We support a unified Iraq.
We ask for special protection for the Indigenous Christians of Iraq.
We ask for the Iraqi security forces to protect our people.
We ask for the U.S. Congress to approve Legislation to Help our people. (HR 944)
We ask that Indigenous Christian lands be reserved so that the millions that have fled have a place to return to.
Save the world's oldest civilization.
Suffering wave after wave of ethnic cleansing in Iraq since the US-led invasion in 2003, the indigenous Christian community of Iraq is near the brink of extinction in the land it has occupied since the great city-states and empires of Mesopotamia. Its numbers have dwindled from the millions to approximately 600,000 as its people flee the violence and persecution in hopes of gaining asylum in the West. This community faces constant threats, kidnappings, rapes, murders, bombings, and massacres in the major cities by Islamic fundamentalists and faces poverty and oppression in the North, its ancestral homeland. With no militia, security forces, or alliances, this ancient community is left helpless as it is driven out of its indigenous lands.
We are targeted for our ethnic and religious identity. WE WILL NOT BE SILENT.
Iraqi Christians make up nearly half of Iraqi refugees but less than 1% of Iraq's population. We need to stand up together, in this WORLDWIDE protest on Monday and try and be heard. The media will be there and, in Detroit, we will be rallying in front of the McNamara Federal Building, 477 Michigan Ave.
Invite all of your family, from your children to your grandparents! Invite all of your friends! Invite all of your co-workers! Invite all of your neighbors! Invite all of the organizations, media and politicians that you are associated with! Invite all of your churches, mosques, temples, etc...!
The Assyrian Christians are an innocent and unprotected people. We need a unified World front to shed light on our people before we no longer have a homeland!
Join us in our march on Monday, Nov. 8th at 11:30am
Sunday, November 7, 2010
Monday, October 18, 2010
An introduction to patristics
http://www.monachos.net/content/patristics/patristictexts
"The patristic texts found in this area are published here in Monachos.net's own library, as part of our work to make the patristic corpus more readily available in a variety of means on-line. We also maintain an extensive listing of patristic texts available elsewhere; between the two, providing an extensive listing of patristic writings on the internet."
Written by M.C. Steenberg | 15 March 2001
The study of the Church Fathers is central to an understanding of and appreciation for the history and content of Orthodox Christianity. It is in these holy men and women that the Church has found her voice throughout the centuries, in these lives transformed and illumined that she has found her most poignant mouthpeaces. It was these that produced the Scriptures, the formulations of the Councils, and the sacred writings that continue to form the textual tradition of the Church.
Often, the writings of the Fathers can be complex, for much hearkens from an era different from our own. Context can seem distant, and the mire of words difficult sands through which one must sift. Yet the great quality of the writings of the Church Fathers is their transcendence of the human moment: their ability to speak to the very heart of man even centuries, perhaps millennia, after they were first written. It is the voice of the Holy Spirit of God that speaks through their words, and thus their message is eternal and ever applicable to the contemporary state of humanity.
It is the Fathers of the Church who have produced her great textual treasures: her Scripture, her hymnody, her theological apologetics, her histories. Thus a proper understanding of any of these elements of Orthodox life can only be obtained when approached with a Patristic sense of mind. We must not be isolationist in our understanding of the Church, thinking that only the here and now have relevance to the spiritual condition and guidance of the faithful. From the beginning of history, God has illumined the hearts and minds of His faithful, revealing to them the truths of His Kingdom, that they might go forth as lights into the world and proclaim Him to the generations. Their message has formed the great body of work known as the writings of the Church Fathers, and it speaks just as boldy to modern Orthodoxy as it did to the Orthodoxy of its own day.
There are two great 'temporal dangers' that present themselves to the student of patristics: first is the tendency to minimize the writings of the past as 'dated', out of touch, inspiring yet unfulfilled in the scope of the modern world. It is only the genuine, open study of the patristic writings than can properly alleviate this tendency and this flawed view of the Church's history, for only when the works of the Fathers are read and comprehended, will one come to see the great power with which they address the concerns of every age, including ours today.
The second danger is that of over-reminiscence, of seeing the purity of the Fathers' teachings as reflecting a golden age in the Church which has been lost and now sits absent in the modern day. It is true that much was and is to be praised of the eras in which given Fathers wrote, and yet much is also to be praised today. Though the multitude of our patristic literature hearkens from past generations and centuries, we must never forget that God continues to inspire prophets, Fathers and Mothers of the Church today, and that the patristic tradition is one of continuation—of the past and the present. The illumination of the past generations of the Church is a light that brightens the faithful in the present moment, now and into the future.
