaurant and saw a web of relationships that didn’t exist a few years ago—nearly all of them connected to a specific community in Boca Raton and the strange, beautiful fact that we keep showing up there.

Gregory, our son who turns 5 this month, was the best helper a dad could ask for. He took it seriously. He knew something important was happening to his sister, and he wanted to be closely involved to the point that he would mimic Fr. Mark’s blessing of the water with the sign of the cross.

That day is in large part the reason I’ve been quiet lately. Not so much because it took time away from writing (and it did), but because it reminded me what the writing is for. And sometimes it’s more important to focus on what is presented in front of you, rather than what is posted online.

Podcasts & Articles

My podcast Brews, Beards, and Shipwrecks is still putting out content.

Bad Books of the Bible isn’t publishing right now, but we’re recording—going through the Wisdom of Sirach chapter by chapter with rotating clergy guests. I’ve also been teaching a catechism-Sirach integration class that pulls those threads together. All of that material will eventually show up here in written and recorded form, complete with downloadable slide decks.

On top of that, I have dozens of practical catechetical articles in queue, but they need to be further developed, refined, edited, and incorporated into a planned release schedule. The pipeline is full. The spigot is just slow.

Share Simply Orthodox

Music

I’m finishing the third Royal Ruckus album inspired by Fred Rogers (here is #2). I have another album coming soon, a collaboration with Eligh of Living Legends, who is one of the most respected artists in the indie rap game. But it’s not just me and Eligh. It’s DJ Sean P on the decks and Cookbook in the mix—the people behind the production and beats. These are friendships that happen to also be creative partnerships, which is the best kind.

School

I’m in two graduate programs. A Master of Theological Studies at Antiochian House of Studies—coursework finished several years ago, with my thesis proposal in progress now. And I have also started working on a Doctor of Ministry in Christian Education—several classes done, aiming to be dissertation-ready by this time next year. Two programs, one brain, not enough coffee in South Florida to bridge the gap.

Day Job

I became Director of Education at the company I work for—which means I spend a good bit of time booking and developing continuing education classes for insurance adjusters and attorneys. I earned my WIND-P designation, I just passed the Associate of Insurance 101 exam, and I travel for work building relationships across Florida and the southeastern United States. Here I am, developing education for other people while falling behind on my own educational blog.

Family

Gregory is in preschool, loves art, and he’s doing jiu-jitsu, which means I’m now a dad who sits on the mat and watches his preschooler grapple. Polina and I will soon have a one-year-old and a five-year-old. That’s not a side note, it’s the main thing, and everything else fits around the edges.

The Names

Paul didn’t write Romans 16 as a status update. He wrote it because the connections matter—the coffee with the inquirer, the class you taught on a Wednesday night, the album you’re finishing with friends, the daughter you baptized, the kid grappling on the mat. These aren’t distractions from the work. They are the work. The names are central to the point.

I’ve been quiet here because I’ve been loud everywhere else—but loud in the way Saint Paul was loud at the end of a letter, just naming the people he loved and trusting that the names were enough.

The silence is ending. The Sirach material is coming. The Thinking Theologically recordings are coming. The writing is coming.

In the meantime—greet one another with a holy kiss. Or, you know, a comment below. Either way.

All the best,

Jamey

Leave a comment

Scripture quotations for this blog post are from the ESV® Bible (The Holy Bible, English Standard Version®), copyright © 2001 by Crossway, a publishing ministry of Good News Publishers. Used by permission. All rights reserved.

Before my wife and I were engaged—before we had met—we were two ordinary people who loved God and wanted to be married. Not a crisis. Just the ordinary wish to be married.

So I asked my father confessor at the time in South Florida for help. He didn’t hand me a marriage book or a strategy. He gave me a saint. His instructions were, more or less: Pray to Saint Xenia of Saint Petersburg. Ask her to prepare your heart and bring you a wife.

Several time zones away in Arizona, Polina was having a similar conversation with her own confessor. He gave her a saint too: Saint John of Shanghai and San Francisco—a bishop who spent his last years serving in California, which is where I’m from. Neither of us knew about the other’s assignment. We hadn’t met.

And then we met, and we hit it off. My first visit to Arizona to meet her, I had dinner with her family and visited their parish. And I was standing in her home parish, in the approximate area where her family had stood many times, and I looked up.

Two icons. Opposite walls. Facing each other. Saint Xenia, and Saint John.

I stood there next to Polina and thought: They’re winking at each other. They’ve been at this a while. We showed up late.

The Bible Spends a Whole Chapter Naming “Dead” People

That story only works if the saints are doing something. Participating—in an actual marriage, an actual family, an actual Tuesday afternoon. Which sounds immediately to some like a late medieval accretion, but it isn’t.

Hebrews 11 runs the roll: Abel, Enoch, Noah, Abraham, Sarah, Moses, Rahab—Rahab, which should encourage all of us—Gideon, Samson, David, Samuel, the prophets. Then verse 38, about the ones sawn in two and living in caves: of whom the world was not worthy.

Notice what that is. A list of names. An inspired author of Holy Scripture spent an entire chapter naming specific dead people and telling you what they did. The list is the theological work, not an aside.

Then chapter 12 turns the list into a room of saints: we are compassed about with so great a cloud of witnesses. Compassed about. Surrounded. Present tense.

And the instinct is older than the Church. Wisdom of Sirach 44 opens, Let us now praise famous men, and our fathers that begat us, and then runs its own roll call for six chapters. A little later: their name lives to all generations.

That’s a feast day. The definition of one, written two centuries before there was an “institutional Church” to keep them. Hebrews 11 stands in an old tradition—Sirach 44 with the Resurrection added, which changes everything, because now the names on the list are alive.

Check out the 50 minute class here:

A Throne with a Court around It

There’s a harder question underneath all this, and it deserves a straight answer: What kind of universe has to be true for any of it to work?

Psalm 82:1 — God has taken His place in the divine council; in the midst of the gods He holds judgment. That’s not late embellishment, that’s the Psalter.

In 1 Kings 22, Micaiah — the prophet nobody wants to invite — says he saw the LORD enthroned with the host of heaven standing on His right hand and on His left, and God turned and asked them a question. In Job 1 and 2, the sons of God present themselves before the LORD. In Revelation 4 and 5, John sees the throne, twenty-four elders, four living creatures, ten thousand times ten thousand.

Scripture’s standing picture of heaven is a throne with a court around it. If you want to go deeper into this and other issues surrounding early Judaism and Christianity, and you should, Fr. Stephen De Young’s The Religion of the Apostles and Fr. Andrew Damick’s Lord of Spirits are where I’d send you.

Somebody is thinking it, so let’s put it on the table: Isn’t that repackaged paganism?

Watch how casually Paul uses it. Do you not know that we shall judge angels? (1 Cor 6:3). He drops that into an argument about lawsuits—as a premise, the thing everybody already accepts, which he then builds on. Nobody builds a case on a premise his readers find absurd. The Apostles weren’t borrowing furniture from the pagans. They were writing from inside the house.

Here’s the thing. That council was never a closed circle of angels. Revelation seats elders there—human beings, on thrones. And Hebrews 12, a few verses past our cloud of witnesses, gives the guest list of the heavenly Jerusalem and names, in one breath, at one address: an innumerable company of angels, and the spirits of just men made perfect.

Same sentence. Same room. The council holds more than one kind of creature, and always has.

Which is why the Church writes their lives in a distinct genre. Biography informs you about a subject, and you judge it by accuracy of detail. Hagiography introduces you to someone still alive, and you judge it by whether you’d recognize them when you meet. Read a saint’s life the way you’d read a letter about a relative you’re about to pick up at the airport. You’re not fact-checking as much as you are getting ready to recognize somebody.

Saints Among Us

9.11MB ∙ PDF file

Download

Download the PDF of this presentation so you can study the class notes more closely.

Download

Nicaea, AD 325

Now the part that took twenty years to assemble, one decision at a time.

Athanasius was in the room at Nicaea—as a deacon. Around twenty-seven, not a bishop, no vote, attending as secretary to Bishop Alexander of Alexandria. He walked in as support staff and walked out having supplied the word that ended the argument: homoousios, of one essence with the Father. Arius, for his part, was reasonable and popular and a marketer — he set his theology to music so dockworkers would hum it at work. Athanasius spent forty-five years arguing with a catchy song. Exiled five times, roughly seventeen of those forty-five years spent away from his own city. Athanasius contra mundum described the arithmetic rather than the man’s temperament. He is my patron from baptism, and the saint for anyone who has been the only one in the room who thinks the thing is wrong.

Gregory the Illuminator was not in the room. Too old, in seclusion — so he sent his son Aristakes, who carried the decrees home. Gregory’s father had assassinated the king of Armenia; the family was destroyed in reprisal and the infant Gregory was carried to Caesarea and raised Christian. He went back into the service of King Trdat, son of the man his father murdered, refused to sacrifice to the goddess Anahit, and spent thirteen years in the pit at Khor Virap, fed bread by a widow over the edge. Then the king went mad, his sister dreamt that only the man in the pit could heal him, and they hauled Gregory up alive. He baptized the king and his court in the Euphrates, and Armenia became the first nation on earth to adopt Christianity as its state religion — traditional date 301, twelve years before the Edict of Milan. Armenia was Christian before Christianity was legal in Rome. He is my son Gregory’s patron.

James of Nisibis was in the room too, as a bishop and a signatory, one of the 318. He had lived as a mountain hermit in a goat-hair cloak until the city drew him out to make him bishop, and he kept wearing the cloak. He founded the church and school at Nisibis and taught a student named Ephrem the Syrian. In 338 he stood on the walls during Shapur II’s siege—the traditional account has gnats and mosquitoes routing the Persian elephants; what isn’t in dispute is that the city held and the people credited their bishop’s prayers.

And here is the part I want to be precise about, because it would be easy to tell as a coincidence.

James of Nisibis and Gregory the Illuminator were first cousins. The traditional Armenian account has James’s mother, Khosrovidukht, as Gregory’s paternal aunt, the two boys raised and educated together at Caesarea. Years later Gregory wrote to his cousin and asked him to compose homilies on faith and love.

I found that out first. My son already had Gregory. I had Athanasius from my own baptism. And when it came time to take a name at my tonsure as a reader, I went looking for one that would tie the household to the council and to my son’s patron at once—and I took James of Nisibis on purpose. (Read more about that decision here.)

Two cousins and a deacon with no vote. One creed. Three names picked deliberately, over decades.

The Rest of the Household

Xenia of St. Petersburg, the one my confessor sent me to. Widowed young, she gave away everything she owned, then refused her own name—answering only to her dead husband’s, saying that Andrey was alive and Xenia had died—and spent forty-five years wandering Petersburg in his military coat. God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise. Her feast is January 24. Our daughter was born on it.

John of Shanghai and San Francisco, the one Polina was sent to. He followed the Russian diaspora across the twentieth century—Shanghai, the Philippines, Western Europe, San Francisco—barely slept, served daily, and was found praying in bell towers at night over whichever city held his people. In anticipation of his death he wrote to his flock: “Tell everyone, even though I have reposed, I am still alive.” His relics lie incorrupt in a cathedral in San Francisco. That sentence he wrote is this entire essay, written by a man who died in 1966.

Apollinaria, Polina’s patron from her own baptism. Daughter of Anthemius, regent to the young Theodosius II—born at the top of the Roman world and chose to become a monk….not a nun, a monk. She talked her parents into a pilgrimage, gave her jewels and money to the poor in Jerusalem, slipped away from her servants near Alexandria, and entered Sketis as a monk under the name Dorotheus. St. Macarius received her as one of the brethren, not knowing the ruse. When her own sister was made to accuse her falsely, she took the blame, walked home to Rome under guard, healed her sister, and went back to her cell. Her identity came out only at her death.

Alexandra Feodorovna and Sophia of Shamordino, chosen this year for our daughter. Alexandra was born Princess Alix of Hesse and received into Orthodoxy before she married Tsar Nicholas II—and she took St. Alexandra the Martyr Empress as her own patron, keeping April 23 as her name day, never knowing that one day she too would follow her patron saint into martyrdom. Our daughter’s patron had a patron. Her chaplain’s diary records her name day in 1917, when she was under house arrest: the family in bright festive clothes, a prosphora, and he described her as smiling, despite her suffering. She was murdered with her family the following July. Sophia Bolotova was a spiritual daughter of St. Ambrose of Optina—married in obedience to the elder, later widowed, tonsured by him, and made first abbess of Shamordino, a convent that received widows, orphans, and the blind whom other houses couldn’t afford. She led it three years and died at forty-two. After her death St. Ambrose told one of the sisters, :Remember, Mother Sophia was a saint!”

An empress and a village abbess, both chosen for the same infant. She has some shoes to fill!

Benedict of Nursia, ours twice over. Benedictus means blessed, and my surname—Bennett—descends from it, so he was on my mail before I had a vote. Serbian Orthodox families keep a Slava: an annual feast for the household’s own patron saint, not a person’s but the whole house’s. Polina and I loosely adopted the practice, and Benedict with it. His Rule opens, Listen carefully, my son, to the master’s instructions, and it was written for beginners, with room made for the weak. A house with a four-year-old and an infant qualifies.

You Are Already in the Room

Nine names. Every one chosen, and I just gave you the reason behind each. My point in sharing each of these is not so I can talk about my family—though I certainly enjoy that—but rather in order to give a glimpse into how the saints “work” in the Orthodox faith.

Venerating the saints amounts to noticing where you’re standing—and then choosing who you stand with. Every Liturgy the curtain goes thin and you are in the room with them. Not thinking about them. With them. And every baptism, a name gets chosen, and a household gains a member it didn’t have the week before.

Compassed about. Surrounded. Not observed from a distance—surrounded, which is a different thing entirely, and the difference is most of the faith.

Two icons, on opposite walls of a church in Phoenix, over the spot where one family stood every Sunday. A California bishop and a Petersburg fool-for-Christ, looking at each other across a nave, while a woman prayed to one of them and a man three continents away prayed to the other — each sent there by a confessor who knew exactly what he was doing.

Nine names, chosen. A council you can join on purpose.

Leave a comment

Prefer YouTube for sharing with others or watching generally?

Blessed is the Kingdom…

The priest does not greet everyone with “Good Morning.” Nor does he begin the Divine Liturgy immediately by saying “Let Us Pray,” nor simply “Welcome.”

When the Divine Liturgy begins on Sunday morning at Saint Mark Greek Orthodox Church in Boca Raton, Florida, Father Mark stands before the holy altar, lifts the Gospel book, makes the sign of the cross, and says something far more radical.

Blessed is the kingdom of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit.

What he is doing is proclaiming the arrival of the kingdom of God on earth. This means if what he said is true; if we really are going into the kingdom of God; that leaves us with a huge question. How can you possibly prepare yourself for such a thing?

We all prepare ourselves for those things we believe are important. Many people spend years preparing for their wedding day. They plan for weeks, months and even longer to be able to execute a few hours perfectly. A man might spend months studying for a big job interview. In fact, most people take their preparation for almost every event very seriously.

But when it comes to the Divine Liturgy, the temptation is to wing it. We wake up. We check our phones. We scroll the news. We yell at our kids in the car. We pull into the parking lot, rush through the doors, and suddenly hear, “Blessed is the kingdom.” (Well, that’s assuming we arrive early enough for that.)

Our bodies have arrived. Our minds and hearts are sometimes still in the parking lot or back at the house.

In our four week August adult education series after Vespers, this past week Father Mark tackled this exact problem. How does an Orthodox Christian actually prepare to encounter Christ in the Divine Liturgy?

To begin to answer, we must start with this: Sunday morning does not begin on Sunday morning.

The Compass Needle

There is a temptation to divide our lives into two distinct worlds. There is the church world, which happens on Sunday morning. And then there is the real world, which happens Monday through Saturday.

Orthodox Christianity doesn’t allow for that division. “The Divine Liturgy is connected to everything that happens during the week,” Father Mark taught. “How I speak to my spouse prepares me for the Liturgy. How I treat the person who irritates me prepares me for the Liturgy. Whether I pray... whether I repent... how I use my money, what I watch... prepares me for the Liturgy.”

You cannot spend six days forming your heart in one direction and expect to instantly turn it toward God on Sunday morning.

Father Mark used a helpful image. Think of the heart like a compass needle. Throughout the week, that needle is constantly being pulled by competing magnetic fields: work, anxiety, money, social media, family drama. The needle spins wildly sometimes.

Prayer helps to bring the needle back. Repentance brings it back. Reading Scripture brings it back. Fasting brings it back.

Saint Paul told the Thessalonians to “pray without ceasing” (1 Thess 5:17). This doesn’t mean standing in front of an icon corner for twenty-four hours a day. It means acquiring a direction. When we finally arrive on Sunday morning, we aren’t starting cold. We have been walking toward the altar all week.

Ascension Theology?

Father Mark shared a story about a local, evangelical Protestant pastor from down the street who brought his “worship team” to Saint Mark for a private tour. Father Mark was happy to show them around. The pastor told him he wanted his team to understand something that the Orthodox Church grasps intuitively: “Ascension theology.”

“We’re ascending,” he explained. “We’re always going toward Christ. We’re going toward that holy altar. Our worship is not us-focused. Our worship is Christ-focused... We’re always walking toward that holy altar.”

The Protestant team was stunned by their tour of the Orthodox Church. For them, it was said, church was a speech, a sermon, and a band. For the Orthodox, it is an ascent into the kingdom.

But it’s tough to ascend if you don’t know where you are going. This is why we have to prepare the mind. We have to learn the language of the Liturgy. We need to know why incense is offered, what the Trisagion means, and why the priest says, “Let us lift up our hearts.” That last line is not filler. It is an instruction. Lift your heart. Bring everything you carried into the building upward toward God.

Father Mark suggested doing something simple yet helpful: read the Sunday Epistle and Gospel before you come to church. “Imagine how differently you will hear the Gospel when you already know the story.” (And if you come to Matins, and follow along, you’ll get even more!)

Preparing the Mind vs. the Heart

Preparing the mind is the easy part. Preparing the heart is where the real work happens. You can understand every theological nuance of the Liturgy and still have a heart that is completely unprepared to receive Christ.

Jesus was quite clear. In Matthew’s gospel, he states “If you bring your offering to the altar and there recall that your brother holds anything against you, leave your gift at the altar, first go and be reconciled to your brother.” He connects quite clearly that how we relate to others has an impact on how we relate to God. “You cannot say ‘I love God,’ but will not forgive my brother.’ You cannot say ‘I am going to take communion’ and simultaneously choose to hold onto hate; it just doesn’t work that way,” Father Mark stated.

The Eucharist is communion. It is communion with Christ, communion with His Church, and communion with one another. This requires examining the heart.

• Are you feeding anger?

• Are you marinating in resentment?

This is where repentance and confession come in. Confession is not a courtroom where bad Orthodox Christians are punished. It is medicine. It is the tool Christ gave us to clean the house of the heart before the Guest arrives.

The Threshold to Sunday

Saturday night in America is often seen as the climax of the weekend. Many people treat Saturday night as their chance to go out with friends, to stay up late and to exhaust themselves. On the other hand, the church sees things differently. Father Mark also thought that we might view Saturday night as a doorway into Sunday.

Does this mean Orthodox Christians cannot hang out with friends or live a life on Saturday night? No! This is not a new set of strict rules; rather it is a matter of space. As Father Mark stated, are you preparing space for what is going to occur tomorrow? Maybe this involves reading the Gospels before bedtime. Perhaps it involves laying out your clothes so the morning is less chaotic. Maybe it simply means getting to bed 30 minutes sooner.

Anticipation changes experience. When you anticipate meeting Jesus Christ, your heart arrives before your body does.

The Purpose of the Fast

Then comes Sunday morning, and the final preparation: the body. Christianity is not a religion simply of the mind. We worship God with our whole person. We stand, we bow, we cross ourselves, we smell incense, we taste the Eucharist.

And we fast. The Eucharistic fast—abstaining from food and drink before communion—is not an arbitrary endurance test. It is not designed to see if you can survive until noon without coffee.

“Fasting teaches the body to participate in our longing for Christ,” Father Mark explained. You wake up hungry. But instead of immediately satisfying that hunger with a bowl of cereal, the hunger itself becomes a prayer. The body begins to say what the soul should be saying: I am waiting to be filled.

“Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God” (Matthew 4:4).

When you approach the chalice physically hungry, anticipation peaks. The first thing you receive that day is Jesus Christ.

(Note: Fr. Mark was clear that the young, the elderly, pregnant women, and those on medication should consult their priest and doctor. The Church is a hospital, not a courtroom, and uses wisdom as she cares for the souls of those who have bodies with particular weaknesses.)

Listen to the class yourself:

Protecting the Stillness

When Sunday morning finally arrives, then comes the biggest test: keeping the stillness. In the first ten minutes after waking, what do most of us do? Most likely we pick-up our phones and begin checking our social media, our e-mail, perhaps the news. Three or four Instagram scrolls deep before our feet have ever touched the floor, and now there are fifty different voices in our mind.

No wonder many cannot concentrate during the Divine Liturgy. Wouldn’t it be wonderful if the very first thing you hear isn’t the world’s voice but rather God’s?

Father Mark described his own Sunday morning routine with his father-in-law. They drive to church in near total silence.

“I am going to meet Jesus Christ today,” Fr. Mark said, summarizing the one thought we should carry with us. “Not, I have to go to church. Not, I hope Father doesn’t preach too long... I am going to meet Christ.”

If you truly believe that, you don’t just arrive at church. You enter it intentionally. You light a candle. You venerate the icons. You don’t bring the noise of the world into the sanctuary.

You arrive ready to ascend.

When the priest finally raises the holy gifts and says, “The holy things for the holy people of God,” everything snaps into focus. The prayers, the fasting, the Saturday night quiet, the silence in the car—it was all leading to this moment.

When the priest declares, “Blessed is the kingdom of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit,” the people respond, “Amen.” This “Amen” represents the culmination of all your work throughout the week. It says: Yes. This is why I forgave. This is why I fasted. I have come to enter the Kingdom.

Then, and only then does something marvelous happen. Instead of giving you a symbol or a memory, Christ gives you Himself.

Your preparation didn’t make you worthy of receiving such an amazing gift. There is absolutely nothing anyone could do to earn this kind of gift. Your preparation only made you ready to accept His Gift.

Leave a comment

A Practical Guide to Preparing for the Liturgy

Based on Father Mark’s class, here are the concrete steps we can take to prepare our minds, hearts, and bodies to encounter Christ on Sunday morning:

1. Read the Scripture ahead of time: Look up and read the Epistle and Gospel readings for the upcoming Sunday before you arrive.

2. Learn the commemorations: Take a few minutes to read about the specific saint or feast day being commemorated that weekend.

3. Reconcile and forgive: Examine your heart for anger or resentment. Reconcile with anyone you have a conflict with before approaching the chalice, utilizing the sacrament of confession as medicine.

4. Guard your Saturday night: Treat Saturday evening as the doorway to Sunday. Consider ways we can shift away from exhausting, worldly activities and intentionally create space for spiritual anticipation and rest.

5. Keep the Eucharistic fast: Abstain from food and drink on Sunday morning before Liturgy (consulting your priest and doctor regarding medical or age-related exceptions) to let your physical hunger become a prayer of longing for Christ.

6. Protect the morning stillness: Avoid the temptation to immediately reach for your phone, check email, or scroll social media and the news when you wake up.

7. Enter with intention: Don’t just casually walk into the building, and remember even the Narthex is a prayerful place and not really for chit chat. Best practice: arrive early, light a candle, venerate the icons, and pray to transition your mind fully toward the altar.

Recommended Resources:

• Daily Readings

• AGES Digital Chant Stand

What follows is my own reflection on that session, written for Simply Orthodox readers—catechumens, inquirers, and anyone still sorting out what any of this is actually for. You can read part 2 here and part 3 here.

Training Day

A catechumen one texted me asking if margarine counts as dairy.

Fair question. I answered it (it doesn’t, mostly—somewhere out there, a nineteenth-century Frenchman patented margarine specifically to torment future Orthodox catechumens, and I have chosen to believe this on faith). But the question underneath that question is the one most of us ask before we even notice we’re asking it: what am I allowed to do, and what happens if I don’t?

That’s rules-thinking. It’s the default setting for anyone who grew up measuring faith in checkboxes, and it’s the exact thing Fr. Mark Leondis spent an hour dismantling in the first session of St. Mark’s new catechesis and adult education series. He introduced a term most inquirers have never heard: phronema. I want to walk through why it matters, because the distinction he’s drawing isn’t a technicality. It’s the whole ballgame.

