Hieromonk Lavrentie | July 4, 2025
The Paterikon, one of the
foundational books of Orthodox spirituality, breathes a spirit of intense
asceticism and repentance. This is, or should be, evident to anyone. The maxims
it contains are concise and strong. For this reason, it is difficult to
integrate into a worldly perspective on life. Nevertheless, [the Romanian
Orthodox newspaper] ZiarulLumina proposes nothing more and nothing less
than to extract an ecumenist vision from the pages of this book in an article
about the “Ecumenism” of the Desert Fathers. [Translation below]
Obviously, this article title
caught my attention, being curious what kind of ecumenism could possibly be
drawn from the Paterikon. And of course, I was once again convinced of
the words of St. Paisios the Athonite that ecumenists not only lack substance,
but even any spiritual outer shell. I even dare to say that it goes further
than that—they transform even spiritual sayings and deeds into worldly ones, as
can be seen from the article in question.
Because Orthodox spirituality has
its own reference points, which are not of this world, we cannot apply the
ecumenist template to interpret various accounts from the Paterikon, as
the author of the article attempts to do. Precisely because love, justice,
kindness, and other virtues are distorted by the sin within us, the works that
proceed from faith are of a different nature. They must be fulfilled through
the careful removal of the passions, through the setting of a good beginning,
through self-denial. So great and exalted is the word of God that it is
received only with a pure heart.
Most importantly, the evangelical
commandments respond to all worldly challenges by their very nature, within a
framework that is not of this world, not through the lens of earthly thinking.
Thus, spiritually speaking, we do
not raise the issue of otherness, but of love in Christ, of pure goodness.
Withdrawal from the world is not of an egoistic nature, but out of humility and
guarding of the mind, in order to rediscover the peace of the heart, to turn
from the outward to the inward. Ultimately, to find the unseen God, the Holy
Spirit.
Therefore, seeking in the Paterikon
an answer to the question: Do we find rejection there, isolation, or, on the
contrary, openness and acceptance? is an entirely mistaken approach. At the
very least, it is not an Orthodox approach to the Paterikon, but a
childish and amateurish one. We cannot drag down the asceticism of the Fathers
of the desert to the level of strictly worldly and infantile questionings. This
only reveals a lack of proper understanding of true spirituality.
It is no wonder that even the
definition of ecumenism as a “Gospel commandment of unity among Christians”
falsely starts from distorted quotations from the Gospel. The union with God,
which takes place on an inner level, is confused with good understanding among
“Christians.” Christ did not speak about the connection of the faithful with
one another, but about the union with God through Him.
“Just as You, Father, are in Me
and I in You, that they also may be one in Us.” (John 17:21) According to the
interpretation of the Holy Fathers, especially St. Gregory Palamas, this verse
refers to our union with the Father—that is, that we may be in Him, just as
Christ is united with Him. We are one with the Father and with Christ, not one
with each other. Clearly, we also attain unity among ourselves when all of us
do this, but that is a secondary meaning and by no means a Gospel commandment
to be in union with heretics, but with God.
Love of enemies was a fundamental
concern of the Paterikon, but not in the sense of openness toward
others, toward sinners, toward the world, toward heretics. It referred to not
judging, not harming the other, having mercy, praying for him, and helping him
in every possible way. But this, in the Paterikon, was from the
perspective of those who withdrew from the world and fled from it, not as if
they sought to do mission or to concern themselves with people's problems.
The examples poorly drawn from
the Paterikon are generally good, with minor clarifications. For
instance, Abba Macarius did not convert a pagan because he greeted him, but
because he ran after him, calling him “O laborer,” and treated him with love
and goodwill, contrary to his disciple who had insulted him the day before.
This is not a random deed, but was likely an attitude inspired by God through
which he might win over that idolatrous priest. In any case, it cannot be taken
as an example of ecumenism.
Indeed, there are extremes,
especially among monastics, concerning the defense of the faith. However, the
solution of the Paterikon is not ecumenism and otherness, nor openness
toward heretics. On the contrary, the deepening of faith leads to a real love
even for enemies and for those who are in error, without betraying the truth of
the faith.
It is good to bring criticism to
ecclesiastical extremisms, but the ecumenists seem incapable of doing this and
instead propose the opposite extreme—laxity and amateurism in matters of faith.
In this way, it is not religious fundamentalism that is being criticized, but
religiosity itself, and faith is being undermined under the pretext of
moderation and discernment.
Abba Agathon rejects the
accusation of heresy after having accepted to be called guilty of all sins
precisely out of the humility brought by pure faith. He is able to consider
himself a sinner in every way through the strength of faith, from which he does
not depart when he is called a heretic. Likewise, St. Basil the Great was ready
to endure any offense, but not when it came to the right faith.