For the above reasons, the Patristics Area on Monachos.net is comprised both of patristic studies from the early, middle and later Church, but also of patristic studies in the present day: modern writers understood by the Church to be holy exemplars of Orthodox Christianity are included, though in number they are fewer than the collection produced through the past 2,000 years. A certain deference is given to some of the Fathers of the Early Church, in whose writings the Church found voice for her principal concerns of Trinitarian and Christological theology, as well as the Councils and their deliberations. But even as God continues to lead and guide the holy Church, the collection of patristic sources will be ever expanding throughout future generations.
This short welcome thus in mind, please enjoy the patristic resources offered on Monachos.net.
"The patristic texts found in this area are published here in Monachos.net's own library, as part of our work to make the patristic corpus more readily available in a variety of means on-line. We also maintain an extensive listing of patristic texts available elsewhere; between the two, providing an extensive listing of patristic writings on the internet."
Written by M.C. Steenberg | 15 March 2001
The study of the Church Fathers is central to an understanding of and appreciation for the history and content of Orthodox Christianity. It is in these holy men and women that the Church has found her voice throughout the centuries, in these lives transformed and illumined that she has found her most poignant mouthpeaces. It was these that produced the Scriptures, the formulations of the Councils, and the sacred writings that continue to form the textual tradition of the Church.
Often, the writings of the Fathers can be complex, for much hearkens from an era different from our own. Context can seem distant, and the mire of words difficult sands through which one must sift. Yet the great quality of the writings of the Church Fathers is their transcendence of the human moment: their ability to speak to the very heart of man even centuries, perhaps millennia, after they were first written. It is the voice of the Holy Spirit of God that speaks through their words, and thus their message is eternal and ever applicable to the contemporary state of humanity.
It is the Fathers of the Church who have produced her great textual treasures: her Scripture, her hymnody, her theological apologetics, her histories. Thus a proper understanding of any of these elements of Orthodox life can only be obtained when approached with a Patristic sense of mind. We must not be isolationist in our understanding of the Church, thinking that only the here and now have relevance to the spiritual condition and guidance of the faithful. From the beginning of history, God has illumined the hearts and minds of His faithful, revealing to them the truths of His Kingdom, that they might go forth as lights into the world and proclaim Him to the generations. Their message has formed the great body of work known as the writings of the Church Fathers, and it speaks just as boldy to modern Orthodoxy as it did to the Orthodoxy of its own day.
There are two great 'temporal dangers' that present themselves to the student of patristics: first is the tendency to minimize the writings of the past as 'dated', out of touch, inspiring yet unfulfilled in the scope of the modern world. It is only the genuine, open study of the patristic writings than can properly alleviate this tendency and this flawed view of the Church's history, for only when the works of the Fathers are read and comprehended, will one come to see the great power with which they address the concerns of every age, including ours today.
The second danger is that of over-reminiscence, of seeing the purity of the Fathers' teachings as reflecting a golden age in the Church which has been lost and now sits absent in the modern day. It is true that much was and is to be praised of the eras in which given Fathers wrote, and yet much is also to be praised today. Though the multitude of our patristic literature hearkens from past generations and centuries, we must never forget that God continues to inspire prophets, Fathers and Mothers of the Church today, and that the patristic tradition is one of continuation—of the past and the present. The illumination of the past generations of the Church is a light that brightens the faithful in the present moment, now and into the future.
For the above reasons, the Patristics Area on Monachos.net is comprised both of patristic studies from the early, middle and later Church, but also of patristic studies in the present day: modern writers understood by the Church to be holy exemplars of Orthodox Christianity are included, though in number they are fewer than the collection produced through the past 2,000 years. A certain deference is given to some of the Fathers of the Early Church, in whose writings the Church found voice for her principal concerns of Trinitarian and Christological theology, as well as the Councils and their deliberations. But even as God continues to lead and guide the holy Church, the collection of patristic sources will be ever expanding throughout future generations.
This short welcome thus in mind, please enjoy the patristic resources offered on Monachos.net.
Sunday, October 17, 2010
After Chalcedon - Orthodoxy in the 5th/6th Centuries (Complex)
http://www.orthodoxunity.org/article01.php
After Chalcedon - Orthodoxy in the 5th/6th Centuries
It seems to be received as an historical fact that after the Council of Chalcedon those Christians who refused to accept its decisions and doctrinal statements were immediately isolated and rapidly withdrew into their own communion. This opinion is far from reflecting historical reality, and yet it is often presumed to be true by Oriental Orthodox as much as Chalcedonian Orthodox.
It fails to take full account of the truth that for a Council to be Ecumenical it must be received by the whole Church, and ignores the reality that large numbers of Orthodox Christians rejected it, and continued to oppose it. This opinion assumes that because one group of Orthodox defined the Faith in a particular way any who disagreed with that definition must of necessity have separated themselves from the Faith and therefore from the Church. Yet in the years after Chalcedon, and throughout the 6th century, those who rejected Chalcedon continued to play a significant, and at times dominant, role in the Orthodox Church.