The Word Nobody Translates Well

Phronema doesn’t land cleanly in English, which is probably why so many converts never get properly introduced to it. The closest we can do is mindset—but that undersells it the way “cardio” undersells a marathon. Phronema isn’t an opinion we hold. It’s the lens we see through before we ever form an opinion, the operating system underneath whatever app happens to be open.

Saint Paul names it directly: “Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus” (Philippians 2:5, ESV). A few letters later, writing to the church at Corinth, he says it flatter still: “we have the mind of Christ” (1 Corinthians 2:16, ESV). Not his ideas. Not a summary of his teaching we could fit on a bumper sticker. His mind—the way he saw a leper, a tax collector, his own execution.

We don’t acquire that by reading about it, any more than my four-year-old is getting a black belt by reading about jiu-jitsu (he’d fight me on this, mid-armbar, but it’s true). We get it the way Paul describes it: “be transformed by the renewal of your mind” (Romans 12:2, ESV)—renewal, present tense, ongoing. Not a bar we clear once and frame on the wall. A mind we keep letting Him remake, the way a river keeps letting the bank shape it, whether the river notices or not.

This is also, incidentally, where East and West tend to part company. A rules framework treats sin as a broken statute—something owed, something to be settled. Orthodoxy treats sin the way a doctor treats a fever: a symptom worth diagnosing, not a debt worth collecting. Which is a nicer way of saying nobody’s getting sentenced to community service for skipping vespers.

Askesis: The Church as Gym

Here’s where it gets concrete. The Greek word askesis just means training—it’s where we get “ascetic,” and it originally described an athlete’s regimen, not a monk’s. Saint Paul uses it on purpose: “I discipline my body and keep it under control” (1 Corinthians 9:27, ESV). Timothy gets the plainer version: “train yourself for godliness” (1 Timothy 4:7, ESV).

I know a little about training regimens. I spent over a year tracking macros and dropped 75 pounds chasing a protein number I still miss most days (mostly because chicken breast is a personality-free food and I will resent it if I eat it too often). A good coach doesn’t hand you one fixed program and disappear. He’s running the whole operation—when to push, when to back off, when a sore knee means rest instead of another set. That whole job, not just the backing-off part, is closer to what the Church actually means by oikonomia. The word literally means managing a household.

A spiritual father practicing it isn’t handing out exceptions to a rule; he’s governing the whole thing, deciding case by case where strictness serves someone and where it would break them. That strict baseline has its own name too: akriveia, the standard everyone’s aiming at. Oikonomia is the governance holding both together, not a synonym for going easy. A pregnant woman gets something other than the full monastic fast because a shepherd is actually managing the household case by case. The program still serves the person. Miss a day, meanwhile, and nobody revokes your membership. You just don’t build the muscle you’d have built.

That’s the whole logic behind fasting, prayer, and every other tool in the Church’s kit. They’re reps. When Christ tells the Pharisees “the Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath” (Mark 2:27, ESV), He’s making Fr. Mark’s exact point about tools two thousand years early: the tool serves us, not the other way around.

And when He says “those who are well have no need of a physician, but those who are sick,” then adds that He came “not to call the righteous, but sinners” (Matt. 9:12–13, ESV), that’s the hospital model preached before hospitals had waiting rooms. It’s such a fixture of Orthodox pastoral language by now that half the people who repeat it couldn’t tell you who said it first, which might be its own kind of proof: the Church runs like a hospital, not a courtroom.

Nobody gets discharged from physical therapy for a bad week. If you’ve ever been to PT, you know your program simply gets modified and your therapist has undoubtedly seen worse.

Seven Tools, One Aim

Father Mark walked through the toolbox itself—prayer, fasting, Scripture, the Divine Liturgy, confession, almsgiving, the saints—and made the same case seven different ways: none of these earn us anything. They form us. We can own a Bible and stay unchanged. Light a candle and stay unchanged. Buy the Allen wrench and leave it in the drawer, and the bookshelf still doesn’t build itself. Pick up the tool and use it, though, and something starts happening to the shape of our mind.

Confession is worth pausing on, because it’s the tool people dread walking into and leave describing as relief—which should tell us something’s being mismarketed. It isn’t a deposition; the Church isn’t building a case against us. Almsgiving carries its own quiet correction: it keeps asking whose money it actually was in the first place, which is an uncomfortable question for a culture that names its retirement accounts after itself.

Every one of those seven tools points at the same word the Fathers kept reaching for: theosis. Saint Peter puts it right in Scripture—we’re meant to become “partakers of the divine nature” (2 Peter 1:4, ESV). Saint Athanasius said the same thing in five words that have outlived every empire since: “He was made man that we might be made god.”

That’s the target—becoming something capable of holding the life of God, from the inside out.

Share

The Actual Point

So, margarine. My catechumen got her answer, and nobody had to call a lawyer to figure it out. But the question I’d want every inquirer walking into a series like this one to actually carry isn’t “what’s allowed.” It’s the one Fr. Mark spent an hour training us toward instead: what is this doing to my heart, mind, and soul?

Father Georges Florovsky, writing decades before any of us showed up to a catechism class, put it better than I can:

“To follow the Fathers does not mean simply to quote their sentences. It means to acquire their mind, their phronema.”

That’s the whole thing in one sentence. Not citations. Not compliance. A mind, slowly and stubbornly acquired—one Wednesday fast, one confession, one Liturgy at a time.

Three sessions to go this August. We’ll be back next to discuss preparation for the Divine Liturgy.

Leave a comment

Sources

Scripture quotations are from the ESV Bible (The Holy Bible, English Standard Version), copyright © 2001 by Crossway, a publishing ministry of Good News Publishers. Used by permission. All rights reserved.

Saint Athanasius, On the Incarnation, §54.3.

Georges Florovsky, “Following the Holy Fathers,” in Collected Works, vol. 4, Patristic Theology and the Ethos of the Orthodox Church (Belmont, MA: Nordland Publishing, 1987), 15–22.

A note on one line above: “the Church runs like a hospital, not a courtroom” is a common saying in an Orthodox pastoral context, often loosely attributed to St. John Chrysostom. I couldn’t trace it to a specific homily with confidence, so it appears in the piece without his name on it.

There’s a strange thing that can happen not long after a baptism or chrismation.

Holy Week and Pascha were electric. The candles, the processions, “Christ is risen!”—maybe you even got a new name spoken over you as you received Communion as an Orthodox Christian for the first time. And then…Monday came. Or June came. Or October. The choir didn’t sound like angels every Sunday and your prayer rule got heavy. Gossip in the church touched your life.

Whatever it may be, the spiritual high faded, and you started to wonder, “Is this it? Am I already failing at being Orthodox?”

On the other end of the spectrum is the convert on fire. Three months after chrismation, he’s got strong feelings about icons, liturgical rubrics, and which Fathers everyone else is misreading (and sometimes he looks ready to punch someone when he talks about it). His social media feed is a running commentary on “the West” and perhaps he’s already got a chip on his shoulder about some priest or other out there with a podcast. It’s also entirely possible his family tiptoes around him, especially about religion, which he incessantly brings up. And his priest, if he’s wise, is quietly trying to help him safely land the plane without crashing.

And then there’s the quieter story: the slow drift. Someone is chrismated, shows up steadily for a while, and then life happens. Work gets busy. The prayer rule starts slipping. Liturgy gets swapped out for sleep now and then, or “Well, I watched it on YouTube, ya know.” Nothing dramatic happens; things just…thin out.

This is meant to be a field guide to that first year or so after chrismation or baptism—things to look for, things to do, and offer some help in making that season honest, sane, healthy, and grounded in the life of the Church. I don’t know if you saw yourself in any of those descriptions, but wherever you are on this spectrum, there’s hope for us all.

After the Feast: Why the First Year Is So Strange

One of the poorly advertised facts of the Christian life is that emotional “honeymoons” are frequently followed by much less glamorous terrain. The Church knows this; the Fathers talk about it. But it’s easy to assume that once you are finally Orthodox, things will only go up and to the right.

Instead, a lot of people experience:

• A post‑Pascha crash: after all the intensity and joy, everything feels a bit flat.

• A wave of old temptations returning with surprising force.

• A new awareness of the Church’s very human side: parish quirks, imperfect leadership, un‑saintly behavior at coffee hour, perhaps you still don’t feel like “part of the crew.”

None of that means you “did it wrong.” In many ways, it means you’ve simply moved from engagement to marriage. The romance isn’t gone, but it’s no longer the whole story. The main task of this first year is learning what faithfulness looks like when you’re not being carried by what is exciting and new.

I don’t share this much, but when I was an Orthodox catechumen, I was on a very high high, followed by a brief crash and burn shortly before baptism. In an email with my friend Steve Robinson, he set me back on track when he wrote something to this effect: “I’ve had many spiritual highs, and I hope to never have one again, because the fall usually hurts.”

What Has Actually Changed? (And What Hasn’t)

It’s worth pausing to name what really did change at your reception into Holy Orthodoxy—and what did not.

What changed:

• You are now in full Eucharistic communion with the Orthodox Church. You’re not just visiting something holy; you belong to it.

  • And more importantly, this Eucharistic communion means that you are united to Christ, and being united to Christ indicates membership in the Body of Christ. It is going to change you if you let it.

• You are under a bishop and a priest in a concrete place. The Church is no longer an inspiring idea or a podcast; you now are tied in with this parish, this altar, these people.

  • This bishop and priest answer to God for your soul—and you have become their spiritual child. This matters a good deal, you’re no freelancer anymore.

• You have undergone a real sacramental change. However you feel on some random Tuesday, your baptism/chrismation weren’t mere symbolic ceremonies with fancy gestures—they are objective gifts and real turning points.

  • Nothing can undo your baptism, either. I always remind our catechumens that becoming Orthodox can never be undone—one can walk away and apostatize, but you can’t unring this bell. Once you’ve been “inside,” you’re accountable to God for it.

What has not automatically changed:

• Your habits: Whatever patterns of prayer, distraction, anger, lust, Internet overuse, you had before—those don’t magically dissolve because oil touched your forehead.

  • You may have more weapons to fight with, but most likely you’re still going to be prone to the same temptations you had before—this is why the Church gives us additional, ongoing tools such as confession, so we can actually make some progress. But be aware—it takes years sometimes.

• Your relationships: Family dynamics, losing old church connections, new workplace challenges: all of that takes time to adjust.

• Your emotional life: You may not feel as “on fire” as you thought you would.

  • At some point you may find yourself more tired than triumphant, and that’s perfectly normal.

Baptism and chrismation are a new beginning. You’ve come out of the baptismal waters newly born, a spiritual rebirth; now, over years (and decades), you must learn to walk.

The Anchors: What a Normal Orthodox Rhythm Looks Like

Everybody wants to know, “Okay, now that I’m officially Orthodox, what’s expected of me?” You may be hoping for a clean checklist. Instead, I want to point to a few anchors—patterns that give shape to a normal Orthodox life—without pretending there’s a one‑size‑fits‑all rule.

Always, always: the concrete details of your life belong in conversation with your priest who you will know in person, and who will guide you for this stretch of the road. Think of these suggestions I’m making as the categories you’ll talk about together.

Sunday Liturgy and the Sacraments

For the ordinary Orthodox Christian life, Sunday Divine Liturgy is not an optional add-on, it’s the beating heart of the life in Christ. Barring illness, travel, or serious obstacles, the basic expectation is: this is where you are on Sunday morning. And if you miss one, come right back; miss three, still come right back; been gone a year, still, come back (and maybe consider scheduling a confession!).

Confession, too, becomes part of the normal rhythm. It’s not an emergency‑only sacrament reserved for spectacular moral failures; it’s one of the ordinary ways you keep your heart honest and your life tethered to Christ. New Orthodox Christians should speak to their priest about the frequency of confession, and find the pace that makes sense within that spiritual relationship. And unless you’re confessing before every communion (as is frequently done in Slavic churches), you can always ask for more.

Fasting and Feasts

It’s no secret that we fast in the Orthodox Church. Now that you’re in, you’re not just watching the fasts and feasts from the outside—you’re keeping them. But that does not necessarily mean instant maximalism.

Instead of assuming, “I must now keep every letter of the fasting calendar,” a better move is to go to your priest and say, “I want to take the fasts seriously. Given my health, work, family, and where I am spiritually, what makes sense for me?” Let the guidance be concrete and realistic.

Being overly scrupulous or completely dismissive of the fast are two opposite ditches we don’t want to fall into.

Feasts matter too. Letting yourself actually celebrate on feasts, and making it a point to observe the seasons and holy days in your life—liturgically and at home—is part of a healthy rhythm. Christianity is not meant to be an unbroken gray.

Prayer at Home

Those converts who attempt the Herculean leap from “occasional improvised prayers” to “full monastic cycle by Tuesday” usually last less than a week at prayer. Don’t set yourself up for failure.

A sane aim is a small, stable rule: morning and/or evening prayers, maybe you will incorporate a Psalm or two, perhaps you’re using the Jesus Prayer throughout the day, and maybe a few prostrations as your body allows. Simple, repeatable, and ideally with feedback from your confessor/priest.

For myself, I’ve always felt that it’s better to get in five minutes of prayer (or even 50 seconds) that I actually do than fifty-five minutes I feel guilty about not doing.

Becoming a Parish Person

Finally, life after reception into Orthodoxy means beginning to belong: not as a permanent visitor, but as a member of a particular community.

That might look like:

• Staying for coffee hour and gradually learning names.

• Finding one small way to serve: helping in the kitchen, reading, singing, cleaning, teaching (after we get to know ya!). One of my godsons basically became an essential part of coffee hour service overnight—and suddenly he knows everyone at the parish. For me, my big “break” in my current parish was becoming an usher. Serve others and you’ll see.

• Becoming a faithful steward of your parish by giving financially according to your means, as a concrete way of saying, “This is my Church, too.” Everyone in the Church should have “skin in the game,” and committing to a financial gift to the Church is an important way of doing that.

You don’t have to become Parish Super‑Volunteer of the Year. But you are no longer just passing through. This is home, and everyone in the family should chip in.

Subscribe now

Classic First‑Year Temptations

Let’s put a few of the usual suspects on the table.

Convert Triumphalism

The temptation is this: You’ve found the pearl of great price, and you can see exactly what’s wrong with everyone else’s pearls. Perhaps you’ve met some cradle Orthodox that you think seem lukewarm. And those other converts seem to have brought in so much baggage!

You discover the delightful pastime of mentally grading everyone’s Orthodoxy. Maybe you like to argue with the priest, because you’re more Orthodox than he is (or so you think). And you’d never mingle with that other filthy Orthodox jurisdiction.

• Antidote: remember that you were received into something you did not build. The people who don’t match your idealized vision of “serious Orthodoxy” are often the ones who quietly kept the parish alive so that you could be received at all, and it’s always good to let the bishops doing the bishopin’. Humility here is an absolute must.

Over‑Asceticism and Burnout

You want to make God proud, so you pile on: strict fasting, long rules, every possible service. For a few weeks, it feels amazing. Then you’re exhausted, irritable, and tempted to chuck the whole thing. Stop trying to make God proud, because He doesn’t need your fasting, you do, and you don’t do yourself a favor by crashing out.

• Antidote: think in decades, not weeks. Ask your priest for a rule you could imagine keeping in five years, not just five days. (You can always adjust later.) Think of the Church’s call to asceticism as an offer of medicine—it’s not a reality show Survivor or Challenge-style competition.

Online Radicalization

Now that you’re “inside,” the algorithm will happily show you every hot take, controversy, and micro‑schism inside Orthodoxy. You could spend your entire spiritual life angry at bishops you’ve never met in places you’ll never go. If you’re prone to following dunces, you might even find yourself organizing a boycott of some institution, ministry, or book that some dork on YouTube told you to hate. Knock it off, it’s a waste of time and spiritually draining.

• Antidote: you soul will benefit from avoiding “jurisdictional politics” and instead making the peace and well-being of your parish and your diocese the center of gravity. And if something online disturbs you, take it to your priest, not to a comment thread.

Discouragement and Shame

You might have had a mental image of the kind of Orthodox Christian you’d be immediately following your baptism/chrismation. That imaginary person prays like an elder, fasts like a monk, and never yells at their kids. The real you…well…does not. Cue: shame, self‑loathing, and the suspicion that the sacraments “didn’t work.”

• Antidote: trade the imaginary Orthodoxy in your head for the actual Orthodoxy in front of you. God is not surprised by your pace of growth. The measure is not “Have I arrived?” but “Am I repenting? Am I getting back up?” The Proverbs say “the righteous falls seven times and rises again” (24:16). That’s the only way.

When the Feelings Don’t Match the Faith

It’s very common for doubts or dryness to surface after reception, if not before. Before baptism/chrismation you were riding the wave of discovery; afterwards, some questions you shelved in the excitement may come back with new force.

You might find yourself second-guessing:

• “What if I just talked myself into this?”

• “Why does prayer feel harder now than before I was Orthodox?”

• “Other people seem to ‘feel God’ more than I do.”

• “I’m not even sure if God is real anymore.”

• “So many jerks in Orthodoxy, I must have made a mistake.”

When that happens:

• Keep the anchors. Show up to Liturgy; keep a reduced, honest prayer rule; don’t abandon confession.

• Tell your priest the truth. It’s best not to fake zeal or use pious platitudes to avoid telling the truth. Say, “Here’s where I’m actually at.” You might be surprised; a good priest is patient with the struggles of the flock.

• Be patient with yourself. It is better to limp toward the Kingdom than to pointlessly sprint around the yard in circles.

I experienced my own reception in a season of deep peace and healing—and the tumults came later down the road. I was baptized at Saint Juvenaly Orthodox Mission in Kailua-Kona, Hawaiʻi—a small, loving community where there were lots of Vespers, lots of Liturgies, and a steady environment for formation. Even in that beautiful setting, the habits took time, and the inner life did not instantly match the outer reality.

And then 5 or 6 years in, and at a decade in, I had various struggles that were much different than what I dealt with when I was newly illumined. That sort of thing is normal. If you don’t let your existential struggles dictate your Liturgy attendance, your faith might stand a chance.

Planning and Planting for Decades

The first year after baptism/chrismation is a time for planting, for growth, for making the life of the Church part of the rhythm of your life. You might think of it as planting a garden you hope to be still be harvesting from in twenty years.

You’re choosing, bit by bit:

• Do I want Sunday Liturgy to be the axis of my week, or just one more thing to fit in?

• Will I treat confession as occasional spiritual urgent care, or as normal medicine?

• Am I going to let the fasting and feasting of the Church year shape my time, or will I mostly live by the civil calendar and squeeze Orthodoxy into the gaps?

• Will I be the kind of parishioner who drifts on the edges or hangs in the back, or someone who lets themselves actually belong?

None of these questions are meant to induce panic, but rather to give you agency. You are no longer a passive object being pulled along by forces you don’t understand—you have been set free in Christ, you have real choices to make, and you have been offered real spiritual help from the Church.

If you stumble—and you will—remember: the measure of a Christian is not about the absence of falls, but is ultimately about the persistence of a life of repentance. You didn’t become Orthodox because you were strong enough. You became Orthodox because Christ is alive enough to carry you, in this very ordinary, often unspectacular life, all the way through.

Father Thomas Hopko of blessed memory said that, when he went to seminary, his mother told him: “Remember God. Say your prayers. Go to Church.” This is the rhythm of the Christian life. This is what we should all be doing at all times, but especially when the chrism has been rubbed in.

If you’re in this first‑year zone right now, you might want to bookmark this page to return to. The oil has dried; the journey has only just begun.

Postscript

If you’ve already slipped away, and you feel like you’ve slipped away completely—the habits cracked, the zeal cooled, and you’re quietly carrying around the knowledge that you “used to be Orthodox”—I want you to hear this as clearly as possible: you are loved, and you are missed.

Whatever combination of burnout, hurt, boredom, sin, or simple drift led you out the side door, none of that has canceled Christ’s claim on you. He has already called you His own in baptism and chrismation; He is not pacing the narthex with crossed arms, waiting to scold you about missed services. He is the Shepherd who goes after lost sheep, the Father who runs to meet prodigals.

If you’re reading this with a knot in your stomach thinking, “Maybe I should go back,” consider that a mercy. Talk to your priest if you can, or another priest if you must, and just say the truth: “I’ve been gone. I want to come home.” There are conversations to have and steps to take, of course—but the basic movement is simple: turn around and come back. The doors are still open.

Leave a comment

Additional Resources

• “Preparing for Confession,” Our Life in Christ, Episode 1, Episode 2, Episode 3

• “When Confession Feels Unsafe,” Healing the Unresolved Podcast

• “Holy Conversation: Issues of Marriage and Sexuality,” Orthodox Marriage Podcast

Someone in our catechism class recently asked about the Immaculate Conception. What happened next was exactly what happens every time: half of the room believed we were discussing how Jesus was conceived. (We were not.) And the fact that we’re confused enough to not know what this 19th-century Roman Catholic dogma actually claims is telling us something.

So let’s resolve this. Afterward, we’ll discuss why the Orthodox Church rejects the concept—because it disrupts the mechanism of how God saves us.

What the Immaculate Conception Actually Is

The Immaculate Conception is unrelated to Christ’s birth in Bethlehem. It pertains to Mary’s conception in the womb of her mother, Saint Anna. Pope Pius IX defined it as dogma in 1854: Mary, from the very first instant of her conception, was preserved from all stain of original sin by a singular grace of God, applied in advance on account of the future merits of Jesus Christ.

In simpler terms, God reached back through time and protected Mary from the guilt of Adam’s fall before she ever drew breath. God made Mary an untouched, sealed vessel—one untainted by the universal infection that affects every human being.

That is what is claimed. Let us now discuss why it exists.

At Issue Behind the Dogma

We cannot understand the Immaculate Conception without comprehending how the Latin West understands the Fall of Adam. This is where things begin to diverge significantly, because the Orthodox East and the Catholic West are addressing two fundamentally different questions.

Saint Augustine of Hippo was both an outstanding and necessary holy Father—but not an infallible one. Through the Latin translation he used of Romans 5:12, the West produced a unique interpretation of Paul: that all humanity sinned in Adam. From this interpretation, Western theology developed the idea that original sin is primarily guilt passed on through inheritance. Every child brought into the world comes with a judicial determination: guilty. Not due to any actions they performed themselves, but because Adam’s wrongdoing was transmitted down through each successive generation like an unpaid debt.

Based on this premise, we face a conundrum regarding the Mother of God. If Mary carried Adam’s guilt, then Christ received flesh from a guilty woman. The Immaculate Conception resolves this issue: a preemptive pardon granted to Mary — essentially a type of exemption placed on her soul before the guilt could affect her.

However, the Orthodox read the Fall differently. This is key.

How the East Understands Original Sin

The Eastern Fathers—Irenaeus, Athanasius, the Cappadocians, Maximus the Confessor—never viewed original sin as inherited guilt. Examine Romans 5:12 in Greek and the phrase that formed Augustine’s structure disappears. Saint Paul states that death spread to all people, because (Greek: ἐφ’ ᾧ, eph’ hō) all sinned. Death spread first. Then we all sinned within that mortal condition. Note the order.

What we inherit from Adam is a condition. Mortality. Decay. A nature that deteriorates over time and draws us toward sin like a weakened foundation draws a house toward collapse. We enter a world that is already sick, and we contract the illness. Some may interpret our existence as carrying a terminal prognosis—yet none of us have been charged with another individual’s crime.

This presents an enormous distinction, because if original sin is a disease, we need a physician. And that physician is Christ. As Saint Paul writes to the Romans, chapter 5, verse 12 and 15:

Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned... much more have the grace of God and the free gift by the grace of that one man Jesus Christ abounded for many.

The remedy is the Incarnation itself—for all humanity.

Why the Immaculate Conception Disrupts Salvation?

This is where the Orthodox objection cannot be overlooked.

Saint Gregory the Theologian laid down a principle in the fourth century that became the spine of all Orthodox Christology: “What is not assumed is not healed.”

Consider this. If Christ intends to repair fallen human nature—our mortality, decay, and tendency toward sin—He must accept that nature entirely and without restriction. And He accepted it from Mary. Her body became His body. Her human nature became the basic substance from which our salvation arose. She gave God His DNA.

Now. If Mary was exempted from fallen human nature—if she possessed some other type of humanity, a pre-Fall variety—then Christ did not assume our humanity. He assumed something else. Something that required no healing.

And if He did not assume our nature, He did not heal it. You may even state that salvation collapses entirely. Ouch!