From these events we should learn
that it is precisely the pure deepening of Orthodoxy that will lead us to
perfect love and humility—not some openness toward heresy. And the humble
mindset that comes from faith is astonishing, such that it accepts any reproach
with a light heart, without calculation.
There are also other accounts
from the Paterikon regarding the right faith that would have been
welcome. For example, Abba Gelasius (§4) was not deceived by a certain
Theodosius to renounce the Council of Chalcedon, realizing his deceit “from the
bearing of that man and from the discernment he had from God.” Later, he was
not frightened by fire nor by threats and remained faithful to the legitimate
bishop Juvenal of Jerusalem. In this instance, one sees both the rigor of the
faith and the humble and fearless mindset of the elder—a true example from the Paterikon.
As I wrote at the beginning, the
article errs through the psychological approach to faith, through the
superficial treatment of the struggle for purification from the passions,
through the distortion of the words of the Gospel, and through the presentation
of patristic books detached from the good fear of God. Thus, it introduces a
completely erroneous idea of ecumenism and attempts to accustom the faithful to
a worldly and heretical spirit.
Ecumenism is precisely this: the
lowering of the faith to the level of worldly psychological experiences, to
diplomatic and hypocritical politeness, and, not least, the betrayal of the
faith under the guise of kindness toward one’s neighbor and supposedly in the
name of God.
Can the ecumenists say where, in
such endeavors, is the presentation of the values and treasures of the faith to
the heretics through ecumenism?
The "Ecumenism" of
the Desert Fathers
Fr. Paul Siladi | July
2, 2025
(Romanian source: https://ziarullumina.ro/opinii/repere-si-idei/ecumenismul-parintilor-desertului-198957.html)
Ecumenism, in its modern form,
appears at the beginning of the 20th century. It is a recent concept, difficult
to apply directly to the world of the desert fathers. Nevertheless, the
influence of these ascetics remains present, especially in Orthodox monastic
circles, but not only there. The Egyptian Paterikon offers a possible
starting point. Even if they do not speak directly about ecumenism, these texts
can be explored to understand attitudes toward otherness. The question is
legitimate: Do we find rejection there, isolation, or, on the contrary,
openness and acceptance?
Such questions are particularly
relevant today. We live in a tense context, marked by identity-based retreats
and the rise of religious fundamentalisms. Ecumenism entails the desire for
unity among Christians. It is not merely a theological or human aspiration, but
a Gospel commandment. It is founded on Christ’s prayer for unity (John 17:21)
and on the commandment to love one’s neighbor (Matthew 22:39). From this
perspective, the experiences of the desert fathers can also be read.
Historically speaking,
Christianity has often been perceived as intolerant. Monastics, in particular,
have sometimes been associated with fanaticism. But this image is unjust. The
great Egyptian ascetics proposed another model, centered around discernment. In
the ascetic life, it means a form of wisdom aided by the Holy Spirit. It
applies both to one’s own life and to the relationship with others.
Abba Anthony, one of the most
important fathers, emphasizes that asceticism without discernment does not lead
to God. He insists that the spiritual life depends on one’s neighbor. Although
withdrawn from the world, the desert fathers did not live isolated from others.
They understood the relationship with one’s neighbor as the foundation of
spiritual life. Abba John the Dwarf states clearly: all the commandments rest
upon love for the other. This love extends beyond the monastic community. It
includes sinners, enemies, heretics, or pagans. In the face of sin, love
becomes care, and in the face of danger, it remains non-violent.
Abba Sisoes refuses to kill a
barbarian, even in legitimate self-defense, and entrusts himself to God. Many
times, his peaceful attitude led to the conversion of his attackers. Abba Zenon
says that prayer for enemies is the condition for our prayer to be accepted.
The attitude toward heretics is
more nuanced. Separation from heresy is recommended, but without hatred. Abba
Agathon rejects any accusation of heresy, because he considers heresy a
separation from God. On the other hand, Abba Lot proposes a middle way: maintaining
distance, but also offering a chance for correction. Toward pagans, the fathers
show love. Abba Macarius even prays for the souls of pagans in hell. In a
well-known episode, he meets a pagan priest and greets him with love. This
attitude leads to the conversion of that man. The conclusion is clear. The
desert fathers lived out love for neighbor in radical forms. For them, no
religious or moral difference canceled the Gospel call to love.
Can we speak of their ecumenism?
Not in the modern sense. But we can speak of a form of religious tolerance. The
Fathers remain faithful to the truth, but refuse to impose themselves through
violence. They bear witness through gentleness and example.
This is, perhaps, the primary
form of ecumenism: a love without boundaries, which respects otherness without
relativizing the truth or diminishing its outline.
Romanian source:
https://theodosie.ro/2025/07/04/ziarullumina-dovedeste-ca-ecumenismul-stinge-pana-si-spiritualitatea-patericului-nu-doar-ca-nu-prezinta-ereticilor-comorile-ortodoxiei/
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.