Even before the Council of Chalcedon there had been tensions between those who followed the teaching and terminology of St. Cyril and those who favoured the teaching and terminology of the Antiochean School. The Council of Ephesus in 431 AD had not resolved these tensions even though it had firmly stated the Orthodox position. The Council had left the Church divided and there were large numbers of Orthodox who were out of communion with one another. St. Cyril understood that it was the substance of Christological teaching which was at stake and allowed the use of certain Antiochean terminology, such as speaking of two natures after the union, where it could be unequivocably seen that those using such terminology were fully Orthodox in their understanding of Christ. Thus he was able to restore communion with the Antiocheans under John of Antioch.
Though communion was restored there were still many tensions between these two theological expressions. Yet there was no sense in which either party was viewed as having been a separate Church. Nor was there seen to be a need for any of the episcopal acts of those who had objected to the Council of Ephesus to be repeated, nor were they viewed as invalid. Indeed some Antiocheans continued to be supporters of Nestorius and other heretics such as Theodoret and Diodore even while being in communion with St. Cyril and those who believed according to the Council of Ephesus. These differing attitudes towards Nestorius and his teachings undoubtedly caused problems, and towards the end of his life St. Cyril considered that the Antiocheans had failed to be really converted to Ephesine Orthodoxy. But there was never any sense that once out of communion there could never be the possibility of being back in communion, or that once in error and un-Orthodox there was no prospect of correction and being Orthodox again. When St. Cyril considered that the Antiocheans had substantially accepted an Orthodox Christology then all the other difficulties that remained were passed over to be dealt with later.
Thus at Chalcedon the fact that from the Alexandrian perspective most of the Orthodox world had fallen into error was not something that could not be remedied. And indeed the followers of Chalcedon hoped that those who rejected the Council could be persuaded to accept it. Neither side understood either the acceptance or rejection of the Council to be irrevocable and the end for all time of any prospect of the other side being Orthodox.
The period of a century and a half following Chalcedon is not the story of a small group of malcontents slipping into obscurity. It is in fact a period during which the Non-Chalcedonians fought hard to restore the whole Church to Cyrilline Orthodoxy, and on several occasions seemed on the verge of doing so. In some respects the situation was similar to the current difficulties in the Anglican Church. There were Non-Chalcedonian congregations trying to cope with Chalcedonian bishops, and bishops faced with opposition from their Patriarchs. It was a period of some confusion but the theological conflict was played out within the Orthodox Church not between two completely separate Churches each claiming to be Orthodox.
There were three main factors complicating the theological debate that took place after Chalcedon. Rome had been lost to the barbarians, there was a growing sense of national identity in the various parts of the Empire, and the great Sees were continually in competition with each other. The Emperors had to balance the desire to regain Rome with the need to try and preserve unity within the Empire of the East. Theological divisions were no help and a uniform Christology was always one of the Emperors underlying ambitions. At times this meant that political policies impinged on theological and ecclesiastical affairs.
Thus Marcian supported Chalcedon and it must have appeared to him that there was the prospect of unity in the Church based on its Christological statement. But if that was indeed his opinion then he was quickly proved wrong. Pope St. Dioscorus may well have withstood his enemies alone, but the people of Alexandria were as staunch defenders of Cyrilline Orthodoxy as any of their bishops, and they were the first to make plain that the See of Alexandria was united in opposition to Chalcedon. When Proterius was appointed Patriarch in place of the exiled Pope Dioscorus he was greeted by a rioting crowd of Alexandrians. Opposition was not limited to Egypt. In Jerusalem the monks rejected Juvenal who had submitted to Chalcedon and appointed Theodosius in his place. The Emperor acted to replace Juvenal with another bishop who accepted Chalcedon but Theodosius had already consecrated several bishops who maintained opposition to Chalcedon.
In 457.AD the Emperor Marcian died. Those who had opposed Chalcedon were able to return to Alexandria and the people elected Timothy Aelurus as their bishop. Proterius was simply ignored, as far as the people of Egypt were concerned, he was merely an Imperial appointee. The Patriarchate of Alexandria was the only Church in Egypt. Those few who supported Proterius were not a different Church, and neither were the followers of Timothy a separate non-Orthodox sect. Thus when Timothy Aelurus was deposed and exiled by the command of the Emperor it was possible for another Timothy, nicknamed Salophaciolus or Trembling Cap, to be the Patriarch of both the Chalcedonian and Non-Chalcedonians in Egypt.