Saint Ignatius Brianchaninov, the 19th-century Russian bishop, stated this clearly: the Mother of God was conceived and born under the general law of humanity’s fallen condition. She required a Redeemer. She required resurrection. She required everything we require.

To clarify: Orthodoxy maintains that Mary never personally sinned—she is the Panagia, the All-Holy. Her personal sinlessness resulted from her fierce cooperation with God’s grace while possessing a mortal, fallen body. She navigated the same fallen world we do. She resisted. She chose. She prevailed. Brianchaninov employed a strongly worded 19th-century Russian corrective to Rome, and while some of his wording exceeds the ferocity on this point of the broader Patristic tradition, his fundamental assertion remains valid: Mary is one of us. That is precisely the point.

What Orthodoxy Truly Believes About Mary

We refer to her as Panagia—the All-Holy. We refer to her as Theotokos—the God-Bearer. Our hymns celebrate her as “more honorable than the Cherubim and more glorious beyond compare than the Seraphim.” No one in Orthodoxy attempts to denigrate Mary.

Her holiness results from a response.

Upon hearing Gabriel speak to her, she replied: “Behold, I am the servant of the Lord; let it be to me according to your word” (Luke 1:38). That “yes” was Mary’s free, fully human response as a woman living within the same fallen world we inhabit—and she chose God regardless.

Vladimir Lossky argued that by excluding Mary from the common condition of humanity—thereby making her fiat a foregone conclusion rather than the culmination of countless generations of faithfulness ripening in one young woman from Nazareth—the Catholic dogma devalues the most important free choice in human history.

And that word—generations—deserves greater emphasis than we typically give it. Orthodoxy views all of the Old Testament as an ongoing refinement process across numerous generations of human flesh and blood. For millennia God worked through the line of Abraham and David, refining that genealogy until it could finally bring forth an individual capable of giving voice to that “yes.” Mary represented the greatest degree of human synergy with God’s grace—the fruit of thousands of years of human striving toward God, culminating in a teenage girl from Nazareth who willingly offered herself as a living Ark.

She represents the summit of humanity. She embodied our nature totally—and still said yes.

The Moment of Purification

A discerning Catholic reader may ask: if Mary was not purified at her conception, how could a fallen human vessel contain the uncontainable God in her womb without being consumed?

St. John of Damascus and the broader patristic tradition teach that Mary was purified by the Holy Spirit at the moment of the Annunciation—immediately after she gave her free consent. “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you” (Luke 1:35). That overshadowing was not merely the act of conception. It was her purification, her preparation to become a living temple of God.

Notice the timing:

• In the Catholic framework, Mary is purified at her conception—before she existed as a sentient individual, before she had chosen anything.

• Orthodoxy teaches that Mary was purified at the Annunciation—after she voluntarily agreed.

There is a great deal of significance in that distinction. One makes Mary’s sanctity a passive state caused by an external factor. The other is a collaborative action between divine grace and human will. God does not supersede Mary’s will. He honors it.

The Icon That Tells Us Everything

Let’s talk about the bed. The icon of the Conception of the Theotokos—celebrated on December 9th—is one of the most earthy, beautifully human images in our tradition. You have Saints Joachim and Anna, an elderly couple who endured decades of barrenness and the social shame that came with it, locked in a tender embrace.

And right there in the background, unapologetically, is their marriage bed.

While including a bed in an image depicting saints may appear incongruous or even sacrilegious today, icons rarely feature random items in their backgrounds. Each stroke of paint has intentionality in iconography. Their marriage bed serves to emphasize an essential truth: Mary was conceived naturally.

The Church celebrates the miracle of Anna’s barren womb becoming fertile — but Mary was conceived through a normal, physical, marital act. Our services are explicit on this subject: only Christ’s conception by the Holy Spirit was seedless. Mary herself came into existence the way every human being does.

Moreover, it is worth noting: the Orthodox Church observes this feast, commemorating Mary’s natural conception as holy and worthy of gold leaf and liturgical hymns. The marital union of Joachim and Anna was a grace-filled act. By placing this event on our liturgical calendar and depicting it in icons, the Church declares that ordinary physical human reproduction is good, capable of existing in a holy union, and capable of producing the Mother of God.

The bed is really a declaration. The icon emphasizes that Mary shares our humanity completely. She was not genetically engineered in any way. She did not possess a “pre-fallen” nature. Like every other human being, she was born into the same grimy, mortal reality we experience daily. The icon is visual theology—an iconographic corrective to any notion that would remove Mary from unity with the rest of Adam’s descendants.

And that unity is crucial to our salvation—it is our salvation. Because if Mary doesn’t share our nature, she cannot pass that nature to Christ. And if Christ does not receive our nature, Gregory’s maxim applies with the greatest of force: what is not assumed is not healed. The bed in that icon safeguards Mary’s dignity as an authentic woman with an actual husband and an actual body—and it safeguards the Incarnation itself.

What About Christ’s Conception?

Now—since this began with confusion on this very point—let’s land this plane.

Scripture testifies to the Virgin Birth itself: Jesus was conceived by the Holy Spirit within Mary’s womb, without a human father (Matthew 1:18–23; Luke 1:35). The Orthodox Church acknowledges this without reserve. It appears in our Creed: “incarnate of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary.”

Christ took real human nature from a real human mother. He entered our condition—mortality and all—and healed it from the inside out by uniting it to His divinity. He needed a willing vessel. He found one in Mary.

That’s the difference between a legal religion and a hospital.

The Landing

The Immaculate Conception addresses an issue we do not have. It responds to a question the Greek (and other Eastern) Fathers never asked. And in answering it, it quietly severs the very connection between Christ and fallen humanity that makes salvation possible.

The icon of Joachim and Anna knows this. It places their marriage bed right in the gold-leafed background where everybody can see it—unembarrassed, ordinary, physical. The woman who gave God His human flesh had to be ordinary in her nature so that His taking of that nature could be extraordinary in its effect.

Mary didn’t need a “forcefield” to protect Her from God. Turns out she just needed a Son. And that’s particularly what is so special about Mary—she knows that He is what we need, too.

Comparative Summary of Points of Departure

Nature of Original Sin
Latin West (Post-1854): Inherited legal guilt (Debt).
Orthodox East: Inherited mortality/decay (Disease).

Mary’s Nature
Latin West (Post-1854): Exempted from fallen nature.
Orthodox East: Shared our fallen human nature.

Timing of Purification
Latin West (Post-1854): At her own conception.
Orthodox East: At the Annunciation (Luke 1:35).

Purpose of the Fiat
Latin West (Post-1854): Result of preemptive grace.
Orthodox East: Culmination of human synergy.

The “Problem” Solved
Latin West (Post-1854): Preventing Christ from inheriting guilt.
Orthodox East: Healing the nature He assumed.

Leave a comment

“There is such a thing as a true American: an honest, forthright, normal person for whom Holy Orthodoxy is quite natural; and the harvest of these true Americans is only beginning.” - Fr. Seraphim Rose

This post is available in audio, simply click below:

The other morning I did a very normal thing for our household: I taught my four-year-old pieces of the Creed on the way to preschool, coffee in the tumbler, work not yet cracked, the day not yet started. Gregory can say things far above his pay grade with total confidence, which is one of the better features of being four.

And somewhere in the middle of reviewing our catechism about the Creed, the Fourth of July landed on me differently than it used to.

Age has a way of sanding off the taste for fashionable contempt. I have less and less patience for the habit of speaking about America as though serious people are required to sneer. The country has sins—any grown man knows that. A nation large enough to do real good has power enough to do real damage. That is what power does in fallen hands.

Still, common sense exists and we can determine a few things about America from what we do know. People do not cross oceans, learn new languages and accents, and rebuild from nothing because they were promised fewer possibilities, fewer freedoms. My ancestors didn’t. My wife didn’t. Polina came here from Russia, and living with someone who knows the difference between America as a theory and America as a gift has a way of clearing the head. Gratitude does what arguments can’t. It makes you notice what has been sitting in front of you the whole time.

So, plainly: America is worth thanking God for.

Romans 12:18 says: “If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone.” Elsewhere, Saint Paul tells the Church to pray for kings and all in authority, “that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and reverence” (1 Timothy 2:1-2). We are not commanded to idolize the state. We are commanded to seek peace in our lives—and to pray for peace in the civil order, because peace gives households, parishes, and ordinary work enough room to breathe. A decent political order does not save souls. But can make it easier for souls to repent, worship, marry, raise children, and bury their dead without chaos swallowing the whole effort.

That room matters. But what is the room for?

Saint Gregory of Nyssa, in his Dialogue on the Soul and the Resurrection, he writes that “liberty is the coming up to a state which owns no master and is self-regulating,” and then the line worth turning over a few times: “everything that is free will be united with virtue; for virtue is a thing that has no master, that is, is free.”

Freedom is not the prize. Rather, Freedom is the room in which virtue becomes possible—the space to choose the good and do the slow, unglamorous work of becoming a person whose will is aligned with God’s.

Strip out that purpose and freedom stops being freedom. It becomes autonomy, which is just a dignified word for drift.

I don’t mind the modern talk of liberty, and I favor non-coercion—but liberty is frequently libertinism unmoored from virtue. Too often it means nothing sturdier than preference—appetite without discipline, choice without judgment. Paul never allows the move. “For freedom Christ has set us free,” he says, then immediately: “Do not use liberty as an opportunity for the flesh” (Galatians 5:1, 13).

Christian freedom has a shape. It bends toward holiness.

But holiness cannot be coerced; you cannot decree the people into virtue. Faith comes by hearing (Romans 10:17), and hearing requires the Word be preached, received, obeyed. Coercion can produce compliance. It cannot produce virtue, and it cannot produce worship. Christ stands at the door and knocks (Revelation 3:20). He does not kick it in.

I cannot talk about religious liberty as an abstraction; I feel the weight of this as a convert, and I value religious freedom because I am its beneficiary. I entered the Church in a country where I could do so openly—no harassment in the street, no visit from agents of the state who had suddenly developed a tender concern for my soul. By contrast, my wife and her mother were baptized by an Orthodox priest in secret in an apartment in the late Soviet Union out of fear of persecution.

So when I say America leaves room, this is what I mean. Room for work, worship, family, for building a home, for seeking opportunities for advancement, personal, professional, familial, cultural. Saint Paul tells the Thessalonians to “aspire to live quietly, to mind your own affairs, and to work with your hands” (1 Thessalonians 4:11). The quiet life is not a lesser Christian life. For most of us it is where ordinary, daily sanctifications either grows or shrinks.

But a quiet and peaceable life has minimal conditions. It needs enough order that a father can teach his son the Creed in the morning without bombs going off and the freedom to do so without a knock on the front door. Collectively, enough liberty that a parish can worship without asking permission of men who treat religion as a hobby with incense, and enough order that the churches are not targeted by authorities.

No amount of liberty or order will automatically grant virtue. Plenty of people waste peace. Plenty use freedom to become softer, greedier, more distracted. Which is exactly why gratitude and self-government belong together. “All things are lawful for me,” Saint Paul says, “but I will not be dominated by anything” (1 Corinthians 6:12).

It’s a principle I think is true: A free people who cannot govern their appetites will eventually beg to be governed by someone else.

I know the pattern in myself. A man can receive a gift and turn it into one more reason to clench his jaw by lunchtime. It is almost as if gratitude has to become a discipline. “In everything give thanks” (1 Thessalonians 5:18) is not a Hallmark greeting card throwaway line, it’s about keeping gifts in perspective and ambition from turning ugly.

The same lesson keeps arriving in my own family’s life through ordinary things—bed shopping, car repairs, baby gear, the unromantic objects that run a household. They force the larger questions. What kind of home are we making? What still belongs to a leaner chapter we never closed? The physical world will not let you stay abstract for long. The Word became flesh (John 1:14). Grace comes in water, bread, oil, spoken words. Children learn by repetition long before analysis, which is why hearing Gregory recite the Creed matters to me. It is funny. It is also inheritance.

And inheritance is where patriotism turns serious or embarrassing. I have no interest left in patriotism as costume. I want the harder thing—gratitude strong enough to tell the truth, to admit sin without collapsing into contempt. A mature patriotism can say America has been foolish and unjust, and also that she has handed many of us something rare: enough liberty to seek God openly, enough peace to build a household, enough freedom that a Russian immigrant turned American citizen wife can love this country with tears in her eyes and teach her husband to see it clearly.

So the Fourth means less to me now as a pageant and more as a question. What are we doing with the freedom we’ve been given? Are we spending it on reverence, work, family, mercy, self-command—or on drift? Faith without works is dead (James 2:17), and so is civic gratitude that never reaches practice.

Tonight I am thankful for plain things. A wife who helped me see this country with clearer eyes. Children who will receive whatever I manage to embody. Work to do, a home to tend, a parish to belong to. The freedom to worship without asking permission, to order a household under Christ, to repent and to build.

Freedom was never the finish line. What it is for—what it has always been for—is virtue.

Leave a comment

P.S. Happy 250th birthday, America!

This is part of an ongoing series on Mormonism and Orthodox Christianity. Some of these posts have come out of my family history—my mother spent thirty years in the LDS Church, and my ancestry goes back a century and a half beyond that. I’ve been writing about what I found when I went looking for the ancient Church.

This one starts, as many true things do, with a closet full of beans.

Our family left the Mormon religion in 1983 after my mom had spent three decades as a member (and of my ancestry, nearly a century and-a-half).

As a faithful Mormon family, we did all the things we were supposed to: Sacrament Meeting, Family Home Evening, and Family Home Storage. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints teaches that all Mormon families keep food stored in case of a long-term disaster or job loss, and has done so at least since the 1930s. They even sell food storage kits.

In a video on the official LDS website, this is a matter of obedience: “We wanted to follow the commandments and get our food storage … If you want to follow the Prophet, just do it.” For the average Mormon, this is understood as a wise way to prepare for a disaster or job loss, but it is impossible to extract this “follow[ing] the commandments” from Mormon eschatology.

Mormon theology teaches that in the “latter days” of world history, Joseph Smith would re-establish the true faith in the world that had fallen away after the time of the Apostles. That day apparently came in the 1820s, and the Mormon scriptures teach that the Second Coming would shortly follow: “[Christ] will reign till he descends on the earth to put all enemies under his feet, which time is nigh at hand.”

Being premillennial, the LDS teach that Jesus will return to earth to install his own earthly rule (in Missouri)—but not before the Great Tribulation of the Apocalypse and the scarier portions of the Olivet Discourse come tearing through the earth with a vengeance. Living “saints” would have to endure such things, should they be unfortunate enough to make it that far into history. It is not surprising, then, that disaster preparedness would be a preoccupation of people who expect to be the last generation on earth.

You store food because the end is near and it’s going to be rough.

So we stored food.

When we left Mormonism and became evangelicals—a huge shift in most ways, but when it comes to the end times, this was not a large shift, really. We were taught a dispensational premillennial understanding of the end-times as evangelicals. Yes, Mormonism is premillennial, but there was one key difference: we believed in a pre-tribulational rapture. Before anything truly catastrophic happened on the prophetic timetable, Jesus would return and escort Christian believers to heaven so they would not have to endure the pains of the Great Tribulation.

The disaster preparedness may have been pragmatic, but we fully expected to be whisked away before the Tribulation, and so our stored surplus food was rendered unnecessary.

So for several years, we worked on eating through the Family Home Storage. The storage closet contained many of my toys—I was in the single digits—so when we weren’t eating the cooked beans, I was pretending the beans were quicksand and sinking my GI Joes in them. Our end-times theology didn’t change much. But our attitude toward it had.

Years later, I came to understand eschatology differently than in my childhood. Beginning with a careful study of Scripture, and then a survey of Christian history, followed by a humbling bow to the Orthodox Church’s authority-as-teacher, I came to understand the following as the sine qua non of Orthodox eschatology.

1. Jesus Christ Is Coming Again

The most fundamental expectation of the Christian Church is that Jesus Christ will come again. No matter the martyrdoms, the heresies, or the numerical setbacks, the Church has always expected that Christ would return with finality. This is so important it is enshrined forever in the Nicene Creed, the most important and central statement of faith of the Orthodox Church: “And he shall come again with glory to judge the living and the dead.”

But the Church also sees the coming of Christ as something we taste in the present. Every time the Church celebrates the Divine Liturgy, Jesus Christ himself comes into the midst of his people in the power of the Holy Spirit, and is received in the Holy Eucharist. This is an eschatological event—where the fullness of Christ is made present in the Eucharist and in his people.

The end is something we eat.

2. The Kingdom of God Is Now—But What Is to Come Is Beyond Belief

While Mormonism and much of popular evangelicalism anticipate an earthly reign of Christ in the future, the Orthodox Church teaches that the kingdom of God is now. The reign of Jesus Christ is a present reality (Philippians 2:9), inaugurated at the ascension of Christ into heaven, where he sits down at the right hand of God. The so-called millennial reign of Christ in Revelation is understood as a spiritual reign from heaven, with the kingdom breaking through into the here and now.

And just as our Savior taught us in the Lord’s Prayer, we are to pray that God’s kingdom come on earth—not later, but now.

This doesn’t evacuate the future of its glory. What is to come is beyond imagination. But the Church is not a bunker. It’s a beachhead.

3. The Particulars of Revelation Aren’t Particularly Important

Ambrose Bierce defined the book of Revelation thusly: “REVELATION, n. A famous book in which St. John the Divine concealed all that he knew. The revealing is done by the commentators, who know nothing.”

It’s no minor factoid that the book of Revelation never appears in the liturgical readings of the Orthodox Church. We read from everything—Genesis to Job to Jonah, all the way through the New Testament’s Epistles and Gospels. But we never read from Revelation liturgically. Not because we reject it, but because Revelation was one of the most disputed books in the early Church canon—and while it is in the canon today, it remains a puzzling book. A range of opinions about its details has existed since the beginning, and various monks and individuals have proposed specific understandings of it. It is not unreasonable to suppose the book served an important purpose for its original audience and has since moved into a role testifying to the faithfulness of God through persecution and tribulation, no matter the characters at the helm of that persecution.

The train-schedule eschatology of Dispensationalism—complete with extensive wall charts—is foreign to Orthodoxy. That Christ is King, that he will come again, that he will vindicate his persecuted Church—these are the things the Orthodox Church is concerned with.

Funny, though: even though we don’t read Revelation in the services of the Orthodox Church, the services of the Orthodox Church look a lot like the book of Revelation. Revelation is a book of worship. The major elements are present at every Divine Liturgy, as we enter into the heavenly worship service mystically.

4. We Each Have Our Own Personal Eschaton to Face—and Preparedness Is Always Now

Hebrews 9:27 famously says: “It is appointed unto man once to die, and after that the judgment.”

None of us is aware of when we will take our last breath. And we will answer for what we do in this life. How many millions of people have pondered an end-times scenario and instead found themselves laid in the ground without ever seeing a Great Tribulation? The average human dies an ordinary death, and we will all stand before God one day at the final judgment.

Paul writes: “Behold, now is the favorable time; behold, now is the day of salvation” (2 Corinthians 6:2). John Chrysostom says Paul is “urging and compelling them to bestir themselves in order to lay hold of their own salvation.” Now.

We have only today. Tomorrow is not promised to any of us. We must repent now, and again, and again—until there is no “now” to repent in.

5. Yet We Paradoxically Live As If We Are Here in an Unending World

When an Orthodox Church is consecrated, it is consecrated unto the end of the world—“Keep this structure standing strong till the end of time, unshaken, and glorified in You.” We don’t set out to merely sojourn here — like we’re buying train tickets into eternity and have no interest in the present. We are pilgrims, but we still seek to establish an outpost of the kingdom of God in the present, and if possible, one that will last until the Second Coming of Christ.

Part and parcel of living now is the desire to see God’s kingdom manifest now. Chrysostom comments on thy kingdom come:

Seest thou how He hath taught us also to be modest, by making it clear that virtue is not of our endeavors only, but also of the grace from above? And again, He hath enjoined each one of us, who pray, to take upon himself the care of the whole world. For He did not at all say, ‘Thy will be done’ in me, or in us, but everywhere on the earth; so that error may be destroyed, and truth implanted, and all wickedness cast out, and virtue return, and no difference in this respect be henceforth between heaven and earth. ‘For if this come to pass,’ saith He, ‘there will be no difference between things below and above, separated as they are in nature; the earth exhibiting to us another set of angels.’

So we live, and pray, and hope that the kingdom is made visibly present now—that holiness and virtue are increased, and that the true worship of God is spread throughout the world as it is in the throne room of God.

The kingdom doesn’t descend from the outside while we store beans.

Conclusion

The canned beans are long gone. The G.I. Joes survived—until sold later in a yard sale. The closet is empty now, and the end of the world has not yet arrived.

Storing up provisions is not a bad idea, and all of us would be wise to take a cue from the Mormons in this regard. But the Orthodox Church does not obsess over end-times scenarios. As one of the most persecuted Christian groups in history, we know what it means to prepare for hard times.

But the grand testimony of the Church in her saints is that our greatest preparation for hard times is this: repentance, humility, and faith.

A young monk said to Abba Sisoes: “Abba, what should I do? I fell.”

The elder answered, “Get up.”

The monk said, “I got up and I fell again.”

The elder replied, “Get up again.”

But the young monk asked, “For how long should I get up when I fall?”

“Until your death,” answered Abba Sisoes. “For a man heads to his judgment either fallen or getting back up again.”

That’s Orthodox eschatology in one exchange. Not a wall chart. Not a food closet. Not a rapture.

The grand testimony of the Church in her saints is that our greatest preparation for hard times is simply this: just a man, getting up again.

Repentance, humility, and faith.

Leave a comment

Note: My apologies to Thelma “Granny” Geer, author of Mormonism, Mama, & Me. The title of this piece owes her a debt.

This article has been updated. It originally was published on the now-defunct On Behalf of All blog at Ancient Faith Blogs circa 2013.

June 1862—A Prophet Cornered

It’s June 1862, and a splinter community of Latter-day Saints is dug in behind dirt and desperation, waiting for the end of the world—or at least for the territorial militia to arrive first. Their prophet has been receiving visions. He has been writing letters to Brigham Young. He has been gathering followers. He has been gathering property.

And in at least one of his prophecies, he says something so big and audacious, it feels like it should belong in a dystopian film, not a family tree: If you are a son or daughter of Adam, I am now your leader.

Some of the followers try to leave. They want their things back—things that were “given” to the communal cause under the pressure of imminent apocalypse. But the camp doesn’t just say no, they detain people, making their own people into prisoners within their own settlement. Word gets out. The governor issues an ultimatum and a militia forms. The standoff collapses into violence, and Joseph Morris—the would-be prophet-king of the whole human race—ends up dead in the chaos.

This is usually told as a strange footnote in the history of American Mormonism: an obscure, short-lived confrontation in the Utah Territory in 1862. For my family, it’s not a footnote. It’s part of our inheritance—one of the earliest chapters in a long, complicated habit we’ve had for generations: We convert.

Not in the shallow sense—religion as a lifestyle tweak, a new community, a better playlist. I mean conversion as upheaval. As rupture. As “we can’t stay where we are, not honestly.” The kind of movement that costs you something, and sometimes costs you almost everything.

My great-great-great grandfather George Thompson and his family didn’t drift into “Zion” the way modern people drift into a new city. They traveled close to 5,000 miles from England to Utah because they believed the Mormon claim was not a private spirituality but a map of reality. They joined, they moved, they built, and somewhere along the line they ended up tangled in the Morrisite movement—one more schism in an already schism-prone frontier religion.

If you want a neat and tidy moral lesson here, I can give you the cheap version: people can be fanatics, and religion is a major driver of fanaticism.

Purported prophets can really be liars. Communities of faith can become coercive. It’s true. It’s also an easy judgment to make. It lets us stand above it all like a safe, modern narrator—shaking our heads at those weird 19th-century zealots while we sip on something cold.

But that’s actually missing the point.

The point is that the modern world—especially the American version—trains you to assume religion is basically a preference. A choice. A consumer menu. If we don’t like one thing, we can try another. If we outgrow a community, we can just “move on.” If a doctrine feels too sharp, we can sand it down and choose to believe whatever variation of that doctrine suits our fancy. If a practice feels too strange, we can just leave it behind.

My family story doesn’t let me pretend that’s what’s happening.

Because whatever else the Morrissites were, they weren’t casual. And whatever else my ancestors were doing, they weren’t browsing. They were staking their lives on something they believed was True—with a capital T—and that’s why their mistakes were dangerous, and why their devotion was costly, and why their conversions mattered.

And here’s the uncomfortable twist: I didn’t inherit this story as a warning about “those people.” I inherited it as a prelude to my own.