In 474.AD Zeno became Emperor, but he was the subject of a palace coup and Basiliscus became Emperor for just 20 months. During this time Timothy Aelurus was recalled from exile and became once more the head of the Church of Alexandria. He travelled to Constantinople where he was joined by the exiled Patriarch of Antioch, Peter the Fuller. The emperor was persuaded by these Patriarchs to send an encyclical to all the bishops throughout the empire calling upon them to anathematise the Tome of Leo and all the things said and done at Chalcedon which were innovations beyond the Faith of the three hundred and eighteen holy Fathers. Over 500 bishops subscribed to this letter, including the Patriarchs of Alexandria, Jerusalem and Antioch. The whole ecclesiastical situation seemed to have changed. It was now the Chalcedonians who were on the defensive.
A council was called at Ephesus and a large number of bishops gathered under Patriarchs Timothy and Peter to anathematise Chalcedon, recognise the autonomy of Ephesus and restore the former rights of the see to its bishop. When the council had concluded its business a letter was written to the emperor which said,
"We have anathematised and do anathematise the Tome of Leo and the decrees of Chalcedon, which have been the cause of much blood shedding and confusion, and tumult, and division and strifes in all the world. For we are satisfied with the doctrine and faith of the Apostles and the holy Fathers, the Three Hundred and Eighteen; to which also the illustrious Council of the One Hundred and Fifty in the royal city, and the two other holy Synods at Ephesus adhered, and which they confirmed."
Patriarch Timothy returned to Alexandria and the whole city came out to greet him. The compromise replacement who had held the Patriarchate while Timothy was in exile agreed to retire on a Church pension, and the holy relics of Pope St. Dioscorus were brought from Gangra, his place of exile, to be buried with the other Alexandrian bishops. It seemed for a while that the followers of St. Cyril would see the true faith established throughout the empire once more. A stand was made against those who leant towards the Eutychian heresy and Timothy disciplined several of his bishops. Yet Timothy always took a moderate line with Christians who came over to the Oriental position from having supported Chalcedon, and only insisted that they reject the dyophysite doctrine in writing. Those who had supported Chalcedon were never re-baptised or even anointed, clearly a sign that Timothy, and those with him, saw the followers of Chalcedon as fellow Christians even though they might be in error.
But Zeno returned from his exile and Basiliscus quickly issued another encyclical trying to gain support from the Chalcedonians. Patriarchs Timothy of Alexandria and Anastasius of Jerusalem refused to have anything to do with this new letter, but Zeno, when he had driven Basiliscus into exile, left them in peace since they were both elderly. This is another indication that though both sides opposed each other theologically they were nevertheless able to see a substantial measure of common ground between themselves. If the Chalcedonians had believed Timothy and Anastasius to be heretical in Christological substance then they would surely have not suffered them to retain their positions and influence under any circumstances.
Zeno realised that he could not force Chalcedon upon the empire. He was supported by Acacius, the Chalcedonian Patriarch of Constantinople, who also realised that concessions would need to be made to the opponents of Chalcedon. Acacius drew up the Henoticon as a document that could unite the divided Christians of the East. The text makes no use of the phrase 'two natures' and stresses the pre-eminence of the Nicene faith. It anathematises both Nestorius and Eutyches and all who think contrary to the teachings of Niceae. The Twelve Chapters of St. Cyril are received and while the reality of Christ's Godhead and manhood are upheld, any idea of 'two Sons' is most emphatically rejected. The Cyrilline teaching that 'both the miracles and the sufferings are those of one Person', the Second Person of the Trinity who became Incarnate.
Acacius addressed his letter to 'the bishops, clergy, monks and laity of Alexandria, Egypt, Libya and Pentapolis'. This is again evidence that he believed his theological opponents to be fully part of the Orthodox Church rather than a non-Orthodox sect. It is his fellow Christians he is trying to conciliate and not those who have lost any claim to Christian faith.
The Henoticon was understood to be an Imperial statement of faith which abrogated Chalcedon and the Tome of Leo. It seemed as though things could go back to the situation before Chalcedon had been called. Both Zeno and Acacius had been freed from the need to placate Western opinion by the establishment of a Vandal kingdom centred on Ravenna. The Henoticon caused a schism between the East and West which lasted 35 years but at the time the opinion of the Pope of Rome carried little weight in Constantinople.
Even though Zeno had expelled Basiliscus things were still going well for the opponents of Chalcedon. For the first time the great Sees of Constantinople, Antioch, Jerusalem and Alexandria were united and Zeno was praised as 'the triumphant star of Christ from the East'. Even the more extreme opponents of Chalcedon accepted that the Henoticon contained a right confession of faith.
Emperor Zeno died in 491 AD and was succeeded by Anastasius, a supporter of the anti-Chalcedonian position. The new emperor was determined to maintain the unity that prevailed in the East, and as a result of his policies 'the Council of Chalcedon was neither openly proclaimed, nor yet repudiated by all'. This is again evidence that the Orthodox Church at that time was able to cope with a certain plurality of opinion within the bounds agreed in the Henoticon. It was not that Christology no longer mattered, but with both the Nestorian and Eutychian positions being explicitly anathematised there was some scope for a variety of opinion about terminology.
In Egypt, however, there remained a large minority who insisted that the Henoticon didn't go far enough, and together with that Orthodox statement it was necessary to anathematise the Council of Chalcedon and the Tome of Leo. Thus the Patriarchs of Alexandria all anathematised the Council, indeed as described previously this was the method used to reconcile those who had been supporters of the Chalcedon. As the opponents of Chalcedon again gained influence in the empire the requirement to anathematise the Council became more insistent. By 512 AD the unity based on the Henoticon was still holding, but in the See of Antioch the Patriarch was now Flavian who was in sympathy with the doctrine of the two natures. He gathered together his bishops and most of them made it clear that they objected to the more rigorous policy being pursued by the opponents of Chalcedon. They supported the Henoticon but were unwilling to wholeheartedly anathematise the Council.
Flavian had left himself exposed and an edict of deposition was issued. The emperor fully supported all these moves and St. Severus, perhaps the greatest of Oriental Orthodox theologians, was brought to Antioch and made Patriarch. When he entered the cathedral and ascended the throne of St Ignatius all the people cried out,
"Set our city free from the Council of Chalcedon! Anathematise now this council which has turned the world upside down! Anathematise now the council of the distorters of faith! Let all the bishops anathematise it now!"
The supremacy of the opponents of Chalcedon was almost complete. At a synod held at Tyre the Henoticon was explained as abrogating the Council and the doctrinal statements which it issued, and which were viewed as additions to the faith, were anathematised. By 516 AD even the supporters of Chalcedon were willing to accept the Council and the Tome, 'not as a definition of faith, nor as a symbol, nor as an interpretation, but only as an anathema against Nestorius and Eutyches.'
Even at this high point of non-Chalcedonian influence and power there was no sense of their being two Churches in the empire. The struggle was for theological truth within the Church not between two different Churches. Both supporters and opponents of Chalcedon could co-exist in a compromise position based on the Henoticon but as the position of the opponents was increasingly established in the empire the requirement to explicitly anathematise Chalcedon meant that in all the great Sees it was the non-Chalcedonians who held the most important positions.
On July 1st, 518 AD, Anastasius died and almost overnight the situation changed. The opponents of Chalcedon now found themselves the opponents of the emperor. The new emperor, Justin, demanded strict uniformity throughout his empire, and he had determined that as far as the Church was concerned that would be a Chalcedonian uniformity. He entered into discussions with Rome about a re-union of East and West and within a year Rome had gained everything it asked for, Acacius was condemned and most of the non-Chalcedonian bishops had been deposed and exiled. Severus fled into Egypt where he spent the rest of his life supporting the non-Chalcedonian faithful and moving from monastery to monastery. Many other resisting bishops also found sanctuary in Egypt and it was at this time and under an increasingly severe persecution that the opponents of Chalcedon and its supporters found themselves becoming distinct Churches, though both still described themselves as Orthodox.
By 525 AD the imperial policy was that all resisting monks should be driven out of their monasteries. All over Arabia and Palestine the monks had to leave their monasteries, were robbed, put in irons and subjected to various tortures. Those faithful who gave them shelter were treated in the same way, and it seemed as if a great wave of persecution swept over all those who opposed Chalcedon. The monasteries of Syria broke off communion with the Chalcedonian bishops and all of them signed an anathema against Chalcedon and the Tome of Leo. In response the Imperial soldiers were sent to expel the monks. It was Winter, just two days before Christmas, and many of the faithful went out into the wilderness with the monks to accompany them some of the way in their journey. The old and sick were forced out and were borne along by the healthy on litters. These persecutions continued for many years until the godly empress Theodora was able to prevail on her husband to allow the monks to return to their monasteries.
In Egypt the Popes found themselves persecuted and imperial appointees imposed on the throne of St Mark. One such was Paul of Tinnis who arrived in Alexandria at the head of a body of soldiers. During his year in Alexandria no-one would communicate with him except the Imperial troops and provincial government. The emperor responded to these actions, which he viewed as a personal insult, by closing the Egyptian churches and setting a guard on them. Yet through this, and worse persecution, the people of Egypt refused to submit to the imperial policy of Chalcedonianism and felt themselves growing further apart from their Byzantine brethren.