Today’s piece is a reflection based on an interview I did on The Areopagus Podcast with Father Andrew Stephen Damick and Pastor Mike Landsman on Ancient Faith Radio.

Conversion: An American Inheritance?

Growing up in an evangelical home, I sometimes felt like I was living in two religions at once. My extended family—cousins, grandparents, the larger web—largely remained Mormon. The culture and identity were there. And because my mother left Mormonism when I was a toddler, the differences were not theoretical in our home. They were daily. They were linguistic. They were about the very shape of reality.

• Mormonism says Jesus is our elder brother who lived righteously and showed us the way.

• Evangelicalism says Jesus is God incarnate.

To some, those sentences may look like they’re making similar points—but they’re not. They’re actually making very different points. And when you grow up hearing both in deliberate contrast, you learn early that theology isn’t academic—it’s the difference between two worlds.

I was two years old when my father died in a car accident. My mother was widowed with four children. And in the middle of the trauma of that loss, she became open—truly open—to something else. She converted to evangelical Christianity.

That conversion wasn’t merely “switching churches.” It was a change in the very grammar of God. She went, as I often put it, from seeing Jesus as our elder brother who did all the right things to help us do all the right things… to seeing Him as God incarnate. Not a creature elevated, not a moral hero with divine backing, but the eternal Word made flesh. This is no minor doctrinal adjustment, but an entirely different Christ.

And once we change Christ, everything changes downstream: salvation, the Church, Scripture, worship, what a human being even is.

So my childhood wasn’t merely “Bible time.” It was catechesis by contrast. My mother would read Scripture at breakfast, and when I’d ask a question, she’d sometimes stop herself mid-answer and say, Wait—that might be a Mormon teaching. And then she’d go study. Not to win an argument, not to prove something, but to tell her son the truth about God.

That’s where my long road “home” actually starts—not with an adult intellectual quest, not with my later zig-zags through Protestant traditions, not with Orthodox liturgy, not with some aesthetic romance about icons.

It starts with grief, with a widow. With the slow, costly work of unlearning and relearning who Jesus is.

My mother gave me a gift, though I didn’t understand it at the time: she taught me that conversion is real. Not therapy; not an upgrade. Real. The kind of thing that asks you to rebuild your house from the ground up.

The Protestant Pendulum: Or, How I Learned to Read the Reformers

I inherited her seriousness. As a teenager and young adult, I threw myself at evangelicalism with the intensity of someone who believed every word mattered—because I did believe that. I handed out Jack Chick tracts. I memorized apologetics. I was sure of just about everything. Later, I spent time in charismatic circles, waiting and listening for the gift of tongues. Later still, I became what we called a “cage stage” Calvinist—a young Reformed Christian so convinced of five-point Calvinism that it would have been a mercy to put me in a cage until I calmed down and got some sobriety.

I was probably pretty tiresome. Also, looking back, I was hungry.

The hunger showed itself especially through reading. I read the Reformers—particularly Martin Luther—and something shifted for me. Luther kept saying that baptism saves you. Not “baptism represents salvation” or “baptism is a symbol of your faith.” He kept saying what Saint Peter says it in the epistles: “Baptism . . . now saves you” (1 Peter 3:21). And suddenly the purely symbolic view of the sacraments—the “well, it’s just a memorial meal” approach—began to feel thin. Not wrong, exactly. Just thin.

I was sensing something the modern Protestant world had stopped sensing: that God might actually do something in the holy things. That He might really be present. That matter might, well, matter.

So I drifted into Anglo-Catholicism—that high-church Anglican tradition where you try to hold onto your Protestant identity while grasping for the liturgical weight and sacramental conviction of the ancient Church. You get the bells, the incense, the sense that something real is happening. You get to keep your Bible confidence. You get the both/and.

Except the both/and started to feel like neither/nor.

Share Simply Orthodox

The Wafer in the Trash: Or, When Symbols Aren’t Enough

Here’s where the theology got concrete for me. I was part of a small Anglican community. We took the sacraments seriously, but being Anglican put us in the position of having to reconcile our self-conscious efforts at “being catholic” with the historical reality of Protestantism inherent to the Anglican way of Christianity.

During this period, I was working a temp job as a janitor at an Assembly of God. One week I found a box of discarded communion wafers in the trash of one of the Sunday School classrooms—and week after week, I was there to clean up communion “leftovers” from this particular classroom. Apparently, this class was experimenting with more liturgical Christianity, because Sunday after Sunday there were leftover wafers, clearly intended as communion bread, designated to be tossed out by the janitor.

From the first discovery, the question appeared in my head with force: What do I do with this? I couldn’t throw it away, could I? Even though they weren’t a high church religious body with claims to Apostolic Succession, I couldn’t bring myself to toss it. It meant something deeply meaningful to them, and was intended to be connected with Christ’s institution of the Eucharist. Somewhere in my bones, I knew: you don’t toss away something holy like it’s a soggy napkin.

So I called my Anglican bishop, explained the situation, and got my orders. I was to consume it. Alone, reverently, in the Sunday School room, like someone who didn’t quite know what he believed about these particular elements, but knew he believed something special is in the Eucharist, and whatever this is, it is certainly intended to be a ritual Supper with our Lord.

I was on a low carb diet at the time, so this was no small sacrifice—I downed so many wafers and grape juice thimbles that summer!

As a Protestant, I had wandered into the territory of Catholicism—the conviction that the Eucharist is really Christ, not symbolically Christ—but I was trying to camp out in Protestantism, which kept insisting it was just bread, just memory, just a beautiful sign.

You really can’t live in both places. Growing up, the modern Protestant world had trained me to think that symbols are enough, that meaning doesn’t require presence, and that worship is primarily about what happens in your mind, not what happens in matter.

But the wafers in my hands said something different.

The Fear That Broke: Hawaii, Galatians 3, and the Mercy I Didn’t Expect

By this point in my life as an Anglican, I had read my way into believing something radical: the early Church still exists. Not as a memory, not as a beautiful ideal that we study and learn about from a distance. Still exists. With Apostolic Succession, with the sacraments, with the full liturgical inheritance.

That belief should have sent me running to the Orthodox Church. But it didn’t. Instead, it sent me running from the Orthodox Church for quite some time.

Because I was afraid.

And the fear had a name: works righteousness. I had been evangelical and Reformed long enough to absorb the Protestant anxiety about salvation by works. And from a distance, Orthodoxy—with its talk of theosis/deification, transformation, the healing of human nature through grace—sounded like an elaborate system of spiritual earning. Like you had to do enough, pray enough, fast enough, pull yourself up high enough to finally meet God halfway.

It sounded exhausting. It sounded like moralism dressed up in liturgy.

I was wrong. But I didn’t know it yet.

Then I visited an Orthodox parish a few months after I moved to Hawaii. A bishop was visiting, and he stood up to preach on Galatians 3—that classic Protestant proof-text about faith, not works, about the Spirit, about grace. And he preached the Gospel of God’s grace and mercy so clearly, so purely, so Christianly that it felt like something in me broke open.

He said—and I’m really relaying my memory’s impressions—that in Orthodoxy, we don’t view salvation as a legal contract we have to pay off. We don’t view it as a transaction where God demands a price and we have to scramble to meet it. We view it as the healing of our human nature by the grace of God. The deification of humanity. Theosis.

It’s not earning. It’s union.

When you’re sick, you don’t negotiate with the doctor about how much sickness you’re allowed to keep, you go to the doctor to be healed. And healing means the doctor’s medicine enters your body, does its work, and you’re restored to wholeness.

That’s what salvation is. Not a legal settlement. A healing.

And suddenly, the fear dissolved.

Not because I had figured out every theological detail. Not because I was ready to be Orthodox in the way a person is ready to be something after a committee vote. But because in that moment, I realized: this is what I’ve been looking for. Orthodoxy is the coherence I kept searching for in Protestantism. This is the sacramental realism I couldn’t quite articulate in Anglicanism. This is the Church that still exists, still carries the apostolic faith, still offers the fullness of Christ.

This is home.

A Decision Point: The Early Church Still Exists

People sometimes ask me: don’t you still feel like a convert? Aren’t you worried that you chose Orthodoxy, rather than being born into it? Like you’re somehow less of a “real” Orthodox Christian because you didn’t inherit it from your grandmother?

And Father Andrew Stephen Damick said something in our conversation that cut through all of that noise: Christianity started with converts.

Think about it. The Apostles didn’t grow up Christians. Peter didn’t attend an Orthodox liturgy as a child and then become an altar server and one day a priest. The early Church was entirely composed of people who had chosen to follow Christ, often at enormous cost. They converted from Judaism. They converted from paganism. They converted from false gospels. And their conversions weren’t timid intellectual movements—they were upheavals that cost them property, relationships, sometimes their lives.

Conversion isn’t less authentic than inheritance. It’s the pattern of Christianity itself.

But here’s what matters: true conversion isn’t brand-switching. It’s not “I tried that thing, it didn’t work, so now I’m trying this thing.” It’s the fundamental realignment of your life with Christ. It’s the moment where you encounter the fullness of the faith and it becomes—to use the language of Scripture—bone of your bone and flesh of your flesh. It becomes you. You can’t imagine being any other way, not honestly.

The Apostle Peter captured it perfectly: “Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life” (John 6:68).

Not “Lord, I’ve compared the options and Orthodoxy seems optimal.” Not “Lord, I like the aesthetics of your Church.” But: to whom shall we go? There’s nowhere else to go. There’s no higher ground. There’s no other place where the fullness of Christ dwells.

That’s the place I’ve arrived at. Not because I’m a perfect Orthodox Christian—I’m not. Not because I have all the answers—I don’t. But because I’ve encountered something real. Something that can’t be upgraded from. Something that holds together the whole inheritance of the faith, from the Apostles to now.

My great-great-great grandfather George Thompson traveled 5,000 miles to find what he thought was Zion. His daughter ended up in a siege, and nearly was shot herself, before returning to the mainstream Mormon fold. My mother lost her husband and had to rebuild her faith from rubble. I zig-zagged through evangelical fervor and Reformed conviction and Anglo-Catholic longing to the calm, still waters of Orthodoxy.

All of it was looking for the same thing: a place where God is really present. Where the sacraments are really efficacious. Where the ancient faith hasn’t been watered down into a consumer preference or gutted of its sacramental meaning. Where you can finally stop auditioning religious identities and come home.

I found it. Not in a neat package. Not after a five-step program. But in the ancient Church, still alive, still singing the same psalms, still offering the same Christ.

Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life.

Leave a comment

Often it takes twenty years. That is the timeline often cited by the monks of Mount Athos for a novice to acquire the mind of the Church.

Two decades of chopping vegetables, standing in the dark, submitting to a spiritual father, and having your ego systematically ground into dust before you can even begin to trust your own theological instincts. Twenty years of silence before you can reliably distinguish the voice of the Holy Spirit from the voice of your own pride.

We do not like that timeline. We live in America. We have Amazon Prime.

We read a copy of Metropolitan Kallistos (Timothy) Ware’s The Orthodox Church, watch three hours of aggressive YouTube apologetics, buy a prayer rope, and suddenly we feel entirely equipped to correct our priest on his liturgical rubrics. We want the phronema—the deep, intuitive Orthodox mindset—by next Tuesday, and think somehow we can download the ancient faith like a software update.

Metropolitan Saba, the primate of the Antiochian Archdiocese of North America, recently sat down for a wide-ranging interview with Ancient Faith Radio. If you haven’t tuned in, you should (see below). He is one of the greatest gifts to the Church in the Americas right now. He brings the gravity of the Middle East to the non-stop, anxious energy of our American religion.

Listening to His Eminence speak—or listening to him pray—is like witnessing a master physician diagnose a patient who didn’t even realize he is sick. The thing is, we are trying to build the ancient Church using American corporate tools and internet paranoia. Metropolitan Saba is gently pointing us toward a different way.

The Bunker and the Sons of God

There is a specific fear that grips many of us when we enter the Orthodox Church. It makes sense. We look out at the culture, and we see a secular acid bath. Everything is dissolving.

We look back at the Evangelical or mainline Protestant churches we left, and we watch them frantically adapting to the culture, compromising their theology into oblivion just to keep the seats full. We are afraid of doing it wrong. We are scared that if we loosen our grip for even a second, the Orthodox Church will slide into the exact same liberalism we just fled.

So we build a bunker. We take the ancient canons of the Church and we pour them over our heads like concrete. We scour the internet for the strictest, most severe monastic advice we can find.

Metropolitan Saba noted this exact phenomenon in the interview: priests are dealing with a rising tide of fundamentalism, largely driven by online lectures and social media algorithms that reward the more extreme voices online. He mentioned a common tale: a young man, deeply influenced by YouTube videos about Elder Ephraim, becomes visibly upset when his rigid, downloaded understanding of the faith is challenged by actual pastoral reality.

We bring our Protestant literalism with us, we just swap out a literalist reading of the King James Bible for a literalist reading of the Rudder.

This is the leaven of the Pharisees. In the Gospel of Matthew, Christ unleashes his most devastating critique not on the pagans, but on the religious fundamentalists of his day. “They tie up heavy, cumbersome loads and put them on other people’s shoulders, but they themselves are not willing to lift a finger to move them” (Matthew 23:4). When we turn Orthodoxy into a hyper-rigid legal code, we are tying up heavy loads. We take a faith designed to heal the soul and turn it into a checklist designed to crush it.

We forget the entire argument of the Apostle Paul to the Galatians. Paul writes that the law was put in charge to lead us to Christ. It was a guardian. It was a babysitter meant to keep us from running into traffic while we were still children. “But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian” (Galatians 3:25).

God did not send his Son to make us perfect law-keepers. He sent his Son so that we might receive adoption. “Because you are his sons, God sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, the Spirit who calls out, ‘Abba, Father.’ So you are no longer a slave, but God’s child” (Galatians 4:6-7).

Metropolitan Saba understands this. His Eminence told his interviewer that we have to learn to respect the canons of the Church while simultaneously living in the liberty of the sons of God. The canons are not a penal code. They are medical guidelines.

A spiritual father does not read a manual and dispense uniform punishments; he looks at the specific spiritual sickness of the person sitting in front of him and prescribes custom medicine. You cannot get custom medicine from a YouTube channel—you need a relationship with an in-the-flesh priest.

Share

The Religious Vendor

The fundamentalism we battle is heavily fueled by the culture we live in.

Metropolitan Saba was born in Latakia, on the Mediterranean coast of Syria. He grew up in a world where the Orthodox faith was not a hobby, a fun thing to debate with friends, but a matter of survival. When he talks about the Middle East, he talks about a people who have endured economic collapse, war, and centuries of persecution. That kind of pressure produces a deeply collective culture. You survive because of solidarity. You survive because the Church is your family.

Then he came to America. The shock he describes is telling. In America, we do not have persecution. We have money. And because we have money, our default instinct is to turn the parish into a religious business.

We view the priesthood as a religious profession rather than a spiritual martyrdom. We run our parishes like vendors. We pay our dues, we expect a certain quality of liturgical service, and if the youth group isn’t performing up to our standards, we take our business elsewhere. The financial dimension dominates our ecclesiastical life. We have line-item budgets and strategic planning committees, but we lack the fierce, bleeding solidarity of the Christians who kept the faith alive under the Ottoman Empire.

We have organized the people of the Church, but we have individualized the faith. This is the great danger for those of us living in the wealthy West. We think our money protects us. But the witness of the Middle Eastern Christians is a glaring reminder that the truest spiritual resilience is not found in an endowment fund. It is found in a community that knows how to suffer together.

We have so much to learn from their courage, if we would only stop trying to run our parishes like corporate franchises.

The Corporate Merger

Nowhere is this corporate mindset more obvious than in how we handle the scandal of Orthodox disunity in America.

It is a glaring canonical failure. The ancient rule of the Church was simple: one city, one bishop. With time, the practice expanded to one diocese, one bishop, but the principle was the same: The bishop is the icon of Christ, the center of unity for the local eucharistic community. But look at any major American city today. We may have a Greek bishop, an Antiochian bishop, a Russian bishop, and an OCA bishop, all claiming neighboring zip codes, all operating parallel administrative structures.

It is an ecclesiological mess that violates the very canons we claim to hold so dear.

But our proposed solution to this problem reveals our underlying disease. Because we view the Church through the lens of American corporate structures, we treat pan-Orthodox unity like an impending corporate merger. We think the problem will be solved when the CEOs—the bishops—get into a boardroom in New York or Istanbul, sign a treaty, consolidate their assets, and announce a new organizational flowchart.

We wait for a top-down administrative fix. Metropolitan Saba takes this apart brick by brick. The Church is not a company. It is the Body of Christ. You do not unite a living body by signing a piece of paper. You unite it by living together.

If we want unity, we have to build it from the base. We have to activate our pastoral activities across jurisdictional lines. The Antiochian parish should probably invite the Greek parish down the street over for Vespers. The OCA youth group might need to run a food pantry with the Russian youth group. We have to exchange visits. We have to pray together. We have to actually stand at the same chalice and discover, through the messy, inconvenient reality of shared human life, that we are already one.

Unity is not an administrative achievement. It is a spiritual reality that has to be lived before it can be codified. As long as we sit in our respective ethnic or convert silos, complaining about the bishops on the internet, we are the ones perpetuating the division.

We want the quick fix. We want the corporate merger. We do not want to do the slow, unglamorous work of loving the parish across town.

The Medicine

We are in a massive moment of transition. Converts are flooding into the Church. The internet is funneling thousands of spiritually starved Americans toward the ancient faith. By some estimates, as many as 16,000 new converts were received in the United States at Pascha in 2026.

This is a profound gift. As Metropolitan Saba notes, these converts bring a serious, intense dedication that often wakes up the cradle Orthodox who may have been taking the sacraments for granted. There is new life pouring into our parishes.

But with that new life comes the chaotic, aggressive energy of American religion. We bring our literalism. We bring our impatience. We bring our desperate need to be right, our fear of the secular world, and our tendency to treat the Kingdom of God like a corporate franchise.

We want to skip the cross and go straight to the resurrection.

Orthodoxy does not work that way. The Church is a hospital, and the medicine takes time. It requires an American-born spiritual leadership rooted deeply in the tradition, and as Metropolitan Saba gently reminds us, that kind of leadership takes generations to cultivate. It cannot be rushed.

It takes twenty years to acquire the mind of the Church.

It takes decades of standing in the nave, submitting to the fasts, and keeping your mouth shut before the frantic, argumentative energy of the American convert finally burns off, leaving behind the quiet, unshakeable peace of the sons of God.

Stop checking your watch. Just take the medicine faithfully.

Listen to the discussion yourself here:

Leave a comment

If you start a new job and your boss immediately hands you a failing, multimillion-dollar project, we would call it a “baptism by fire.” It is a corporate cliché, a piece of shorthand for a steep learning curve or a highly stressful initiation.

But when St. John the Forerunner used the phrase in the Gospels, he wasn’t talking about a stressful Tuesday at the office—he was talking about a smeltering furnace. “He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire,” John warned the crowds (Matthew 3:11).

In the modern era, we tend to read the word fire as a metaphor for enthusiasm. Modern Christians want to be “on fire” for the Lord, which usually means having a really good time during the “worship music.” But as Fr. Stephen de Young and Fr. Andrew Stephen Damick frequently point out on their excellent Lord of Spirits podcast, the biblical writers weren’t using fire as a metaphor for warm fuzzies, but were instead using it as a metaphor for metallurgy.

A baptism by fire is a process of painful purification. When you refine gold or silver, you subject it to intense heat so that the impurities—the dross—rise to the surface in order to be skimmed off. The fire doesn’t destroy the gold; it destroys everything that isn’t gold. So spiritually speaking, a baptism by fire is the agonizing but necessary process of confronting our own weaknesses, burning away our self-deception, and emerging resilient. It is the crucible of spiritual warfare.

But how exactly does a Christian enter into this refining fire? And once we are in it, what keeps us from simply burning up?

A few weeks ago, we began a series on the Holy Mysteries. First, we gave a “field guide” to the sacraments of the Orthodox Church. Then we looked at why we baptize and commune children. Today, we arrive at the mysterious, fragrant, and heavily misunderstood reality of Chrismation.

With a little help from the hosts of the Lord of Spirits podcast, we are going to walk through how the Orthodox Church understands the anointing of the Holy Spirit, how it connects to ancient Israelite kings, and why your local parish is actually a localized invasion force.

Counting Sacraments?

If you ask a Roman Catholic how many sacraments there are, they will promptly tell you there are seven. If you ask an Orthodox Christian, an honest answer is perhaps a shrug, followed by, “At least seven?”

As the Lord of Spirits hosts amuse themselves by pointing out—and they are frequently amused—the concept of “sacraments” (or mysteries, as we prefer) isn’t as rigidly categorized in the East. Historically, we see the most rigorous definitions along these lines in the Orthodox Church in response to Western questions and conversations.

We know Baptism and the Eucharist are mysteries. But we also consider the blessing of water at Theophany, the tonsuring of a monk, and perhaps even the painting of an icon to be sacramental acts. But right at the center of our initiatory rites is Chrismation: the anointing of a new believer with a specially prepared oil—called Holy Chrism—that has been consecrated by the bishops of the Church.

For our Catholic and many Protestant friends, the equivalent rite is Confirmation. But there is a major logistical and theological difference in how we apply it. In the West, Confirmation is often delayed until the child is older and can articulate the faith. So a baby is baptized, but they are not “confirmed” in the Holy Spirit until they reach an “age of reason,” making Confirmation function almost like a graduation ceremony or a public coming-of-age profession of faith.

And as neat as a coming-of-age rite can be, Orthodoxy, however, anoints babies immediately after they are pulled from the baptismal waters. Why? Because we do not view the gift of the Holy Spirit as a diploma for passing a theology quiz. We view it as the equipping of a soldier, and this is signified in anointing them for spiritual battle.

You don’t send a soldier into the meat grinder of human existence and tell them you’ll give them their armor in thirteen years if they memorize the catechism. You outfit them immediately.

To listen to this episode yourself, check it out at Ancient Faith or below on YouTube:

The Anointed Kings and the Restricted Spirit

To understand what this oil is actually doing, we have to look backward. In the Old Testament, the Holy Spirit was not poured out on everyone. The presence of the Spirit was targeted, specific, and often restricted to those who needed to fulfill an impossible task.

When you read through the historical books (such as 1-4 Kingdoms, frequently labeled in English Bibles as 1–2 Samuel and 1–2 Kings), you notice that the Spirit rests on or abides with specific figures: prophets, priests, and kings. When Samuel anoints David with oil, the text explicitly links the physical oil with the Spirit’s descent: “Then Samuel took the horn of oil and anointed him in the midst of his brothers. And the Spirit of the Lord rushed upon David from that day forward” (1 Samuel 16:13).

This is the biblical imagery of anointing. The oil is the visible, physical vehicle for the invisible, spiritual reality.

But this anointing was also deeply tied to the concept of restoration. By the time of the Second Temple period, Jewish tradition was thick with Messianic expectations. Messiah (or Christos in Greek) literally means “The Anointed One.” Because Israel had been anointed in three main offices, they began looking for a Kingly Messiah (like David) to defeat their enemies, a Priestly Messiah (like Aaron) to purify the temple, and a Prophetic Messiah (like Moses) to speak the very words of God.

Interestingly, as Fr. Stephen explains, there was also a tradition regarding the Messiah ben Ephraim—a messianic figure whose specific task was the reconstitution of the lost tribes of Israel. The expectation was that when the ultimate Anointed One arrived, He wouldn’t just sit on a throne; He would put the shattered family of God back together.

The Messianic Marker

And that brings us to the banks of the Jordan River.

When St. John the Baptist is standing in the water, he isn’t just waiting for a nice guy with good moral teachings. He is waiting for a very specific set of markers for the One for whom he would prepare the way. In the Gospel of John, the Forerunner says, “I myself did not know him, but he who sent me to baptize with water said to me, ‘He on whom you see the Spirit descend and remain, this is he who baptizes with the Holy Spirit’” (John 1:33).

The Holy Spirit is the ultimate marker of the Messiah. When the Spirit descends like a dove and rests on Jesus, it is the cosmic signal that the Kingly, Priestly, and Prophetic Anointed One has finally arrived.

But here is where the story turns a corner and directly implicates you and me. The Anointed One does not keep the anointing to Himself. As the prophet Joel had predicted centuries earlier, the era of the Messiah would be marked by the Spirit being poured out “on all flesh” (Joel 2:28)—this is why this text is explicitly quoted by Saint Peter in Acts (2:17-21) to explain the miraculous events of Pentecost, making the Spirit extend to all believers, regardless of age, gender, or status.