Yet despite all of these difficulties there was still the possibility of a real union between the supporters and opponents of Chalcedon. In 530 AD the emperor relaxed his persecution of the resisting Christians and in 532 AD summoned the leaders of the non-Chalcedonians to Constantinople for a conference with the Chalcedonians. Severus did not attend this first meeting, but in 534 AD he made the long journey and was able to meet Anthimus who was made Patriarch of Constantinople and who refused to receive Chalcedon. In this year Theodosius, a friend of Severus, became Patriarch of Alexandria. Thus for a short time there were three opponents of Chalcedon in important positions.
The Emperor Justinian was never really committed to conciliating the non-Chalcedonians. He was more interested in union with Rome and the West. Thus in 536 AD Anthimus was deposed and Severus was condemned as a Nestorian and a Eutychian. The Empress Theodora, ever a supporter of Severus and the non-Chalcedonians helped him to escape back to Egypt where he died a few years later. But it was the last opportunity for any real chance at union. The persecution of non-Chalcedonians started again and the non-Chalcedonian's position increasingly became confused with national resistance to Byzantine oppression.
There were still contacts between the non-Chalcedonians and the Chalcedonians. There were further conferences between 550 and 564 AD, and when the Empress Theodora died a large body of Egyptian monks went up to Constantinople. On each occasion the non-Chalcedonians presented the Cyrilline doctrines about Christ and the reasons for their resistance to Chalcedon, but on each occasion they went home having achieved nothing. At the Second Council of Constantinople the writings of the Nestorians Ibas, Theodore and Theodoret were condemned, and the statements issued by the Chalcedonian bishops gathered there were still broadly in line with those of the Henoticon. The Council tried to express its opposition to the teachings of both Nestorius and Eutyches and spoke in its decrees came close to the non-Chalcedonian position. One such decree states,
"If anyone using the expression, "in two natures," does not confess that our one Lord Jesus Christ has been revealed in the divinity and in the humanity, so as to designate by that expression a difference of the natures of which an ineffable union is unconfusedly made, a union in which neither the nature of the Word was changed into that of the flesh, nor that of the flesh into that of the Word, for each remained that it was by nature, the union being hypostatic; but shall take the expression with regard to the mystery of Christ in a sense so as to divide the parties, or recognising the two natures in the only Lord Jesus, God the Word made man, does not content himself with taking in a theoretical manner the difference of the natures which compose him, which difference is not destroyed by the union between them, for one is composed of the two and the two are in one, but shall make use of the number two to divide the natures or to make of them Persons properly so called: let him be anathema."
There had certainly been a shift over time from the strictly Chalcedonian expressions about Christ, and at this Council it seemed that some non-Chalcedonian concerns had been given due weight. But Chalcedonian attitudes were hardening rather than softening and with the succession of Councils held by the Chalcedonians the non-Chalcedonians found themselves increasingly the subject of anathema and excluded from positions of influence within the empire.
Nevertheless, it can been seen that until the accession of Justin in 532 AD the opponents of Chalcedon had more influence and greater opportunity to further their theological position than had the supporters of Chalcedon. It was only with the reigns of the Emperors Justin and Justinian that the non-Chalcedonians found themselves facing the full weight of imperial aggression. Until that time the differences between the opponents and supporters of Chalcedon were predominantly theological and the Henoticon showed that the two sides could be reconciled. But such was the force of the persecution under Justin and Justinian that national feelings were aroused against the Byzantine empire and the theological position of non-Chalcedonianism became mixed with the political position of anti-Byzantinianism.
If a date should be placed on the separation of these two bodies of Christians it would be better to place it at 532 AD rather than 451 AD. The non-Chalcedonians had yet to reach the zenith of their influence in 451 AD and in 532 AD they were to suddenly find themselves at their lowest. Yet it is interesting that the two sides were still able to talk to each other, with some measure of equality, even up to 564 AD. This suggests that in the modern discussions between the Chalcedonians and non-Chalcedonians there is the possibility of dialogue as equals even while recognising the distinctives in each position. And it also suggests that Orthodoxy can accomodate such differences as exist between Chalcedonians and non-Chalcedonians as long as the heresies of Nestorius and Eutyches are explicitly condemned. An attitude of outright hostility between the two families of Orthodox is not a neccessity, and nor is there a requirement for either side to give up all distinctives in an imposed uniformity.
The history of theological tension after Chalcedon provides some hope for modern times. The ecclesiastical position of extreme Chalcedonians is not 'traditional', rather it represents a fear of any difference and a concentration on secondary issues while agreement in substantial matters is ignored. The conciliatory efforts of moderate Chalcedonians and non-Chalcedonians better represents the 'traditional' attitudes of the fathers of these years, and indeed of St Cyril himself. Following in their footsteps with humility and compassion there is once more the possibility of a real theological unity that respects difference and is able to cope with it.