What was once restricted to the kings and prophets of the Old Testament is now democratized in the New Covenant. The idea of anointing is no longer limited to a guy holding a scepter or wearing an ephod. Through the mystery of Chrismation, every single Christian is anointed.

When the priest traces the sign of the cross on your forehead, eyes, and chest with the Holy Chrism, you are being integrated into a new, restored, and transformed humanity.

You are being drafted into the royal priesthood.

The Mobile Temple

This alters our fundamental geography of “where” God lives.

For the ancient Israelite, the presence of God was intensely localized. It was in the Tabernacle. Later, it was in the inner sanctum of the stone Temple in Jerusalem. Second Temple Jewish thought was incredibly focused on this reality: the Temple was the singular overlap between heaven and earth.

The early Christians, however, recognized that Jesus Christ Himself was the new Temple. A living, breathing, walking, sacramental, sacrficial, new Temple—He is the ultimate, indestructible meeting place of God and man.

But it doesn’t stop with Jesus. Because we are baptized into Christ, and because we are sealed with His Spirit in Chrismation, the New Testament writers begin using astonishing language to describe normal, everyday people. “Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you?” St. Paul asks the Corinthians (1 Cor. 6:19).

We are so used to this verse being used as a proof-text for eating your vegetables, limiting booze, and putting a damper on your cigar night with the boys, that we miss the sheer theological import of what Paul is saying. He is essentially telling a group of blue-collar workers and former pagans in a chaotic port city that they are now a walking, talking, dwelling place of God. We are to become a breathing Holy of Holies.

The purpose of the sacraments is not just to impart a legal status or give you a ticket to heaven. Chrismation turns you into a mobile Temple. We are meant to carry the presence of God out of the nave of the church building and into the grocery store, the boardroom, and the neighborhood.

The Intensity that Bears Fruit

This brings us back to the fire, and to what we are actually supposed to do with this anointing.

In Jeremiah 31, God promises a new covenant where He will put His law within us and write it on our hearts. The Holy Spirit is the fulfillment of this promise. The Spirit empowers Christians to actually keep the commandments of God. It is not merely a matter of intense, white-knuckled individual effort; it is a synergistic work of the Spirit operating within a willing human heart.

In Lord of Spirits, the “podfathers” emphasize that Christians are called to bring the Holy Spirit with them into the world to actively drive out evil. We are involved in spiritual warfare, seeking to replace demonic chaos with the presence of God.

But how do we fight? We don’t do it by casting magical spells or shouting at the sky. We do it through what St. Paul calls the fruit of the Spirit: love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control (Galatians 5:22-23).

We may be tempted to read that list as a polite checklist for being a nice person. But in the context of spiritual warfare, the fruits of the Spirit are weapons of territorial conquest. They are the means by which we conquer the nations—love not swords; self-control instead of suicide bombs; gentleness instead of blows.

Toward the end of the show, Fr. Stephen really emphasized a challenge for all of us. That when we introduce profound, immovable peace into a chaotic, anxiety-ridden world, we are driving out a spirit of fear, whether that world is a neighborhood, a workplace, or your family life. When we exercise supernatural patience with someone who usually provokes us to anger, we are extinguishing the fire of demons and replacing it with the presence of God. This transformation occurs through everyday, microscopic efforts to love and be at peace.

Fr. Stephen continues:

So through just one person who’s honestly striving every day to follow Christ, both in keeping commandments and in repenting when not… One of the most powerful ways to completely transform a social dynamic is to apologize, to actually accept the blame for our failures, to actually be honest about them and apologize. So repentance is a big part of this, too. But one person doing that can transform a whole system, can transform a whole workplace, can transform a whole dynamic. And it’s when we do that that people see Christ in us. It’s when we do that, not win arguments, that people are drawn to find Christ in his Church, and as they do that they start to become Christians as well, and they start to make an honest effort to follow Christ. And some of us who have been Christians our whole lives but maybe aren’t making an honest effort right now are inspired by seeing those who do to start making further efforts ourselves.

And slowly, slowly, piece by piece, big systems can be transformed. If you don’t believe that’s true, I will once again point you to history, where a bunch of peasants and fishermen, in a backwater of the Roman Empire—it took them 300 years, but—completely transformed society, culture, politics, everything, just by each one of them being willing to follow Christ, whether that meant life or death, whether that meant glory or dishonor, but they made that honest effort every day. And through them the Spirit—the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of God—came to fill a whole empire and change it. And it can do that again, but we don’t start by trying to stage some kind of Christian revolution. We’ve seen how that goes. We do that by each of us, in our place, in the place where God has put us—in the family he’s put us in, in the occupation he’s put us in, in the church community he’s put us in—making these everyday, day-to-day efforts to love, to be at peace, to experience real joy, to be kind, to be good, to be gentle, to be faithful, to exercise self-control.

It is worth repeating what he just said: This is exactly how the early Christians transformed the Roman Empire. They didn’t win by out-arguing the pagan philosophers or assembling a massive military force. They won because they were baptized in fire, sealed with the oil of kings, and lived as walking temples in a world that was dying for the presence of God.

They bore the fruit of the Spirit in the face of lions and gladiators, and in doing so, they drove the demons out of Rome.

The call to action for us is identical. You have been anointed with the same Chrism. You contain the same Spirit.

• Make an honest effort to follow Christ today.

• Forgive the person who slighted you.

• Tell the truth when a lie would be easier.

• Pray for your enemies.

In doing so, you aren’t just being a good citizen; you are taking back ground for the Kingdom of God, one peaceful interaction at a time.

For something a little different, I’d like to share this song from my pals in the Christian rap outfit, P.I.D., “The Crucible.” If nothing else, it will give you a soundtrack for this message:

Leave a comment

Heresy is rarely original. It’s usually just a couple of ancient errors duct-taped together by someone who thinks they are the first person in 2,000 years to finally read the Bible correctly.

Recently, a commenter stopped by my blog to drop off a manifesto or two. It was a theological yard sale. The author had taken 3rd-century Sabellianism (Modalism), duct-taped it to 19th-century Hyper-Preterism (the idea that all prophecy, including the Second Coming, was fulfilled in AD 70), and littered the whole thing with enough emojis to make a teenager dizzy.

He confidently informed me that Trinitarians share a heresy with Islam and Jehovah’s Witnesses—two sides of the same heretical coin. He bolstered his Christology with a theologically rigorous use of the flexed bicep emoji, and he let me know that anyone waiting for the Second Coming is a fraud.

Normally I would not give much time to refuting such an argument, and even here my refutation is much shorter than it could be—but I have encountered both the Christological errors and the bizarre redefinition of the Gospel many times over the years in a variety of places.

Because while this might look like a digital clown show, the root of these errors is actually quite common.

Here is the problem: Heresy—which literally means “to choose” one’s own path apart from the historic Church (derived from the Ancient Greek haíresis, which literally means “choice” or “thing chosen”)—always shrinks God. It reduces the eternal, relational God of the Trinity into a lonely monad who just wears different “masks” (Father, Son, Spirit) depending on the era.

And it reduces the cosmic, death-trampling Gospel of Jesus Christ into a localized Roman military campaign.

Both of these errors stem from a failure to understand the scale of who our Lord God and Savior Jesus Christ is and what He came to do.

The “Flesh Suit” Christology

Let’s look at the appeal of this for a moment. The Trinity is, by all accounts, an incomprehensible mystery. It defies our categories, and our simplistic metaphors we use to explain it. It is intellectually much easier to shrink God into a single guy wearing three different masks. It feels like solving a math problem.

The author doubles down on this simple math, claiming that Jesus is just the Father wearing a human body. He writes: ”Jesus is only a son by virtue of the fact that the human flesh that the SINGULAR GOD occupied belonged to God... not a second or different person!!”

We’ve touched on this before, but it bears repeating because this logic falls apart in light of the Gospel narratives. If Jesus is just the Father in a flesh suit, the New Testament becomes some kind of bizarre Divine Ventriloquist theater.

When Jesus cries out on the cross, “My God, My God, why have you forsaken me?” (Matthew 27:46), is He just talking to Himself to put on a show? The author quotes John 14:9 (”He that has seen me has seen the Father”) but ignores John 14:11, where Jesus says, “I am in the Father, and the Father is in me.” There is a clear distinction of persons being made by our Lord.

Historic Christianity teaches that God is one in essence (ousia) but three in person (hypostasis). As St. Philaret’s Catechism puts it: “The Father is true God, the Son equally true God, and the Holy Ghost true God; but yet so that in the three Persons there is only one Tri-personal God.”

They share the exact same divine nature, will, and power, which is why seeing the Son is seeing the perfect image of the Father. But they are distinct persons. Different conditions do not equal different persons, but eternal relations (unbegotten, begotten, proceeding) do.

St. Athanasius didn’t endure five exiles from home to defend a “flesh suit” theology. He defended the Trinity because if Christ is not the eternal Son of God, our salvation is null and void.

The “Gospel Wasn’t the Resurrection” Absurdity

Once you have a lonely, single-person God playing dress-up, you have to rewrite the rest of the story to fit. And here is where the commenter goes entirely off the rails, claiming: “THE GOSPEL JESUS PREACHED WAS NOT DEATH BURIAL & RESURECTION ...HE HARDLY EVER MENTIONED IT!”

This is historically and scripturally illiterate.

Jesus explicitly predicted His death and resurrection repeatedly (Mark 8:31, 9:31, 10:33-34). Furthermore, Saint Paul defines the Gospel with absolute, undeniable clarity in 1 Corinthians 15:1-4: “Now, brothers and sisters, I want to remind you of the gospel I preached to you... that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day.”

The AD 70 Trap

This redefinition of the Gospel is necessary for his final trick: Hyper-Preterism. He claims that the “end of the world” and the “days of vengeance” were entirely fulfilled in the AD 70 destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans. The earth that was to burn up was just “a people -> Israel NOT a planet!!”

I get the psychological appeal of this. Waiting for Christ to return and fix this broken world is exhausting. Living in the tension of the “already, but not yet” is hard. Hyper-Preterism is a cheap way out—if it all ended in AD 70, you don’t have to wait or hope anymore.

Did Jesus prophesy the destruction of the Temple? Yes, absolutely (Matthew 24, Luke 21). There are aspects of preterist interpretation in some Orthodox holy fathers, but the Church has always understood that the events of AD 70 were a localized judgment and also a type (or a foreshadowing) of the final judgment.

But Hyper-Preterism—the claim that all prophecy was fulfilled in AD 70—is a heresy that guts the Christian hope.

If the Second Coming already happened in AD 70, then the resurrection of the dead already happened. If that’s true, then death has not been defeated, the cosmos has not been restored, and we are still in our sins. Some Gospel.

As St. Paul warns in 2 Thessalonians 2, we are not to be deceived into thinking the Day of the Lord has already fully come. The Creed we recite every Sunday is clear: “He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead, and His kingdom will have no end.”

The Second and Glorious Coming of our Lord did not happen in a fly by night operation in AD 70. He did not wrap things up yet.

The Rubble or the Empty Tomb?

Why does this matter?

• If the Gospel was just about God taking “vengeance” on Jerusalem in AD 70, then Christianity is just a historical footnote about Roman siege warfare.

• But we believe in a Gospel where the eternal Son of God took on our human nature, descended into Hades, shattered the gates of death, and rose on the third day so that we might be united to God.

The author’s theology shrinks God into a lonely actor and shrinks the Gospel into a localized history lesson.

We belong to a Church that offers a cosmic, eternal, death-defeating reality. We don’t need to invent a new theology in the comment section. The saints already bled for the true one.

Stick with the Holy Fathers.

Leave a comment

When my wife and I brought our newborn baby girl home from the hospital earlier this year, we did not immediately strap her into a highchair, set a plate of roast chicken in front of her, and announce, “I will feed you once you can explain the value of protein and the mechanics of digestion.” We actually just fed her.

We feed her milk so that she can survive. We feed her so she can grow. We feed her because she is already part of the family, and families share life together at the table.

But in the modern West, we have adopted a very different approach when it comes to the table of the Lord. Across the Roman Catholic and Protestant traditions, there is a generally held assumption that religion is largely a mental exercise. Faith risks being reduced to understanding data and giving an intellectual assent. Because of these assumptions, we delay communion until a child reaches a somewhat arbitrary “age of reason,” which varies from group to group.

We end up turning a holy meal into a math problem.

I grew up in a nondenominational evangelical Church with baptistic and dispensational emphases, and we definitely didn’t commune the little kids. But when I started running with Reformed and Presbyterian folks (and even Lutherans), I was forced to face the question of infant baptism, and by implication, infant communion (also known as paedocommunion).

I studied the issue closely, and by the time I joined an Anglican Church, I was already convinced that children belonged at the altar. And significantly, my Anglican parish functionally practiced paedocommunion. If the parents had approached the chalice with a baptized toddler, and he or she looked at the priest and offered a hearty “goo goo ga ga” unto the Lord, we basically accepted that as a credible profession of faith and gave them the Eucharist.

While it was a beautiful pastoral instinct, it was also a workaround; not really something from within the tradition of Anglicanism.

We were trying to hack a modern Protestant framework—to do an ancient Catholic thing in Anglo-Catholic vestments. It wasn’t until I really looked long and hard Eastward that I realized I didn’t need a workaround. The Orthodox Church is the only game in town that has been communing infants since the early Church—without interruption, and without apology.

There is no theological pop quiz at the chalice for the baptized. As I say over and over on this site and in our in-person classes, God’s saving actions are a rescue mission.

The Burial and the Promise

To understand why a baby needs the Eucharist, you have to understand what happens to a baby in the font of baptism.

We do not baptize children because they understand theology. We baptize them because they, like us, are trapped in the domain of death. In Romans 6, Paul does not describe baptism as a public declaration of a private intellectual ah-ha moment. He describes baptism as a grave: we are buried with Christ into death in order that we might walk in newness of life (Romans 6:4).

You certainly do not need a PhD to die, and you do not need one to be resurrected.

When the Apostle Peter preaches at Pentecost in Acts 2, he declares that the promise of the Holy Spirit is “for you and for your children.” This wasn’t a new concept at all. It was the age-old structure of the covenant. In Colossians 2:11ff., Paul explicitly links the waters of baptism to the Old Testament practice of circumcision—and goes so far as to see it as a triumph over death and wicked authorities:

In him also you were circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ, ¹² having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through faith in the powerful working of God, who raised him from the dead. ¹³ And you, who were dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made alive together with him, having forgiven us all our trespasses, ¹⁴ by canceling the record of debt that stood against us with its legal demands. This he set aside, nailing it to the cross. ¹⁵ He disarmed the rulers and authorities and put them to open shame, by triumphing over them in him.

Under the Old Covenant, male infants were circumcised on the eighth day. They were marked as members of the covenant before they could speak a single word, before they could make a choice, and before they could articulate the meaning of the Covenant. And when the time came for the defining meal of that covenant—the Passover—the children were not sent out of the room. They ate the lamb with the family. And the blood on the doorpost was a shield and protector for the whole house, while the meat on the table fed the whole family.

If the Old Covenant, which was merely a shadow, included infants in its initiating signs and its saving meals, it is unthinkable that the New Covenant—which is built on better promises—would suddenly cast them into the outer darkness until they could pass a Sunday School exam.

Share Simply Orthodox

The Invention of the Age of Reason

So, how did the West lose this? It wasn’t the result of a sudden flourish of biblical exegesis. Believe it or not, it was a medieval spilling hazard, and a curiosity of regional differences in practice.

1. First, in the West, Chrismation was performed by the bishop, whereas in the east Presbyters could perform the sacrament. This led to a gradual separation of the two rites in time, and since bishops’ visits are infrequent, kids were being chrismated older and older.

2. In addition, in the Middle Ages, the Latin Church became terrified of spilling the consecrated wine. Out of an understandable desire to protect the holy mysteries, they began withholding the chalice from the laity entirely, offering only the bread.

This created a stark, practical problem: a six-month-old cannot chew and swallow a dry wafer—and chances are that six-month-old was still waiting for the bishop to come and chrismate. So, by sheer logistical necessity, babies stopped receiving.

As time went on, theologians looked around and realized their children were no longer communing. Instead of fixing the practice, they retrofitted their theology to justify the accident. The Council of Trent formally declared that little children do not need the Eucharist because they have not attained the “use of reason.”

They turned a logistical accident into a standard practice of Western Christianity.

But the Orthodox Church never withdrew the chalice from the children; and we have been using the spoon for about as long back as we can remember. Because of that, our theology of the child remained intact. We leaned on the reality of what the sacraments actually do.

If baptism is the rescue from death, Chrismation is the personal Pentecost. We don’t just wash our babies—we anoint them for battle. The Holy Spirit gives to each person their unique, unrepeatable distinctness, and makes them into a full communicant member of the deified humanity of Christ.

They are in the Body and they need the Blood.

Discerning the “Loafness”

There is a fairly common objection at this point, and it usually comes with a furrowed brow and a Bible opened to 1 Corinthians 11.

Paul writes that whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the Body and Blood of the Lord. He commands a person to examine himself before eating, lest he eat and drink judgment on himself by “not discerning the Body.”

I get the fear here—I really do. The Eucharist is a consuming fire. Taking it lightly is dangerous, and if you read Saint Paul’s warning as a demand for intense intellectual self-auditing, it makes perfect sense to keep the elements away from a toddler who can’t even examine their own shoes.

But look at the context. Paul was not writing to toddlers.

Paul was writing to adult Christians in Corinth who were getting drunk at the Lord’s supper (1 Corinthians 11). They were feasting and hoarding the food before the poor (which included slaves who had become Christians) could even arrive from their shifts.

When Paul tells them they are failing to “discern the body” (vv. 27-32) he is not talking about the ontology of bread turned to flesh. He is talking about the unity of the Church. He is talking about the “loafness” of the community. Because there is one loaf, we, who are many, are one body. The Corinthians were eating and drinking judgment upon themselves because they were fracturing the Body of Christ through their pride and gluttony.

Saint Paul’s solution to adults abusing the poor was not inventing a cognitive baseline that bars infants from the Lord’s Table.

The Medicine of Immortality

We have to get this right, because the stakes are definitely higher than a mere theological debate.

If salvation and grace require an “age of reason,” then the Gospel is disastrous news for the vulnerable.

• If you have to understand the mechanics of grace to receive it, what happens to the severely mentally disabled?

• What happens to the grandfather whose mind has been slowly hollowed out by the advancement of Alzheimer’s disease?

• If communion is a reward for cognitive coherence, the vulnerable are left to starve at the very moment they need the medicine of immortality the most.

But Christ unites Himself to our human nature, from the womb to the tomb.

In Mark 10, when the disciples tried to act as bouncers to kidlets, Jesus rebuked them. He did not say, “Let the little children come to me, provided they can pass a theological exam.”

He authoritatively said the kingdom belongs to them.

When you approach the chalice in an Orthodox parish, the priest doesn’t ask for your academic credentials. He holds the golden spoon, he calls you by your baptismal name, and he feeds you the life of the world. He didn’t ask for your intellect. He just asked for you.

You don’t need a PhD to receive God. You just need to be united to Christ and then open your mouth.

Leave a comment

In the Gospels, people are always getting to Jesus through something tangible. Water, mud, the hem of his garment, bread he breaks with his own hands. He breathes on the Apostles. He lays hands on the sick. He sends them out to anoint with oil.

The sacraments—what we often call the Mysteries—are how that same Christ still touches us now, in his Church, by the Holy Spirit.

Not magic tricks or bare symbols; they’re how he feeds, heals, forgives, joins, and sends real human beings in real places…and yes, in ways that look different from parish to parish. (I’ve been in the OCA, the Moscow Patriarchate, and the Greek Archdiocese; I can assure you, standards and styles vary.)

What I want to do here is walk through the “big seven” without pretending that grace only flows through seven pipes. We’ll keep it simple: what each Mystery is, what it’s for, and how it fits into a normal Orthodox life.

What a “Mystery” Is (And Why We Use That Word)

Orthodox Christians are often more comfortable saying Mystery (mysterion) than “sacrament.” That’s not because we enjoy being vague! It’s because the primary reality here is not a human ceremony—but Christ acting in His Body by the Holy Spirit.

In very simple terms: A Mystery is a concrete act in which Christ himself works, through his Church, to unite us to Himself and to one another.

That means:

• There is always a visible side (water, oil, bread and wine, hands, words).

• There is always an invisible side (grace, the Spirit’s action, forgiveness, healing, union) that you can’t measure with a lab test.

  • The point is not to treat the sacraments as spiritual vending machines, but as the places where the Lord of the Gospels still touches us.

The life of the Church is sacramental in a much wider sense—blessings, icons, funerals, monastic tonsure, holy water—but the “seven” give us a clear, catechetical set of central encounters to talk about.

So we number the sacraments at seven out of convenience, but the reality is that the Church herself is Sacrament and therefore all of her actions are sacramental in some sense.

Baptism and Chrismation: Birth and Seal

Baptism: Dying and Rising with Christ

If you want one biblical image for Baptism, it’s burial and resurrection. Saint Paul (Romans 6:3-4, ESV) doesn’t say we get a religious label; he says:

Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life.

In Baptism:

• We are washed—sins forgiven, including the whole backlog of our old life.

• We are buried and raised with Christ—united to his death and Resurrection.

  • We are adopted—no longer spiritual freelancers, but sons and daughters in a household.

While it is sometimes talked about as a mere rite of passage that “gets the baby done” or gives the adult a nice memory, but the deeper reality is that it is a spiritual crossing of the Red Sea, a real change of status and belonging, an escape from Egypt, and a true deliverance like the ark delivered righteous Noah and his family (1 Peter 3:20).

Chrismation: Our Personal Pentecost

Immediately after Baptism (or on its own, when someone is received by chrismation as a completion of their prior baptism), we are anointed with holy chrism. The priest says, “The seal of the gift of the Holy Spirit.”

Chrismation is:

• Our personal Pentecost—the Spirit given, not as an external visitor, but as indwelling gift.

• A sealing—marking us as belonging to Christ, equipped for the life we’ve just been born into.

  • The moment when all the “you” commands of the New Testament start to make sense: we’re not being told to live this life alone; we’re given the Spirit to live it in us.

Baptism and Chrismation are the great doorway. Everything else—Eucharist, Confession, Marriage, Unction—assumes this new birth and seal are already there first.

Eucharist and Confession: Food and Medicine

Eucharist: Christ Our Food

In the Divine Liturgy, we don’t just remember something that happened; we enter into Christ’s once‑for‑all sacrifice and receive his Body and Blood.

Orthodoxy insists on three things at once:

• The Eucharist is truly the Body and Blood of Christ (not just a symbol, not just a mental prompt, and not just thinking really hard about Jesus).

• It is not a new sacrifice, but our participation in the one sacrifice of the Cross, made present to us. But it is absolutely a sacrificial meal.

  • It is the sacrament of unity: it both expresses and deepens the fact that we share one faith, one baptism, one life.

That’s also why we practice closed communion. It’s not a statement that “we’re better than you”; it’s a statement that Communion presupposes a shared faith and sacramental life. To pretend unity at the chalice when it doesn’t exist in belief and practice would be dishonest and, frankly, spiritually dangerous (see 1 Corinthians 11:30).

For those who are baptized and chrismated into the Church, the Eucharist is normal food. The basic expectation over time is: we prepare and come regularly, not as a rare treat but as our life.

Confession: Naming the Sickness, Receiving the Cure

If the Eucharist is food, Confession is medicine. In Confession, we stand before Christ and speak the truth about our sins in the presence of the priest, who is both witness and physician.

A few important distinctions:

• Confession is not therapy, though it may be therapeutic.

• The priest is not a prosecutor; he is there to help you tell the truth and to pronounce Christ’s forgiveness.

  • The goal is not to produce a perfectly exhaustive sin‑inventory, but to repent—to turn from known sins and ask for grace to begin again.

How often? That varies, depending on the jurisdiction or region, parish or individual. Some people confess before every communion, every few weeks, four times a year, and so on; others less frequently, some more.

The real question is: am I letting my sins harden into habits, or am I bringing them into the light regularly? Your priest can advise you how to find an appropriate rhythm.

Marriage and Ordination: Sacraments of Vocation

Marriage: A Shared Road to Holiness

In Orthodox terms, Marriage is not just a romantic upgrade with incense. It is a Mystery of union in Christ between a man and a woman, ordered toward shared salvation and, ordinarily, open to children.

So what makes Orthodox weddings unique?

• The couple are not just making a contract; they are being joined in a life that is now accountable to Christ and his Church.