Some further reading:
Pseudo-Dionysius of Tel-Mahre, Chronicle, (Liverpool University Press, 1996)
Torrance Iain R., Christology After Chalcedon, (The Canterbury Press, 1988)
Sellers R. V., The Council of Chalcedon, (S.P.C.K., 1953)
el Masri Iris Habib, The Story of the Copts, (Coptic Bishopric for African Affairs, 1987)
Peter Theodore Farrington
Sub-Deacon
British Orthodox Church
Coptic Orthodox Patriarchate
After Chalcedon - Orthodoxy in the 5th/6th Centuries
It seems to be received as an historical fact that after the Council of Chalcedon those Christians who refused to accept its decisions and doctrinal statements were immediately isolated and rapidly withdrew into their own communion. This opinion is far from reflecting historical reality, and yet it is often presumed to be true by Oriental Orthodox as much as Chalcedonian Orthodox.
It fails to take full account of the truth that for a Council to be Ecumenical it must be received by the whole Church, and ignores the reality that large numbers of Orthodox Christians rejected it, and continued to oppose it. This opinion assumes that because one group of Orthodox defined the Faith in a particular way any who disagreed with that definition must of necessity have separated themselves from the Faith and therefore from the Church. Yet in the years after Chalcedon, and throughout the 6th century, those who rejected Chalcedon continued to play a significant, and at times dominant, role in the Orthodox Church.
Even before the Council of Chalcedon there had been tensions between those who followed the teaching and terminology of St. Cyril and those who favoured the teaching and terminology of the Antiochean School. The Council of Ephesus in 431 AD had not resolved these tensions even though it had firmly stated the Orthodox position. The Council had left the Church divided and there were large numbers of Orthodox who were out of communion with one another. St. Cyril understood that it was the substance of Christological teaching which was at stake and allowed the use of certain Antiochean terminology, such as speaking of two natures after the union, where it could be unequivocably seen that those using such terminology were fully Orthodox in their understanding of Christ. Thus he was able to restore communion with the Antiocheans under John of Antioch.
Though communion was restored there were still many tensions between these two theological expressions. Yet there was no sense in which either party was viewed as having been a separate Church. Nor was there seen to be a need for any of the episcopal acts of those who had objected to the Council of Ephesus to be repeated, nor were they viewed as invalid. Indeed some Antiocheans continued to be supporters of Nestorius and other heretics such as Theodoret and Diodore even while being in communion with St. Cyril and those who believed according to the Council of Ephesus. These differing attitudes towards Nestorius and his teachings undoubtedly caused problems, and towards the end of his life St. Cyril considered that the Antiocheans had failed to be really converted to Ephesine Orthodoxy. But there was never any sense that once out of communion there could never be the possibility of being back in communion, or that once in error and un-Orthodox there was no prospect of correction and being Orthodox again. When St. Cyril considered that the Antiocheans had substantially accepted an Orthodox Christology then all the other difficulties that remained were passed over to be dealt with later.
Thus at Chalcedon the fact that from the Alexandrian perspective most of the Orthodox world had fallen into error was not something that could not be remedied. And indeed the followers of Chalcedon hoped that those who rejected the Council could be persuaded to accept it. Neither side understood either the acceptance or rejection of the Council to be irrevocable and the end for all time of any prospect of the other side being Orthodox.
The period of a century and a half following Chalcedon is not the story of a small group of malcontents slipping into obscurity. It is in fact a period during which the Non-Chalcedonians fought hard to restore the whole Church to Cyrilline Orthodoxy, and on several occasions seemed on the verge of doing so. In some respects the situation was similar to the current difficulties in the Anglican Church. There were Non-Chalcedonian congregations trying to cope with Chalcedonian bishops, and bishops faced with opposition from their Patriarchs. It was a period of some confusion but the theological conflict was played out within the Orthodox Church not between two completely separate Churches each claiming to be Orthodox.
There were three main factors complicating the theological debate that took place after Chalcedon. Rome had been lost to the barbarians, there was a growing sense of national identity in the various parts of the Empire, and the great Sees were continually in competition with each other. The Emperors had to balance the desire to regain Rome with the need to try and preserve unity within the Empire of the East. Theological divisions were no help and a uniform Christology was always one of the Emperors underlying ambitions. At times this meant that political policies impinged on theological and ecclesiastical affairs.
Thus Marcian supported Chalcedon and it must have appeared to him that there was the prospect of unity in the Church based on its Christological statement. But if that was indeed his opinion then he was quickly proved wrong. Pope St. Dioscorus may well have withstood his enemies alone, but the people of Alexandria were as staunch defenders of Cyrilline Orthodoxy as any of their bishops, and they were the first to make plain that the See of Alexandria was united in opposition to Chalcedon. When Proterius was appointed Patriarch in place of the exiled Pope Dioscorus he was greeted by a rioting crowd of Alexandrians. Opposition was not limited to Egypt. In Jerusalem the monks rejected Juvenal who had submitted to Chalcedon and appointed Theodosius in his place. The Emperor acted to replace Juvenal with another bishop who accepted Chalcedon but Theodosius had already consecrated several bishops who maintained opposition to Chalcedon.