• The crowns placed on their heads are both royal and martyrial: symbols of honor and of self‑giving love.

  • That’s why the Church doesn’t simply “host weddings” as venue rentals. To be married in the Church is to enter a sacramental state with real content and expectations.

There are edge cases—mixed marriages, previous divorces, complex histories—but those belong in personal conversation with a priest, not in a brief overview.

Holy Orders: Service, Not Promotion

When someone is ordained a deacon, priest, or bishop, there is again a laying on of hands, a prayer, a gift of the Spirit for a particular kind of service.

Ordination is:

• A sacramental configuration to Christ the High Priest: the ordained man becomes a visible icon of Christ’s pastoral care in that community.

• A call to sacrificial service, not a perk package.

  • A gift given for the sake of the Church, not for the private holiness of the man alone.

This is one reason (among many) why Orthodoxy doesn’t talk about “starting your own church.” The Church’s sacramental life is received, not invented.

Holy Unction: Healing Along the Way

We’ve already described this, but here’s the short form.

Holy Unction (or the Sacrament of the Anointing of the Sick) is rooted in James 5:14–15, where the apostle calls the elders to anoint the sick with oil and pray for healing and forgiveness. In the Orthodox Church, this is not reserved for the edge of death; it is a sacrament of healing in the midst of the journey.

In Unction, we ask God for:

• Physical healing of illnesses and infirmities,

• Spiritual healing of soul and mind,

• Forgiveness of sins—including those forgotten or unknown.

During Great Lent, many parishes celebrate a communal Unction service, often on Holy Wednesday. Everyone present (who is an Orthodox Christian) is anointed—not only those who look sick—receiving Christ’s healing touch as we step into Holy Week and Pascha.

It’s a very concrete way the Church says: this life of repentance we talk about is also a life of real, applied mercy.

Beyond Seven: A Life Filled with Sacramentality

At this point, you might be tempted to say, “Okay, that’s seven. Are we done?” The answer is: yes and no.

Yes, in the sense that:

• These seven Mysteries give us a clear frame:

  • Birth and seal (Baptism, Chrismation),

  • Food and medicine (Eucharist, Confession),

  • Vocation (Marriage, Ordination),

  • Healing (Unction).

No, in the sense that:

• The Church’s life overflows with sacramental actions:

  • Blessings of homes, vehicles, water.

  • Making or praying with icons.

  • Funerals and memorials.

  • Monastic tonsure and the monastic life.

  • The daily cycle of services, which bathe us in Scripture and prayer.

  • Much more could be said!

Some theologians will happily point out that the “seven sacraments” language came into Orthodoxy partly through Western influence and systematization. Fine. The deeper truth is that Orthodox life is simply thick with Christ’s presence. We don’t engage the Mysteries like a definitive checklist to complete; they are the main arteries in the circulatory system of the Body of Christ.

Standards and styles do vary—between jurisdictions, between parishes, sometimes even between priests in the same diocese. But beneath those variations, the same Christ is at work, through water, oil, hands, bread and wine, words and gestures, to save, heal, and unite.

If you’re new to all this, the best next step is simple: bring your questions about these Mysteries to your priest. Ask him to help you see how they fit together in your life, in your parish. The point is not to master a system, but to keep showing up where Christ has promised to meet you, again and again, until the day you see him face to face.

Fr. Alexander Schmemann in For the Life of the World (p. 102), writes:

A sacrament—as we already know—is always a passage, a transformation. Yet it is not a “passage” into “supernature,” but into the Kingdom of God, the world to come, into the very reality of this world and its life as redeemed and restored by Christ. It is the transformation not of “nature” into “supernature,” but of the old into the new. A sacrament therefore is not a “miracle” by which God breaks, so to speak, the “laws of nature,” but the manifestation of the ultimate Truth about the world and life, man and nature, the Truth which is Christ.

Leave a comment

Sometimes a single comment from a thoughtful reader can open up a whole new line of inquiry, helping all readers dig a little deeper into Scripture and into our faith. After the recent article on “Demystifying the Septuagint,” a comment was received that touched on several crucial—and often misunderstood—aspects of Old Testament textual history.

The reader’s comment was this:

The Septuagint is the oldest complete version of the Old Testament that survives today. We don’t have a complete original Hebrew anymore, and the Masoretic Text is NOT the original Hebrew. Many people don’t understand that, including Martin Luther. Also, the reason we use the Septuagint is because it clearly points to Christ in the prophecies. It’s the version Christ used in the gospels to talk about Himself. The Masoretic (Hebrew) was created in about the 900s to standardize the reading of the text, adding dots and dashes to serve as vowels where there weren’t any because Hebrew alphabet has no vowels - to make sure the prophecies wouldn’t point to Christ as they clearly do in the Septuagint.

This is a fantastic summary of several common perceptions, questions, and even accusations that have swirled around the Septuagint (LXX) and the Masoretic Text (MT) for centuries. And it hits on some very real historical complexities. Our goal here is not to argue, but to engage these points squarely, relying on both the Church’s Tradition and the scholarship that illuminates it.

As mentioned in the previous article, this is a topic that requires dipping into rather expensive and not-so-accessible academic works—like the $200 Oxford Handbook of the Bible in Orthodox Christianity I used for the previous article. (Citations at bottom.)

It’s perfectly understandable that there’s a lot of confusion out there. So, let’s pour yet another cup of coffee and clarify some things for the benefit of all.

The “Septuagint”: Not One Book, but a Library

First, I’d like to address a common misconception: Just as “the Bible” isn’t so much a single book as a collection of books, “the Septuagint” is a not a single, monolithic volume OR translation either. So even the idea of “THE” Septuagint isn’t really true. It was, rather, a series of translations of various Hebrew (and some Aramaic) Old Testament texts into Greek, occurring over several centuries, primarily in Alexandria, Egypt. Pentiuc states directly that its “transmission history is ‘quite complex and convoluted,’ especially compared with later, more standardized texts.”

Imagine trying to collect every English translation of the Bible over, say, 500 years, with revisions, different translators for different books, and regional variations in the manuscripts. That’s closer to the reality of the how the Septuagint came to be.

These Greek translations evolved over time, went through “copying, revising, and even competing editions.” For instance, as mentioned before, the Greek version of Daniel commonly used in the East was not the oldest Septuagint version, but a later translation associated with Theodotion (2nd century AD). This alone tells us that even the Greek Old Testament wasn’t a single, fixed volume that simply “dropped from heaven in leather‑bound form,” as previously discussed.

So, while “the” Septuagint is indeed a remarkable ancient textual witness of great importance—and it is the oldest complete version of the Old Testament in any language to survive today—it’s more accurate to see it as a textual stream, a dynamic collection that became the Old Testament for Greek-speaking Judaism and, critically, for the early Church.

Providential Primacy: Why the Septuagint Is Our Bible

The question of why the Septuagint matters so much to the Orthodox Church is crucial, and on this point, the initial comment points to a key concept.

The early Church embraced the Septuagint quickly and instinctively, because it bore witness to Christ. As Pentiuc argues, for the Fathers, the Septuagint was a “missionary Bible,” which “helped prepare the nations to receive Christ. It let the Jewish Scriptures ‘speak Greek’ in a world where Greek was the common language.”

More than just a convenient translation during a time where Greek was increasingly spoken, it shaped the very language and theological mind of the Apostles and the early Christians. When the New Testament authors quote the Old Testament, they are overwhelmingly quoting the Septuagint. This isn’t a coincidence; it’s because this was their Bible, the Scripture that sounded in their ears, prayed in their synagogues, and proclaimed in their churches.

This means that the Septuagint became, for the Church, the definitive collection of Old Testament prophecies. It was the lens through which Christ’s coming was understood. It’s the language that resonates through our hymns, our homilies, and our iconography.

As stated in the previous article:

When one hears, ‘Orthodoxy reads the Septuagint,’ one should think: The Greek Old Testament that shaped our hymnography, preaching, and theological imagination from the beginning.

Masoretic Text: A Different Stream, a Resilient Witness

Now attention turns to the Masoretic Text (MT) and the common concern that it might have been altered to obscure Christ.

It’s indisputable that the Masoretic Text, as it is known today, was standardized much later than the Septuagint, primarily between the 7th and 10th centuries AD by Jewish scholars called the Masoretes. Their meticulous work involved adding vowel points (the “dots and dashes”) and accent marks to the consonantal Hebrew text. This was a monumental effort to preserve the pronunciation and reading tradition of the Hebrew Bible for future generations within their community.

The claim that the MT is not “the original Hebrew” in the sense of a single, unchanging source text that existed throughout all antiquity is also accurate. The Dead Sea Scrolls, discovered in the mid-20th century, revealed that even in the Second Temple period (the centuries immediately before and during Christ’s time), there was a diversity of Hebrew textual traditions. The Septuagint was often based on Hebrew manuscripts that reflected these earlier, diverse traditions. Some of these traditions differed from the particular textual stream that would eventually become the Masoretic Text.

Now, to the important point about accusations of deliberate alteration. It is historically significant that prominent Church Fathers did accuse Jews of altering the Hebrew Scriptures to obscure Christ—such as Saint Justin Martyr and Saint Irenaeus of Lyons (both 2nd century AD). This was part of a broader patristic concern rooted in heated theological polemics between Christians and Jews regarding the interpretation of prophecy. For these Fathers, certain Old Testament passages read differently in the Septuagint offered clearer prophetic witness to Christ, and they suspected that divergent Hebrew versions were a result of intentional changes to weaken that witness. This perspective, therefore, has indeed been part of Orthodox understanding of textual differences.

Adding to the complexity, this accusation was made over 500 years before there was any such thing as the MT, and many of the ancient Hebrew witnesses are in agreement with the LXX.

Moreover, according to Pentiuc, the dominant Orthodox scholarly understanding today is informed by the insights of modern textual research (which the Fathers themselves did not have access to), and tends to explain the differences between the LXX and MT in several other ways:

• Different Hebrew Versions: The Septuagint translators worked from Hebrew manuscripts that were, in some cases, centuries older than those used by the Masoretes and belonged to different textual families. Essentially, the issue is that many of these textual variations were already present in the Hebrew.

• Interpretive Variations: All translation involves some level of interpretation. The Greek translators had their own theological and linguistic nuances, as did the later Masoretes. Pentiuc argues that these were often good-faith efforts to understand and preserve the text according to their respective traditions.

• Masoretic Goals: The Masoretes’ primary aim was to standardize their existing Hebrew tradition for their Jewish community, preserving its reading and pronunciation, not primarily to engage in theological warfare with Christians.

But to address the core theological concern embedded in the Fathers’ critique: even if textual differences exist, did they succeed in truly obscuring Christ in the Hebrew text?

The answer from Orthodox theology is a resounding no. Even with differences, the Holy Spirit ensures that the truth of Christ remains clear to those who seek Him. While the Church has long prioritized the Septuagint, it has consistently maintained space for the Hebrew witness—while St. Justin Martyr argues for Christ from the Septuagint, he also addresses Jewish appeals to the Hebrew text in his Dialogue with Trypho.

The Hebrew witness might require more careful reading, more theological discernment, and certainly the guidance of the Church’s Tradition, but the Old Testament, in any canonical form, ultimately points to Christ. The Spirit’s witness to the Son is more resilient than minor textual variations, and certainly far outlasting any human attempts to dim its light.

The Septuagint’s primacy does not itself mean there are no other witnesses! Pentiuc witnesses to this textual diversity when he discusses how the Fathers themselves were aware of different readings. He points out that in their commentaries, they would refer to “The Hebrew,” “The Samaritan,” and “Later versions” like those of Aquila, Symmachus, and Theodotion. This means the early Fathers were not oblivious to differences, and their faith in Christ was not shaken by them.

Subscribe now

Reading Alongside: A Confident, Nuanced Orthodox Approach

So, what does this complex history mean for the Church today? It certainly doesn’t mean throwing up hands in confusion. Today we still hold the Septuagint with primacy for the Old testament, but it’s a nuanced primacy.

Pentiuc emphasizes that “modern Orthodox Bible translations tend to be more balanced and dispassionate in how they use textual witnesses.” I propose that an ideal contemporary approach is something like this:

• LXX-Primary: Orthodox Old Testament translations remain primarily based on the Septuagint, especially for books where it is clearly the Church’s traditional text. This is frequently the norm because the LXX is more or less the Old Testament of the New Testament.

• Broad Foundation: Translators also “consult the Hebrew, the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Peshitta (Syriac), and other versions,” particularly “where the Septuagint seems obscure, obviously secondary, or questions of transmission are at play.” This is not a sign of weakness, but a sign of scholarly and spiritual integrity.

The Orthodox Church practically lives and breathes out of the Septuagint historically, but she has frequently read it alongside other witnesses, not in isolation. This is a testament to the Tradition’s strength—not its fragility. The Church trusts that God’s inscriptured revelation is not so delicate that honest scrutiny or textual complexity will break it.

Share

Conclusion

I’ve been working through many of these questions for years, and will likely continue to do so for years to come. Starting “Bad” Books of the Bible several years ago set me out on a path of textual exploration that has been nothing short of breathtaking and eye opening. Every time I think I’ve wrapped my head around the transmission of Scripture in history, there’s another layer or wrinkle that gives way to opportunity for further exploration.

The questions raised in the initial comment are important, and they give us an opportunity to consider how the Church engages with her sacred texts. It’s tempting to want a perfectly simple, linear story about “the Bible,” but the reality is more complex:

• It’s a story of divine providence working through human hands;

  • of textual streams that evolved over time;

    • and of the Church prayerfully discerning the voice of Christ in her Scriptures across centuries.

The collection of Greek Old Testament that we have come to call the Septuagint remains the cherished, providential Old Testament—the voice through which the prophets spoke to the Apostles, the wellspring of Orthodox hymns, the bridge that carried Israel’s story into the Gentile world.

Yet the Church has never locked it away in splendid isolation. She has held it alongside other ancient witnesses—the Hebrew original, the Syriac streams, the patient comparisons of Origen’s Hexapla—always discerning, always prayerfully receiving, never afraid that truth might fall apart under honest scrutiny.

For readers today, there’s no need to be afraid of other text families. We approach the Old Testament with reverence, letting the LXX shape souls as it shaped the saints, but we can also understand its complex history. We have so many tools available today for the diligent student of Scripture to compare it with other texts when questions arise. The confident Orthodox believer can trust that the same Tradition that cherished the LXX is anchored in truth, so some embrace of textual diversity is not a threat. The Tradition magnifies Christ, and remains.

The Church returns again and again to the services: we hear the Psalms at Vespers, the prophecies at Matins, the Theotokos’s canticles, and every feast can tune our hearts to the rhythm of the Church. There, in the choir of the Church, the Septuagint still breathes—alive, echoing, pointing ever forward to the ever-breaking-through coming of the Kingdom of God.

Source

• Pentiuc, Eugen J. The Oxford Handbook of the Bible in Orthodox Christianity. Oxford University Press, 2017. All quotes taken from pages 6-10.

  • Transmission history, Theodotion Daniel, missionary Bible, p. 6

  • Fathers consulting other versions, p. 7

  • Modern Orthodox translations, consulting other texts, p. 10

Leave a comment

It’s Bright Week now, but I can’t stop thinking about Pascha. I want to go back to Saturday night, to the greatest Vigil and Liturgy that comes only once a year.

The nave is entirely dark. It is 11:07 PM on Great and Holy Saturday, and the air inside the church is heavy. It is thick with the scent of spent beeswax, residual frankincense, and the undeniable, physical exhaustion of a parish that has been standing, kneeling, and chanting for a long season, and especially in the past week. The people in the pews are waiting in anticipation, eager for the Resurrection. The expectation and faith are palpable.

Beside me in the pew, completely oblivious to the cosmic threshold we are about to cross, my four-and-a-half-year-old son is totally sacked out. He is curled up tightly against the wooden pew, his head resting heavy as a rock on his beagle pillow, covered from the neck down in a Snoopy blanket. He is breathing the deep, rhythmic, unbothered breaths of a boy who could not possibly make it to midnight.

It is amusing to watch—and perfectly fitting. He is sleeping peacefully through the harrowing of Hades. He is participating in the Great Sabbath. Just as the Creator is currently resting in the tomb from His labor of saving the world, my son is resting in the pew.

The Orthodox tradition beautifully holds this in tension. As the Synaxarion of Holy Saturday proclaims:

On the Great and Holy Sabbath the Church celebrates the burial of the divine Body and the descent into Hades of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ... This is the blessed Sabbath, this is the day of rest, on which the only-begotten Son of God rested from all His works.

As I look down at his tiny body, resting heavily in the darkness of the nave, I realize his physical exhaustion perfectly mirrors the spiritual reality of the rest of us. Holy Week is both a physical and spiritual grind. We do not arrive at the empty tomb pristine, polished, and piously full of energy. We usually arrive battered. We drag our mortality, our failures, and our sheer fatigue right up to the stone.

The raw, real world shows what this approach is really about. As my friend Steve Robinson notes in his essay “Stealing Paradise,” the Gospels are not populated by spiritual elites effortlessly ascending from glory to glory. The Kingdom of Heaven is routinely taken by the desperate. Robinson catalogs the dramatic interlopers: the bleeding woman crawling through the dirt of a crowded street just to touch a hem; the blind beggar screaming loud enough to annoy the religious gatekeepers.

He rightly includes the thief on the cross, who did his own Ocean’s Eleven heist when he stole his way into Paradise with his dying breath. God seems to look upon great desperation as great faith. Salvation, Robinson observes, is as simple and difficult as that.

But Robinson does not romanticize the unexpected, eleventh-hour conversions. He honors the quiet, ongoing “desperation” of ordinary faith. He points to the fifty-year, monotonous, repetitive slog of daily life—the mortgages, the relational friction, the temptations managed but never fully eliminated, the mid-life crises endured without surrender.

Whether you arrive at the tomb through a tragic, revelatory moment of the eleventh-hour desperation, or through decades of tedious, uninspiring faithfulness, the intention is what God honors. Both the flash-in-the-pan interloper and the guy who’s worked his whole life drag their exhaustion up to that stone, still hoping against hope the tomb is empty.

And what do we find inside our exhausted selves when we finally stop moving? Often, we find our own tombs.

Archimandrite Justin Pârvu, a Romanian confessor who survived years of communist imprisonment, offers insight on this dark interior reality. When asked how we can descend into our hearts when they feel full of passions, rot, and darkness, he flipped the script on us. The darkness is not a disqualification; it is the exact purpose of Christ’s descent.

“There is no depth that God has not reached,” Pârvu reminds us. He shone in the deepest, most terrible darkness of Hell itself. How much more, then, will He shine in the darkness of our hearts if we simply wait for Him?

The heart is a tomb. The more you look at your own heart unvarnished, you will find it is actually a terrifying space to inhabit. But our job is not to miraculously fix our own brokenness before the Feast—our job is to keep watch in the dark without despair.

Pârvu prescribes an important tool for this vigil of the soul: the Jesus Prayer. We sit in the dark, calling upon the Name, waiting for the King of Glory to melt our corruption with His warmth. We endure the spiritual Holy Saturday.

As we stand in the dark church, waiting for the light, human reason often hits a wall. The intensity of the services, combined with the rationalist conditioning of the modern world, can breed intense cognitive dissonance. Thomas del Vasto, reflecting on his own Holy Saturday struggles as a modern “Doubting Thomas,” admits that human intellect cannot neatly resolve the paradox of the God-Man lying dead in a grave.

When human reason fails at the boundary line of the tomb, we are left only with the desperate pivot of the Apostle Peter: “Lord, to whom shall we go? you have the words of eternal life” (John 6:68). This cognitive failure is not a modern, secular invention. It is embedded right there in the original Paschal morning.

The Resurrection does not produce an automatic, tidy, doubt-dissolving certainty for most of us. It is instead a shattering, terrifying reality that breaks all human paradigms. The Gospel of Mark tells us that the myrrh-bearing women did not leave the empty tomb with triumphant theology; they fled in trembling and astonishment, saying nothing to anyone out of sheer terror (Mark 16:8).

Even the remaining eleven disciples, standing on the mountain in Galilee with the Risen Lord standing right in front of them, experienced a similar dissonance. “When they saw him, they worshiped him; but some doubted” (Matthew 28:17). You cannot logic your way into the Resurrection. Reason may still fracture at the empty tomb.

The truth is that the historical event of the Resurrection is inaccessible to us. We can only experience the Resurrection mystically through the Liturgy, trusting the reality of “cosmic Agape”—a love so vast that it embraces us entirely as we are, trembling, afraid, and even if we are of two minds.

We hear the cosmic stakes chanted in the darkness during Matins (Triodion):

Hell trembled, O Savior, when he saw Thee, the Giver of life, despoiling him of his wealth and raising up the dead from every age.

Suddenly, the Royal Doors swing open in the darkness:

Come receive the light from the unwaning light, and glorify Christ, who has risen from the dead!

A single flame emerges from the sanctuary. It passes to the altar servers, then to the front pews, spreading backward until the entire nave is ablaze with candlelight. The heavy, dark grind of the fast is visibly broken by the light. The smell of melting wax replaces the stale air. We begin the shuffle for the procession, my son still dead to the world, his Snoopy blanket now illuminated by the flickering glow of hundreds of tapers.

Why does this light matter? How did the locks of Hades actually break? Turning to the Cappadocian Fathers, we can address the “mechanics” of our salvation.

St. Gregory the Theologian (Nazianzus) rightly corrects the false idea that Christ’s death was a transaction or a ransom paid to some all-powerful Devil. He calls the very idea an “outrage.” As he puts it:

To whom was that Blood offered that was shed for us, and why was it shed? ... If to the Evil One, fie upon the outrage! If the robber receives ransom, not only from God, but a ransom which consists of God Himself...

No, the Incarnation was not a payoff. It was a cosmic rescue mission initiated from the inside. Humanity had to be sanctified by the Humanity of God. But how did He trap the great tyrant?

His great friend, St. Gregory of Nyssa, answers this with a well-known analogy of the fishhook. The Divine Nature clothed itself in human flesh, using the fleshly, human body as bait. Death saw the broken, exhausted body of Jesus of Nazareth on the Cross and swallowed it eagerly, assuming it had claimed just another mortal victim.

“The Deity was hidden under the veil of our nature,” Saint Gregory of Nyssa explains, “that so, as with ravenous fish, the hook of the Deity might be gulped down along with the bait of flesh, and thus, life being introduced into the house of death, and light shining in darkness, that which is diametrically opposed to light and life might vanish.”

In swallowing the bait of His humanity, Hades choked on the hook of His Divinity. We needed an Incarnate God, put to death, that we might live. Christ blew death apart from the inside out, poisoning Hades with the unendurable presence of God.

Because of this supreme victory, Saint Gregory Nazianzus issues his sweeping, pastoral invitations to all of us holding our candles in the night:

If you are a Simon of Cyrene, take up the Cross and follow. If you are crucified with Him as a robber, acknowledge God as a penitent robber... enter with Jesus into Paradise, so that you may learn from what you have fallen. If you be a Mary, or another Mary, or a Salome, or a Joanna, weep in the early morning. Be first to see the stone taken away... If, like a Thomas, you were left out when the disciples were assembled to whom Christ shows Himself, when you do see Him be not faithless; and if you do not believe, then believe those who tell you; and if you cannot believe them either, then have confidence in the print of the nails.

Whatever your state, whatever your burden, the Incarnation was designed specifically to draw you into the life in Christ.

The procession reaches the doors of the church. The priest raises the cross into the air, and the first, explosive chant shatters the silence.

Christ is Risen from the dead, by death trampling down upon death, and to those in the tombs He has granted Life!

In most parishes, the doors are pounded open, symbolizing the shattering of the gates of brass, and then everyone floods back into a church now blazing with full light. The sorrow is gone. The grind is over. And here, the majestic, triumphant words of St. John Chrysostom’s Paschal Homily are woven through the chanting, calling forth our joy.

Chrysostom reminds us that the feast is prepared for everyone. The first and the last, the fasting and the non-fasting, the zealous and the slothful. The gritty reality of our personal failures is entirely swallowed by the majestic triumph of His mercy on all. He unleashes a roar against the gates of Hell:

Let no one fear death, for the Savior’s death has set us free. He that was held prisoner of it has annihilated it. By descending into Hell, He made Hell captive. He embittered it when it tasted of His flesh. And Isaiah, foretelling this, did cry: Hell, said he, was embittered, when it encountered Thee in the lower regions. It was embittered, for it was abolished. It was embittered, for it was mocked. It was embittered, for it was slain.

O death, where is your sting? O Hades, where is your victory?

The Divine Liturgy carries on into the early hours of the morning, a blur of incense, beautiful vestments, and chaotic, joyful Paschal greetings in multiple languages. By the time we receive the Eucharist and finally hear the dismissal, it is the wee hours of the morning. Through it all, my son has barely moved an inch. He is still out cold on his beagle pillow.

He missed the dramatic lighting of the candles. He missed the procession. He missed all the activity at the doors, the shouting, the bells, and even the triumphant homily.

It’s not lost on me that Christ’s Resurrection icon depicts Adam and Eve pulled out by their wrists—from what I know about Orthodox theology and the idea of “synergy,” one would expect them to be holding on with their own hands, too. But they aren’t.

I, too, “pulled” my son “out by the wrists,” when I woke him up at the appointed time to receive communion—my sleeper stirred long enough to tell the priest his name and to receive the Pure Gift in the chalice. “Come receive the light, my son, it’s time for communion—and I want you to say your name at the chalice, like we always do,” I told him as we walked the aisle.

Awake, O sleeper,
and arise from the dead,
and Christ will shine on you.
(Ephesians 5:14, ESV)

In context, Saint Paul prefaces this quote with this: “Therefore it says...” Usually, that’s the setup for a direct Scriptural quote. But because this exact phrasing doesn’t exist anywhere in the Old Testament, the consensus among the Church Fathers and modern scholars alike seems to be that Paul is quoting a song the early Church was already singing.

Specifically, it’s widely believed to be a fragment of an early baptismal hymn. When a catechumen descended into the baptismal waters (representing the tomb) and rose back up, the congregation would sing this over them. It’s a Christological remix of a few key prophecies from Isaiah:

• Isaiah 60:1: “Arise, shine, for your light has come, and the glory of the Lord has risen upon you.”

• Isaiah 26:19: “Awake and sing for joy, you who dwell in the dust, for your dew is a dew of light, and the earth will give birth to the dead.”

The early Christians took these ancient promises of Israel’s restoration and applied them to their ultimate fulfillment: Jesus Christ. They took the raw materials of Isaiah, baptized them in the reality of the Resurrection, and swapped out the generic “light” for Christ Himself. And those of us present in the morning for the baptisms and chrismations saw this too—two dozen people “rose from the dead” and were united to Christ.

So as I gather up his Snoopy blanket and hoist his little, sleeping body over my shoulder to carry him out to the car, the profound reality of the night hits me. It doesn’t matter that he slept through it. The victory was won for him, too. He didn’t have to earn it. He didn’t have to stay awake to secure it. He was completely helpless, entirely exhausted, resting in a deep “Sabbath sleep”—and yet, he was carried out of the church a true victor.

All of this is exactly what Christ did for us. He descended into our dark, passion-filled tombs while we were entirely helpless. He carried our dead weight out of Hades upon His own shoulders. That is the very definition of Κοσμικὴ Ἀγάπη (Cosmic Agape).

That is the majestic truth that remains when all of the grit of our personal striving is finally exhausted. Christ is Risen!

Sources for this reflection:

• This post was inspired by a roundup of resources sent to me by a reader. That roundup served as the foundation of my own reflections, though the direction I go with it is a bit different. I’ve supplied links to sources above, but here’s a list for those keeping track at home.

• Steve Robinson, “Stealing Paradise: Desperate Measures,” Pithless Thoughts II (Substack), March 2025.

• Archimandrite Justin Pârvu, “The Heart as the Tomb of Christ’s Resurrection,” Trans. Grig Gheorghiu (Substack), April 2026.

• Thomas del Vasto, “Faith & Doubt During Holy Week,” Shapes in the Fog (Substack), April 2026.

• “The Synaxarion of Great and Holy Saturday,” from the Lenten Triodion.

• “Matins of Great and Holy Saturday, The Praises,” from the Lenten Triodion.

• St. Gregory of Nazianzus, “The Second Oration on Holy Pascha,” Oration 45, Section 22, c. 380 AD.

• St. Gregory of Nyssa, “The Great Catechetical Oration,” Chapter 24.

• St. John Chrysostom, “The Paschal Catechetical Homily,” c. AD 400.

Take a moment to close your eyes and imagine you are standing in a dark, incense-filled Orthodox Church at midnight, at the end of a long winding road to Pascha (Easter).

Did you do well? Perhaps your stomach is a hollow cavern after forty days of lenten rations, your legs are vibrating from exhaustion, and you’re wondering if you can honestly make it through another three hours of standing.

Or perhaps you ate a ribeye a few times, popped by Mickey D’s for some nuggets, and boozed it up with your buddies after work. Did you screw up? Did you drop the ball? Did you fail? Come anyway.

Regardless of how you prepared for Pascha, the royal doors will be thrown open. The Church will be flooded with the brightness of the light of Christ, and the priest isn’t going to just read, but might actually boldly proclaim or shout a 1,600-year-old sermon at the congregation!

This is the Paschal Homily of Saint John Chrysostom. We read it every single year on Pascha night, usually right when our physical and mental endurance is running on fumes. But this homily isn’t just a piece of soaring ancient poetry designed to give us a second wind. It is a scripturally saturated breakdown of the metaphysical earthquake that just occurred in the basement of the universe.

Many of us carry a massive amount of legalistic baggage into our faith, sometimes even if we were raised Orthodox. We too often treat God like a cosmic magistrate and salvation like a courtroom acquittal.

Chrysostom takes a sledgehammer to that entire framework with his ancient sermon. Through a masterful rhetorical delivery, Chrysostom dismantles our spiritual meritocracy, redefines repentance, and reveals the terrifying, glorious “physics” of how Jesus Christ actually murdered Death.

The Economics of Grace (Matthew 20)

To some extent, all humans are accustomed to meritocracy. You clock in, you get paid. You do the crime, you do the time. Because of this, it is incredibly easy to slip into a transactional view of God and religion—treating sin like a legal infraction, fasting like a currency, and salvation as a wage we earn by being relatively good people.

Chrysostom puts an end to this transactional nonsense in his very first breath by channeling Jesus’s Parable of the Workers in the Vineyard (from Matthew 20):

If they have toiled from the first hour, let them receive their due reward; If any have come after the third hour, let him with gratitude join in the Feast! ...And he who arrived only at the eleventh hour, let him not be afraid by reason of his delay.

In Matthew 20, the master of the vineyard pays the guys who worked one hour the exact same denarius as the guys who sweated through the heat of the day. To our modern, merit-obsessed minds, this is a gross miscarriage of justice. It’s no surprise that those among us who keep the Lenten fast the strictest are frequently tempted to act like the resentful first-hour workers.

But Chrysostom reminds us that God is not an IRS agent auditing a spiritual tax account. “He gives rest to him who comes at the eleventh hour, as well as to him who toiled from the first... The deed He honors and the intention He commends.”

If salvation were a strict legal contract, this could certainly be a breach. But as Saint Paul writes, “The wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life” (Romans 6:23). The Kingdom of Heaven isn’t a wage you earn, it is pure gift and an inheritance you step into. Whether you kept the fast perfectly or stumbled into the nave at the last minute smelling like a cheeseburger and a beer, the Table is richly laden. The grace of God is violently disproportionate to human effort.

The Fatted Calf and the Death of Guilt (Luke 15)

Once we realize we can’t truly earn our way to the table, the immediate temptation for many of us is to despair. We look at our own wretchedness, our own failures to pray, to love our neighbors, or to conquer our passions, and we assume we are disqualified.

Chrysostom anticipates this exact psychological trap. He pivots directly to the imagery of the Prodigal Son from Luke 15:

Feast royally on it, the calf is a fatted one. Let no one go away hungry; partake, all, of the cup of faith... Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen from the grave.

When the Prodigal Son returns home, he has a prepared speech (probably with note cards and all). He essentially wants to negotiate a plea deal: Make me as one of your hired servants. He is still trapped in a transactional mindset. But the Father doesn’t even let him finish the sentence. He sprints down the road, throws a robe over his filthy shoulders, and has the fatted calf slaughtered.

This is the eradication of guilt. “Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again.” Why? Because forgiveness didn’t just issue a decree; forgiveness rose from the grave.

Under a legal framework, if you break a law, you pay a fine. But in the Orthodox framework, sin isn’t a parking ticket; it is more like a terminal illness. You don’t take a cancer patient to traffic court, you take them to a hospital.

On Pascha, the Great Physician has successfully synthesized the cure for human mortality, and He is distributing it to absolutely everyone willing to drink the cup of faith. As St. Paul assures us, “There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus” (Romans 8:1).

The Metaphysics of the Bait-and-Switch (1 Corinthians 15)

But the question remains in light of this mercy: How did Jesus actually pull this off? How did a man dying on a Roman instrument of torture result in the liberation of the human race?

This brings us to the theological climax of the homily, where Chrysostom gives us the mechanics of the Harrowing of Hades (the realm of the dead). His sermon builds with a cadence like a drumbeat:

He destroyed Hades when he descended into it. He put it into an uproar even as it tasted of His flesh... Hell took a body, and it discovered God. It took earth, and encountered Heaven. It took what it saw, and was overcome by what it did not see.

For thousands upon thousands of years, Death had a flawless winning streak. It swallowed every human being that walked the earth. When Christ was crucified, Death looked up and saw a bruised, bleeding, mortal man. It opened its jaws to swallow Him, just like it swallowed Adam, Abraham, and David. It took the “bait” of His humanity, and His death.

But to understand what happened next, we have to consider what theological scholars call the “Hypostatic Union.” This is the bedrock doctrine that Jesus Christ is fully God and fully man, united in one single, undivided person. The uncreated, infinite divine nature and the created, finite human nature are perfectly united.

When Death swallowed the human soul of Jesus, it unknowingly swallowed the infinite fire of His divinity. Death, which only has an appetite for the finite, the corrupt, and the fallen, tried to digest the Author of Life. It choked.

St. Peter preaches this exact reality in his first sermon at Pentecost: “God raised him up, loosing the pangs of death, because it was not possible for him to be held by it” (Acts 2:24).

Saint Gregory of Nyssa (4th century) puts it like this:

…it was not in the nature of the opposing power to come in contact with the undiluted presence of God, and to undergo His unclouded manifestation, therefore, in order to secure that the ransom in our behalf might be easily accepted by him who required it, the Deity was hidden under the veil of our nature, that so, as with ravenous fish, the hook of the Deity might be gulped down along with the bait of flesh, and thus, life being introduced into the house of death, and light shining in darkness, that which is diametrically opposed to light and life might vanish; for it is not in the nature of darkness to remain when light is present, or of death to exist when life is active.

Christ didn’t just survive death; He weaponized it. He used death to destroy Death from the inside out. He kicked the gates of brass off their hinges, grabbed Adam and Eve by the wrists, and dragged human nature out of the tomb.

As St. Paul taunts in 1 Corinthians 15, “O death, where is your sting? O Hades, where is your victory?” Chrysostom echoes the Apostle perfectly: “Christ is risen, and you, O death, are annihilated!”

The Bottom Line

Pascha is not just a historical memorial of something that happened in a dusty tomb in AD 33. It is an eschatological event. It is the end of the world breaking into the here and now.

When the priest booms this homily at midnight, he is declaring an ontological shift in the very fabric of reality. Because Christ is the “first-fruits of those who have fallen asleep,” Death has been permanently demoted. It is no longer a dark, inescapable dead-end; it has now become a doorway to Resurrection. The sting is gone.

We do not worship a God who is waiting in the heavens to catch us on a technicality. We worship the God who willingly descended into the deepest, darkest basement of human misery, planted a bomb, and blew the Hell out of Hell to drag us out of it.

The fast is over. The doors are open. The Kingdom has been revealed. Enter into the joy of your Lord.

The Paschal Homily of Saint John Chrysostom

Is there anyone here who is a devout lover of God?
Let them enjoy this beautiful bright festival.
Is there anyone who is a grateful servant?
Let them rejoice and enter into the joy of their Lord!
Are there any now weary with fasting?
Let them now receive their wages!
If they have toiled from the first hour,
let them receive their due reward;
If any have come after the third hour,
let him with gratitude join in the Feast!
And he that arrived after the sixth hour,
let him not doubt; for he shall have sustained no loss.
And if any have delayed until the ninth hour,
let him not hesitate; but let him come too.
And he who arrived only at the eleventh hour,
let him not be afraid by reason of his delay.
For the Lord is gracious and receives the last even as the first.
He gives rest to him who comes at the eleventh hour,
as well as to him who toiled from the first.
To this one He gives, and upon another He bestows.
He accepts the work as he greets the endeavor.
The deed He honors and the intention He commends.
Let us all enter into the joy of the Lord!
First and last alike receive your reward;
rich and poor, rejoice together!
Sober and slothful, celebrate the day!
You that have kept the fast, and you that have not,
rejoice today for the Table is richly laden!
Feast royally on it, the calf is a fatted one.
Let no one go away hungry; partake, all, of the cup of faith.
Enjoy all the riches of His goodness!
Let no one grieve at his poverty,
for the universal kingdom has been revealed.
Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again;
for forgiveness has risen from the grave.
Let no one fear death, for the death of our Savior has set us free.
He has destroyed it by enduring it.
He destroyed Hades when he descended into it.
He put it into an uproar even as it tasted of His flesh.
Isaiah foretold this when he said,
You, O Hell, have been troubled by encountering Him below.
Hell was in an uproar because it was done away with.
It was in an uproar, because it was mocked.
It was in an uproar, for it was destroyed.
It is in an uproar, for it is annihilated.
It is in an uproar because it is now made captive.
Hell took a body, and it discovered God.
It took earth, and encountered Heaven.
It took what it saw, and was overcome by what it did not see.

O death, where is your sting?
O Hades, where is your victory?

Christ is risen, and you, O death, are annihilated!
Christ is risen, and the evil ones are cast down!
Christ is risen, and the angels rejoice!
Christ is risen, and life is liberated!
Christ is risen, and the tomb is emptied of its dead;
for Christ, having risen from the dead,
is become the first-fruits of those who have fallen asleep.

To Him be glory and power forever and ever. Amen!

Leave a comment

Years ago when I lived in Philadelphia, and was a member of a century-old Russian Orthodox parish, I was talking to an elderly man about the sheer physical toll of Holy Week. He laughed, his eyes crinkling at the corners, and told me about his own childhood. By the time Holy Saturday rolled into Pascha night, his entire family would be running on fumes. He remembered being seven or eight years old, the Church thick with incense and echoing with Slavonic, and finally just giving up. He said he crawled right under the wooden pews, curled up on the floorboards, and nearly slept through the Resurrection.

If you’ve survived Holy Week before, you know the feeling. We are about to enter the most exhausting, exhilarating, and transformative eight days of the Church year. You will stand until your feet ache. You will be hungry. You will smell like frankincense through Tuesday. And that is exactly the point. We worship with our bodies, not just our brains, because the God we worship took on a body to save us.

Yet it’s incredibly easy to walk into this week treating it like a guilt trip or a piece of theological community theater. We often drag our legalistic baggage right into the nave: the underlying assumption that sin is a cosmic parking ticket, God the Father is an angry judge, and Jesus is stepping in as a divine ATM to pay our fine with His blood. We brace ourselves to feel very sad for Jesus on Friday so we can feel happy for Him on Sunday.

If that is your framework, you are going to miss the midnight earthquake.

Holy Week isn’t a courtroom drama; it is a cosmic rescue mission. In the Orthodox Church, liturgical time isn’t a straight line—it’s a spiral. When we sing these hymns, we aren’t merely reenacting an event from two millennia ago. We are stepping outside of linear time and participating in the eternal Today of Christ’s saving work. Christ isn’t paying a fine. He is the Great Physician, and He has stepped onto the floor of the plague ward.

Here is your field guide to the services, the theology, and the sheer metaphysical weight of what we are about to do.

Palm Sunday: The Warrior King Arrives

It starts this weekend. We just had the raising of Lazarus on Saturday morning, a foretaste of Christ’s own resurrection and the resurrection of all. Then at the nighttime services for Palm Sunday, we read prophecies from Zephaniah and Zechariah that foresee the Messiah coming to Jerusalem to deliver His people from the abyss.

On Palm Sunday, when you stand in the nave holding your blessed palms (or perhaps pussy willows, depending on your parish’s local tradition), you are not a fan cheering at a parade. You are a citizen of a besieged city welcoming the conquering King. But He isn’t riding in to overthrow the Romans; He is riding in to engage in single combat with Death itself. It is truly a joyous celebration, and the Church permits (or encourages) us to lighten the fast a bit with some fish.

By Sunday evening, the tone shifts abruptly. The bright celebration pivots to the Bridegroom Matins, and we hear the dismissal prayer that will anchor us through Great Wednesday: “May the Lord who came to His voluntary passion for our salvation, Christ our true God... have mercy on us and save us.”

Notice the phrase “His voluntary passion”:

Nobody is taking His life;

He is laying it down as a tactical strike.

Fr. Georges Florovsky constantly battled against what he called “eschatological Docetism”—the bizarre but common idea that the Incarnation and the Cross were just temporary “episodes” in God’s timeline. It’s the heresy that Jesus just put on a human meat-suit for thirty-three years, suffered a bit, and then discarded it so we could all return to being pure, ethereal spirits in the clouds. History matters to Christianity, and that history is an outworking of God’s acts.

God didn’t just beam down a theological concept. He entered the dirt, the betrayal, and the blood of human history. The Christ who suffers this week doesn’t just pretend to be human; He takes our actual, physical humanity into the grave to blow the doors off it from the inside.

Moreover, the Ascension didn’t undo the grit of the Incarnation. The God who hangs on the cross is the same God who sits on the throne, forever bearing the marks of His love in His flesh.

The First Three Days: The Bridegroom and the Chamber

From Palm Sunday evening through Holy Tuesday, we celebrate Bridegroom Matins. The Church is darkened, and the icon of Christ the Bridegroom is brought out in procession. But He isn’t dressed for a wedding—He is wearing the crown of thorns and the purple robe of mockery.

Why a Bridegroom? Because the Cross is a marriage. Christ is coming to unite Himself to humanity, and He is paying the ultimate dowry: His own blood.

But there is an eschatological tension here. We are forced to ask ourselves: Am I ready for the wedding? We sing the haunting Troparion:

Behold the Bridegroom comes at midnight, and blessed is the servant whom He shall find watching... Beware, therefore, O my soul, do not be weighed down with sleep.

At the end of these services, we sing an Exapostilarion, admitting that we see the bridal chamber adorned, but we have no wedding garment to enter.

We are confronting our own unreadiness. We are the foolish virgins who fell asleep; we are the guests who showed up to the King’s feast in filthy rags.

“The kenosis, the self-emptying of Christ is, in itself, the supreme form of tenderness,” says Saint Dumitru Stăniloae. By stepping into the ultimate human suffering, betrayal, and abandonment, Christ fills the darkest, most godforsaken corners of human existence with the uncreated light of God.

Because of this week, there is nowhere you can fall—no depression, no suffering, no betrayal, and not even death itself—where Christ has not already been and planted His flag. Saint Dumitru and other holy fathers have taught that our dogmas are not abstract truths, but rather are an articulation of the living experience of God within the Church.

The Bridegroom services aren’t designed to make you feel guilty; they are designed to wake you up so you don’t miss the rescue mission.

Holy Wednesday: The Harlot and the Traitor

On Wednesday, the Church draws a sharp, terrifying contrast between two people: Judas, the chosen disciple who betrays Christ for thirty pieces of silver, and a sinful woman (a harlot) who shatters an alabaster flask of expensive myrrh to anoint His feet.

We sing the famous Hymn of Kassiani, written by a brilliant ninth-century female hymnographer and saint. It is a masterpiece of biblical exegesis. Kassiani puts words into the mouth of the sinful woman, drawing a direct, chilling line back to the Garden of Eden: “I will kiss Thy pure feet and I will wipe them with my tresses. I will kiss Thy feet Whose tread when it fell on the ears of Eve in Paradise dismayed her so that she did hide herself because of fear.”

Look at what is happening here. This is a metaphysical reversal. In Genesis, God walks in the Garden, and Eve hides in fear because of her sin. This time, God is walking on earth in the flesh, and a woman drowning in sin doesn’t hide—she runs to Him, falls down, and kisses those exact same feet.

Saint John Chrysostom points out the tragic irony of this moment. “And when the harlot had repented, when she had been drawn to the Master, then the disciple betrayed his Teacher.” Judas, the insider, the man who spent three years listening to the Word of God, starts doing math. He calculates the cost of the perfume. He calculates the payout from the Pharisees. The harlot, meanwhile, calculates nothing. She simply recognizes her Creator.

Share

SIDEBAR: Oil, Bread, and the Liturgical Reality

While the historical timeline of Holy Week gives us the narrative, the liturgy drags us directly into the events. If you’re navigating the service schedule this week, keep an eye out for two major sacramental anchors that break the usual rhythm.

Holy Wednesday: The Sacrament of Unction
In many parishes, Wednesday evening is reserved for the Sacrament of Holy Unction. The timing is entirely deliberate. On the exact day we commemorate the sinful woman weeping and anointing Christ’s feet with expensive myrrh, the Church turns around and anoints us with blessed oil. It is administered for the healing of soul and body. We don’t just watch the harlot repent; we step into her shoes and receive the medicine of the Great Physician ourselves.

Holy Thursday: The Mystical Supper
“Accept me today, O Son of God, as a partaker of Your mystical supper.” Thursday is liturgically massive because it is the day Christ instituted the Eucharist. To mark this, we celebrate a Divine Liturgy (specifically, the majestic Liturgy of St. Basil the Great) on Thursday morning or early afternoon. But we are not putting on a historical play. We are not hosting a new supper or merely doing a reenactment. Through the Liturgy, we step outside of time and participate mystically in that exact same upper room in Jerusalem.

Great and Holy Friday: Theopaschism and the Glory of the Cross

If you come from a Christian background that emphasizes “penal substitution,” you might expect Good Friday to focus on the psychological and physical agony of Jesus—the nails, the scourging, the sheer human terror.

We do not ignore the suffering. (Your feet and your fasting stomach will remind you of it.) But the Orthodox Church focuses on something far deeper: the divine glory manifest in that suffering.

On Thursday night, we read the Twelve Passion Gospels. On Friday afternoon, we take the body of Christ down from the Cross (the Unnailing) and place it in the tomb. On Friday night, we sing the Lamentations over His grave. All the drama of Christ’s final week becomes real in our midst as we literally have a funeral for God and eulogize Him as He descends into the tomb.

Saint Andrew of Crete tells us that the cross is the glory of Christ, that it was his goal before the ages:

The cross is called Christ’s glory; it is saluted as his his triumph. We recognize it as the cup he longed to drink and the climax of the sufferings he endured for our sake.

And Saint Andrew of Crete won’t let us treat the Cross like a tragedy that happened to “the human part” of Jesus while the divine nature watched from a safe distance. The Cross is exalted because it’s Christ’s glory—his triumph, the cup he wanted to drink, the summit of his love for us. That’s why it isn’t God’s emergency patch after Eden. It’s the plan “before the ages.” The Cross is the eternal shape of God’s self-emptying: God unites Himself to humanity, meets Death head-on, and kills it from the inside—by death.

So when we look at the cross, we don’t just see an instrument of Roman execution; we see the King of Glory ascending His throne.

We believe in an Orthodox understanding of Theopaschism—as championed by St. Cyril of Alexandria—that God suffered in the flesh.

This means that the One hanging on the wood—and the services say exactly this—is the selfsame One who hung the earth upon the waters. The hymnography of Great and Holy Friday is staggering because it forces us to watch the angels. The bodiless powers are looking down in absolute, unmitigated shock as their Creator allows Himself to be slapped by the clay He molded.

Saint Dumitru Stăniloae again:

Without the cross man would be in danger of considering this world as the ultimate reality. Without the cross he would no longer see the world as God’s gift. Without the cross the Son of God incarnate would have simply confirmed the image of the world as it is now as the final reality, and strictly speaking he could have been neither God nor God incarnate. The cross completes the fragmentary meaning of this world which has meaning when it is seen as a gift which has its value, but only a relative and not an absolute value. The cross reveals the destiny of the world as it is drawn towards its transfiguration in God by Christ. For this reason at the end of this stage of the world this sign, ‘the sign of the Son of Man’, will be revealed in the heavens above all the world, as a light, as a meaning, as a destiny which illumines the whole history of man (cf. Matthew 24:30).

The Cross is not a defeat; it is the ultimate revelation of God’s uncreated love. He is weaponizing Death against itself.

Great and Holy Saturday: The Harrowing of Hades

This brings us to the very hinge of the universe. On Saturday morning, we celebrate a Vesperal Liturgy—the mood has begun to change from the rest of the week. The clergy change from dark purple vestments to bright white. Many parishes throw bay leaves and flower petals all over the Church, shouting, “Arise, O God, judge the earth!”

Christ is in the tomb. But the tomb is not a place of decay, it has become a “life-bearing tomb.”

While His body rests in the grave, His human soul—united to His divinity—descends like a nuclear strike into Hades (the realm of the dead). For all of human history, Death had swallowed everyone: the righteous and the wicked. But when Death swallows Christ, it swallows God. It is like a dark, sealed room trying to swallow the sun.

Hades is shattered. The gates of brass are kicked off their hinges. Christ grabs Adam and Eve by the wrists and pulls them from the graves. The “death of God” becomes the death of Death.

Christ, the New Adam, restores our humanity so that we can once again stand as priests of creation. The Cross and the descent into Hades are the ultimate acts of His priestly offering, reclaiming everything that was lost before.

SIDEBAR: Holy Week at a Glance

If you want to explore a little more, Archpriest Ivan Shandra provides a straightforward breakdown of what the Church actually commemorates each day in this video, and summarized below:

Holy Monday - The Patriarch and the Fig Tree

We hold up two warnings: Joseph the Fair (sold by envious brothers, foreshadowing Christ) and the cursed fig tree. The tree had plenty of green leaves but zero fruit—a stark image of hypocritical religion that looks the part but lacks actual repentance.

Holy Tuesday - Spiritual Vigilance

Christ drops parables in the temple that infuriate the Pharisees. We read the Parable of the Ten Virgins as a blunt, unvarnished call to wake up. Do the actual work of your faith so you aren’t caught sleeping when the Bridegroom arrives.

Holy Wednesday - The Sinner and the Traitor

A terrifying contrast. A sinful woman weeps, anoints Christ’s feet, and repents. Meanwhile, Judas—the insider, the disciple—does the math and sells his God for thirty pieces of silver. The harlot repents; the theologian betrays.

Holy Thursday - The Supper and the Garden

A massively dense day. Christ washes His disciples’ feet and institutes the Eucharist. Then, the narrative plunges into the dark: the agonizing prayer in Gethsemane, the arrest, and Peter’s three-fold denial before the rooster crows.

Holy Friday - The Cross and the Tomb

The trial, the mocking, and the sheer shock of the Creator remaining silent before His creatures. Christ is crucified and dies. Just before the Sabbath, Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus take His body down from the wood and seal it in a garden tomb.

Holy Saturday - The Harrowing of Hades

A day of heavy, pregnant silence. Christ’s physical body rests in the grave, but His soul descends like a battering ram to kick the doors off hell and rescue the righteous. By evening, the liturgy noticeably shifts. The Resurrection is coming.

Conclusion: Your Role in the Drama

Every day this week is called “Great” because of the magnitude of what God is doing. But we do not do Holy Week to feel bad for Jesus. He doesn’t need our pity; but he does call us to repentance.

Even in the midst of this cosmic drama, the Church reminds us that our theology must become action. We cannot just read about this; we have to live it in the community of the Church. One of the hymns of the week instructs us plainly:

Let us serve the Master eagerly... Let one gain wisdom through good deeds; Let another celebrate the Liturgy with beauty; Let another share his faith... Let another give his wealth to the poor.

We are about to walk through the darkest, brightest, most exhausting week of the Church year. Pace yourself. We should fast, but not boast about it. We pray more, we pray deeply. We work on forgiveness. And we show up to as many services as the circumstances of life and physical stamina allow.

If your legs are shaking during the Twelve Gospels, and when the smell of myrrh and incense clings to your clothes, remember the old man in Philadelphia—and cut the little boy some slack, too. We bring our whole bodies to the tomb because Christ brought His whole body to the cross.

We are marching with Christ to the grave this week. But we do not go to mourn a martyr. We go to watch the Author of Life plant a bomb in the basement of Hades.

The Bridegroom is coming. Make sure you are awake.

Leave a comment

To borrow an opening line from the rock band Foo Fighters, I have another confession to make—and I have never felt more fiercely righteous than when I was absolutely certain someone else was ruining the Church.

It is an intoxicating feeling, being “right” when everyone else is so wrong. You look around at the state of your parish, or your Orthodox administrative jurisdiction (or someone else’s jurisdiction—i.e., GOA, OCA, ROCOR, etc.), or the latest theological trainwreck unfolding in the Orthodox corners of the internet, and a hot, clean zeal washes over you. You know exactly what needs to be fixed. You know exactly who the problem is. And you know, with the unshakeable confidence of a crusader, that if people would just listen to you, the Bride of Christ would finally be pristine again.

It is also, almost without exception, a complete spiritual delusion.

On Friday, His Eminence Metropolitan Saba of the Antiochian Archdiocese published a piece that stopped many of us dead in our tracks. It wasn’t a standard encyclical or a theological treatise. It was a prayer—a raw, honest, public confession written directly to Christ. In it, he named the exact temptation that plagues anyone who cares deeply about the Church, from the newest convert on YouTube to the bishops in their cathedrals: the terrifying ease with which we confuse our own ego with zeal for God’s house.

So, today I want to go through the Metropolitan’s prayer, “Lord, Do Not Discipline Us Harshly.” We are going to look at the messiness of the Church, the strange geometry of Christ’s life, and why the most dangerous thing you can do is try to “fix” the Body of Christ.

My Lord,

Perhaps one of the most difficult things in Your Gospel is that You allowed the wheat to grow together with the tares until the final judgment. In doing so, You taught us that Your Church on earth is not a gathering of saints as much as it is a community of strugglers seeking holiness.

Some may attain it; others may glimpse it only from afar; and many may not see it at all.

You willed Your Church to be a community of seekers of the truth—and the Truth is You, and in You it is revealed. Yet we still wonder why the Church is persecuted and in conflict until the end of time.

In our disputes and zealotry—which we mistakenly attribute to You—we imagine that we are defending You and defending Your Body stretched out across the earth.

But the truth is: we belong to this and that of your servants more we belong actually to You.

You also taught us that holiness is not given except to those who truly seek it on the narrow path.

Thus, we learned that we must be strict with ourselves, not others, and that we must demand truth and uprightness from ourselves before anything else.

Then You offered Your life so that truth, purity, and self-sacrifice might hold the highest place in Your creation. Your sacrifice became the true expression of Your pure words.

And because You humbled Yourself and made Your life consistent with Your word, Your whole life was a descent.

You ascended only twice.

The first time was so that the multitudes might hear Your teaching, when You went up the mountain to give them the new law.

The second time was upon the Cross. On the hill of Golgotha, You allowed Yourself to be lifted up as a martyr, embracing the world with Your outstretched arms.

Yet even this elevation was the summit of Your descent, for it led You to the tomb in an earthly cave.

And through this utmost descent You rose again and burst forth with life—the life of which You spoke in the Gospel, saying that You came to give it to us, and to give it to us abundantly.

But we often act contrary to you.

We love display and self-exaltation. We prefer that people see us as leaders rather than as servants and fathers.

We want followers, even if we lead them to destruction.

Because we are small within, we seek to become great—not through You, but through them—so that we may feel effective, influential, and important.

If Your children, out of love for us, see only our outward appearance, what excuse do we have, when we ourselves know who we are and are aware of the baseness, weakness, and impurity that dwell within us?

Teach us, Lord, how to descend so that You may raise us up.

Guide us to understand the true exaltation that befits Your people and Your servants.

Is it not enough for us to remain at Your feet?

Is not the whole fulfillment in listening to You, as Mary did when she received the good portion that shall not be taken away from her?

In the intoxication of our self-importance and ego, we often forget You, my Lord, and replace You with our followers.

We become preoccupied with the devil dwelling within us, following his whispers so we no longer see You or hear You. Thus, vainglory leads us to do what we perceive is right—when in truth it is our own sins.

And so, Lord, we no longer know how to distinguish between our passions and our zeal for Your house.

Do not allow turmoil, Lord, to drive us to act contrary to Your Gospel.

Have mercy on us and on our hardness of heart. Pour out upon us much more of Your abundant mercy.

You have entrusted us with a fearful responsibility, for You have chosen to place Your Holy Spirit in us—vulnerable vessels so easily broken.

How can we keep our vessels intact while slipping is so easy, and the illusion that we are Your chosen agents to correct Your Church and the world is so enticing?

Lord, how many times have we been tempted to act against Your Gospel in order to serve Your Church “better”?

How often have we violated Your Gospel when we sanctified the means for the sake of the end?

And how often have we betrayed You when we set You aside and used You as a tool for our own interests and desires?

Teach us, Lord, that we are not greater than You, for no servant is greater than his master.

Help us to accept Your example—the example of the one who is the persecuted, not the persecutor.

Direct our steps so that You may be our first love.

Grant that we may listen to You more than we speak about You, so that we may rightly discern between Your will and our passions.

My Lord, throughout history You have taught us that You permit both external and internal persecution when we stray from the truth and depart from the straight path.

Do not discipline us harshly, Lord, for we can scarcely endure it.

Preserve among us a remnant that bears witness to You—to the fullness of life You desired for us, and to the joy that Your angels proclaimed when You honored our earth when You visited us.

People are weary of Your Church because of us, O Lord. Forgive us and guide us onto the straight path.

It is You who we desire, Lord. Do not let us become distracted from You by that which belongs to You.

Share

Setting Up the “Agricultural” Problem

Most Orthodox Christians want a pure Church.

This is not a new problem. In the fourth century, a group of hardline Christians in North Africa looked around at their bishops and priests. Some of those clergy had caved under Roman persecution, handing over holy things to save their own skins. When the persecution ended, these lapsed priests wanted to return. The hardliners—who became known as the Donatists—said absolutely not. They demanded a pure Church, stripped of the compromised, the weak, and the cowardly. For the Donatists, these people weren’t invited to the party.

The Orthodox, Catholic response—championed most famously by Saint Augustine—was far more messy. The Church, they argued, is a hospital for sinners, not a museum for saints.

Metropolitan Saba addresses this directly in his prayer, pointing straight back to Christ’s parable of the wheat and the tares. “Perhaps one of the most difficult things in Your Gospel,” he writes, “is that You allowed the wheat to grow together with the tares until the final judgment.”

He gives a beautiful definition of what we are actually doing here:

You taught us that Your Church on earth is not a gathering of saints as much as it is a community of strugglers seeking holiness. Some may attain it; others may glimpse it only from afar; and many may not see it at all.

The human tendency is to hate this. We want to pull the weeds, and we’re pretty sure the other guys are the weeds. We may be tempted to draw sharp lines between the “True Believers” and the “Compromised.” But the tension of the Gospel is that Christ actually tells us to knock it off with the weed-pulling (Matthew 13:24-30)—primarily because our spiritual eyesight is so warped by pride that we are almost guaranteed to uproot the wheat while protecting our own favorite tares.

Or, more frighteningly, and I already hinted at this: we might realize that we are the tares.

“Thus, we learned,” His Eminence concludes, “that we must be strict with ourselves, not others, and that we must demand truth and uprightness from ourselves before anything else.”

Subscribe now

The Two Ascents of Christ

If the first temptation is to purge the Church, the second is to climb to the top of it.

Here, Metropolitan Saba makes a profound observation about the physical trajectory of the Incarnation. Our culture is obsessed with upward mobility. We want platforms. We count clicks, subscribers, followers, and comments. Enter YouTube, and the newly zealous want to be seen as leaders, defenders of the faith, important voices.

But Christ’s life moved in the exact opposite direction. His entire existence was an act of kenosis—a Greek word meaning self-emptying. God becomes a fetus. The Creator of the cosmos learns to walk in the dust of first-century Palestine. He famously rode into Jerusalem on a donkey, and yet was greeted by the masses as a King and Royal Victor.

“Your whole life was a descent,” Metropolitan Saba writes. And then he points out an astonishing detail: “You ascended only twice.”

The first time Christ goes up is to the mountain, so the multitudes can hear the new law (Matthew 5). The second time is upon the Cross: “On the hill of Golgotha, You allowed Yourself to be lifted up as a martyr, embracing the world with Your outstretched arms.”

Even when Christ goes “up,” it is actually the summit of His descent. He ascends the mountain to serve the crowds. He ascends the cross to die for them.

Contrast this with how we operate. “Because we are small within,” the Metropolitan confesses on our behalf, “we seek to become great—not through You, but through them [our followers]—so that we may feel effective, influential, and important.”

We use the things of God to build monuments to ourselves. We gather followers, readers, and allies under the banner of “defending” or promoting Orthodoxy, but the engine driving the train is often just our own desperate need to matter.

We are like the disciples arguing over who is going to be the greatest in the Kingdom; meanwhile, Christ is prepping a bowl of water to wash the feet of the disciples.

Sanctifying the Means

All this presents an amusing—or rather, tragic—conundrum. What happens when we convince ourselves we are fighting a holy war for the Church? And what if we are really being driven by ego?

“How often,” the Metropolitan asks, “have we violated Your Gospel when we sanctified the means for the sake of the end?”

When you believe that the survival or purity of the Church depends entirely on you winning an argument, securing a parish council vote, or “destroying” an opponent online, you will justify almost any behavior. Snark, slander, political maneuvering, gossip, personal attacks—it all gets baptized as “zeal” or is justified “because he brought so many to the Church.”

But the Metropolitan pierces right through this delusion:

In the intoxication of our self-importance and ego, we often forget You, my Lord, and replace You with our followers. We become preoccupied with the devil dwelling within us, following his whispers so we no longer see You or hear You. Thus, vainglory leads us to do what we perceive is right—when in truth it is our own sins.

Read that line again. Vainglory leads us to do what we perceive is right.

The most terrifying moment in the spiritual life is not when you are tempted to do something obviously evil. It is when the demons convince you to do something “holy” using the methods of Hell.

We set Christ aside, the Metropolitan says, and “use [Him] as a tool for our own interests and desires.”

The Weariness of the World

If we stay on this path of arrogant, self-appointed crusading, the results are inevitable. As is usually the case, history shows us exactly what happens, even when new technologies give platform to our sins.

When we become swollen with in our own self-importance, and when the broader Church begins to forget the strange geometry of downward mobility, God prunes us. He permits external hardship or internal fracture to break the pride of His people. He lets the structures collapse so we will hear the message and we can remember how to pray.

This leads to the most sigh-inducing line in the entire piece:

People are weary of Your Church because of us, O Lord. Forgive us and guide us onto the straight path... Do not discipline us harshly, Lord, for we can scarcely endure it.

If you have spent any time trying to evangelize, you know how true this can be. People are rarely kept away from Orthodox Christianity by the doctrine of the Trinity or the complexity of the Divine Liturgy. They are kept away by us. They see our infighting. They see our arrogance. They see leaders and laymen who demand to be served rather than to serve. They see people who claim to eat the Body of the crucified God, but who refuse to crucify their own egos. The see a prideful bunch who fill X with posts about being right, and everyone else is just stupid, wrong, and probably dishonest.

Is it any surprise that some are weary of us? And we are, if we are honest, frequently weary of ourselves.

The Good Portion

So how do we fix it? How do we stop being the obstacle? The answer is unexciting to the human ego: you stop trying to “fix” the Church, and you sit down.

“Is it not enough for us to remain at Your feet?” Metropolitan Saba asks. “Is not the whole fulfillment in listening to You, as Mary did when she received the good portion that shall not be taken away from her?”

This is where the Metropolitan reframes it for us. The next time you feel that hot flush of righteous indignation—the next time you are absolutely certain that you need to step in and correct someone, or launch a theological offensive, or save the parish from itself—pause.

Look at your own hands: Are they reaching for a towel to wash feet, or are they reaching for a crown?

The Church doesn’t need more saviors. It already has one. What it needs is a committed bunch of men and women who are willing to take the downward path. It needs people who are more concerned with their own repentance than their neighbor’s theology and morals.

“Direct our steps so that You may be our first love,” the Metropolitan prays. “Grant that we may listen to You more than we speak about You.”

May it be so. Because when we finally stop trying to ascend, we might just bump into the God who is already waiting for us at the bottom.

Leave a comment

This Lent I would like to pause to consider just what profound spiritual surgery this short, powerful prayer is performing on our souls.

We know it’s important. It’s everywhere during Lent, both in Church and in our private prayer corners. Yet, for all its seeming to be everywhere, its direct, almost blunt petitions can fly by, becoming part of the Lenten atmosphere rather than an earnest, personal plea.

So, let’s explore this little Lenten prayer that has withstood the test of time. We’ll peel back its layers, understand the ancient wisdom it condenses, and see how this prayer, century after century, offers a direct path to spiritual healing and true communion with the God who is there.

O Lord and Master of my life, take from me the spirit of sloth, despair, lust of power, and idle talk.

But give rather the spirit of chastity, humility, patience, and love to Thy servant.

Yea, O Lord and King, grant me to see my own transgressions, and not to judge my brother; for blessed art Thou unto ages of ages. Amen.

Source: OCA

Dissecting the Petitions: The Four Foes and the Four Friends

Saint Ephraim’s prayer is a two-part spiritual diagnostic.

• First, it identifies the primary diseases of the soul we need God to remove.

• Then, it prescribes the essential virtues we need God to implant. It’s a masterful piece of spiritual engineering: concise, precise, and effective.

O Lord and Master of my life, take from me the spirit of sloth, despair, lust of power, and idle talk.

This isn’t a generic “make me a better person” petition. Ephraim names four specific, insidious “spirits” that corrupt us from within.

• Sloth (ἀργία - argia): This isn’t just about being lazy and binging Netflix. This is spiritual sloth, a listlessness of the soul that resists effort towards God. It’s the spiritual inertia that keeps us from prayer, from charity, from any real striving for holiness. Sometimes it comes across as a comfortable apathy that says, “eh, tomorrow.” (There are some differences between the Greek and Slavonic here that are interesting.)

• Despair (ἀθυμία - athymai): Sometimes this is translated as “faint-heartedness,” this is the spirit that tells us it’s too hard, we’re too weak, God can’t possibly forgive this. It’s a parlyzing doubt, the inner voice that whispers to us that spiritual growth is for others, not for our pathetic selves. Interestingly, the desert fathers saw despair as one of the ultimate temptations, because it cuts off the very hope needed for repentance.

• Lust of Power (φιλαρχία - philarchia): This isn’t just about wanting to be CEO. This is the desire to dominate, to control, to impose our will on others, even subtly. It’s pride’s ugly cousin, whispering that we know best, that our opinions are superior, that our way is the only way. You need a permit in fourteen U.S. states to attempt that level of self-importance, but here we are, asking God to yank it out of us.

• Idle Talk (ἀργολογία - argologia): Oh, the chatter! And in our digital age, this one hits close to home. It’s not just gossip, but all speech that is empty, pointless, or destructive. It’s the incessant internal monologue, the endless scrolling, the words that build nothing up but tear down reputation, peace, or truth. It’s spiritually junk food for the soul.

This prayer is a direct plea for God’s grace to pull out these deep-rooted and tenacious weeds from our souls.

But give rather the spirit of chastity, humility, patience, and love to Thy servant.

Having cleared the ground, Ephraim then asks for the cultivation of four essential virtues. These aren’t just external behaviors; they are qualities that transform the very fabric of our being, making us more truly human, more truly like Christ.

• Chastity (σωφροσύνη - sophrosyne): It’s more than sexual purity (but not less than sexual purity), so this ancient virtue speaks to inner integrity, sobriety, and self-control across all aspects of life. It’s the spiritual clarity that allows us to see things as they truly are, unclouded by passion or illusion. It’s aiming for a unified, healthy soul.

• Humility (ταπεινοφροσύνη - tapeinophrosyne): The queen of virtues, often misunderstood. It’s not self-abasement; it’s self-knowledge. It’s seeing ourselves accurately before God and others, without pretense or exaggeration. It’s the freedom from needing to prove anything, the quiet confidence that comes from resting in God’s grace.

• Patience (ὑπομονή - hypomonē): This is not passive resignation but active endurance. It’s the steadfastness that allows us to bear trials, temptations, and delays without losing heart. It’s the long-suffering love that trusts in God’s providential love, even when we don’t understand this mortal existence.

• Love (ἀγάπη - agapē): The highest virtue, the very essence of God Himself. It’s selfless, sacrificial love, the kind that seeks the good of the other before its own. It’s the glue that binds all other virtues together, making them truly Christ-like.

Share Simply Orthodox

The Mirror, Not the Hammer: Seeing My Own Transgressions

Yea, O Lord and King, grant me to see my own transgressions, and not to judge my brother; for blessed art Thou unto ages of ages. Amen.

This final petition is the prayer’s pinnacle, the place where it has been leading all along. It’s the antidote to pride and the foundation of true repentance. How often do we, as humans, find it so much easier to spot the speck in our brother’s eye than the plank in our own? Saint Ephraim cuts to the chase, and with him we ask for the grace of self-knowledge, the radical honesty to confront our own fallenness.

This prayer and this petition isn’t really about wallowing in guilt; it’s about clarity. It’s about turning the spiritual microscope on ourselves, recognizing our inner “spirits” of sloth or lust of power, and simultaneously disarming the judgmental spirit that so quickly rises when we look at others.

True humility, the prayer teaches us, leads not to condemnation of our neighbor, but to compassion, because we know all too well our own battles.

Sidebar: The Syrian Sheepdog

It’s a great irony of Church history that Saint Ephraim the Syrian—one of the most prolific and complex poets and theologians of the ancient Christian world—is globally famous today for a prayer that takes about thirty seconds to say, complete with gestures and prostrations.

In the fourth century, Ephraim was a towering intellectual. He was ordained a deacon by a bishop who had actually sat at the Council of Nicea. But he didn’t fight the theological battles of his day with dry academic treatises. He fought them with lyrics.

As the Orthodox YouTube channel Patristix notes in a great video essay on the topic, Ephraim used his hymns to build a fortress of truth against the swirling heresies of his era. In fact, a century after he died, another saintly poet, Jacob of Serugh, gave him the perfect title: “a sheepdog guarding the sheep of God’s household.” Ephraim literally built a protective sheepfold out of poetry to shield the faithful from spiritual storms.

He didn’t just argue. He sang.

We can remember this when we drop to the floor to pray his Lenten prayer, that we aren’t just reciting an isolated monk’s private journal entry. We’re borrowing the field-tested notes of a fourth-century theological sheepdog.

(To dig a little deeper into the history of the man behind the prayer, I highly recommend the short breakdown from Patristix below.)

From Words to Life: Living the Prayer

This prayer is not merely recited; it’s lived through gesture and intention. Whether bowing alongside our brothers and sisters during a Pre-Sanctified Liturgy, or quietly in the solitude of our homes, its rhythm is meant to imprint itself on our bodies and souls.

The bodily action that accompanies this prayer—which can vary in specifics, but pretty much always involves some form of bowing or prostration—is crucial. It reminds us that repentance is not a purely mental exercise. It involves the whole person—mind, heart, and body—bending in submission and humility before God. As the Fathers understood, the body is a full participant in our spiritual lives, not just vessels for our souls and the thoughts that rattle around our heads.

Fr. Alexander Schmemann (of blessed memory) put it like this:

In the long and difficult effort of spiritual recovery, the Church does not separate the soul from the body. The whole man has fallen away from God; the whole man is to be restored, the whole man is to return. The catastrophe of sin lies precisely in the victory of the flesh—the animal, the irrational, the lust in us—over the spiritual and the divine. But the body is glorious; the body is holy, so holy that God Himself “became flesh.” Salvation and repentance then are not contempt for the body or neglect of it, but restoration of the body to its real function as the expression and the life of spirit, as the temple of the priceless human soul. Christian asceticism is a fight, not against but for the body. For this reason, the whole man—soul and body—repents. The body participates in the prayer of the soul just as the soul prays through and in the body. Prostrations, the “psycho-somatic” sign of repentance and humility, of adoration and obedience, are thus the lenten rite par excellence.

Incorporating Saint Ephraim’s prayer into our daily lives during the Lenten weeks transforms our days into a school of spiritual combat and a deepening self-awareness.

Rightly understood, it teaches us that true fasting isn’t just about abstaining from food, but from the passions that distort the image of God within us. Each time we utter it, each time we bow, we are engaging in a micro-act of metanoia, allowing God to work His healing, transformative power within us.

So this Lent, as the familiar words rise from your lips, take a moment. Let them sink in. Feel the weight of each petition, the cutting edge of each diagnosis, and the soaring hope of each virtue on offer in the prayer.

Because in this short but bold prayer, we hold the scalpel that cuts to the heart—in order to truly heal it.

Leave a comment