In 457.AD the Emperor Marcian died. Those who had opposed Chalcedon were able to return to Alexandria and the people elected Timothy Aelurus as their bishop. Proterius was simply ignored, as far as the people of Egypt were concerned, he was merely an Imperial appointee. The Patriarchate of Alexandria was the only Church in Egypt. Those few who supported Proterius were not a different Church, and neither were the followers of Timothy a separate non-Orthodox sect. Thus when Timothy Aelurus was deposed and exiled by the command of the Emperor it was possible for another Timothy, nicknamed Salophaciolus or Trembling Cap, to be the Patriarch of both the Chalcedonian and Non-Chalcedonians in Egypt.
In 474.AD Zeno became Emperor, but he was the subject of a palace coup and Basiliscus became Emperor for just 20 months. During this time Timothy Aelurus was recalled from exile and became once more the head of the Church of Alexandria. He travelled to Constantinople where he was joined by the exiled Patriarch of Antioch, Peter the Fuller. The emperor was persuaded by these Patriarchs to send an encyclical to all the bishops throughout the empire calling upon them to anathematise the Tome of Leo and all the things said and done at Chalcedon which were innovations beyond the Faith of the three hundred and eighteen holy Fathers. Over 500 bishops subscribed to this letter, including the Patriarchs of Alexandria, Jerusalem and Antioch. The whole ecclesiastical situation seemed to have changed. It was now the Chalcedonians who were on the defensive.
A council was called at Ephesus and a large number of bishops gathered under Patriarchs Timothy and Peter to anathematise Chalcedon, recognise the autonomy of Ephesus and restore the former rights of the see to its bishop. When the council had concluded its business a letter was written to the emperor which said,
"We have anathematised and do anathematise the Tome of Leo and the decrees of Chalcedon, which have been the cause of much blood shedding and confusion, and tumult, and division and strifes in all the world. For we are satisfied with the doctrine and faith of the Apostles and the holy Fathers, the Three Hundred and Eighteen; to which also the illustrious Council of the One Hundred and Fifty in the royal city, and the two other holy Synods at Ephesus adhered, and which they confirmed."
Patriarch Timothy returned to Alexandria and the whole city came out to greet him. The compromise replacement who had held the Patriarchate while Timothy was in exile agreed to retire on a Church pension, and the holy relics of Pope St. Dioscorus were brought from Gangra, his place of exile, to be buried with the other Alexandrian bishops. It seemed for a while that the followers of St. Cyril would see the true faith established throughout the empire once more. A stand was made against those who leant towards the Eutychian heresy and Timothy disciplined several of his bishops. Yet Timothy always took a moderate line with Christians who came over to the Oriental position from having supported Chalcedon, and only insisted that they reject the dyophysite doctrine in writing. Those who had supported Chalcedon were never re-baptised or even anointed, clearly a sign that Timothy, and those with him, saw the followers of Chalcedon as fellow Christians even though they might be in error.
But Zeno returned from his exile and Basiliscus quickly issued another encyclical trying to gain support from the Chalcedonians. Patriarchs Timothy of Alexandria and Anastasius of Jerusalem refused to have anything to do with this new letter, but Zeno, when he had driven Basiliscus into exile, left them in peace since they were both elderly. This is another indication that though both sides opposed each other theologically they were nevertheless able to see a substantial measure of common ground between themselves. If the Chalcedonians had believed Timothy and Anastasius to be heretical in Christological substance then they would surely have not suffered them to retain their positions and influence under any circumstances.
Zeno realised that he could not force Chalcedon upon the empire. He was supported by Acacius, the Chalcedonian Patriarch of Constantinople, who also realised that concessions would need to be made to the opponents of Chalcedon. Acacius drew up the Henoticon as a document that could unite the divided Christians of the East. The text makes no use of the phrase 'two natures' and stresses the pre-eminence of the Nicene faith. It anathematises both Nestorius and Eutyches and all who think contrary to the teachings of Niceae. The Twelve Chapters of St. Cyril are received and while the reality of Christ's Godhead and manhood are upheld, any idea of 'two Sons' is most emphatically rejected. The Cyrilline teaching that 'both the miracles and the sufferings are those of one Person', the Second Person of the Trinity who became Incarnate.
Acacius addressed his letter to 'the bishops, clergy, monks and laity of Alexandria, Egypt, Libya and Pentapolis'. This is again evidence that he believed his theological opponents to be fully part of the Orthodox Church rather than a non-Orthodox sect. It is his fellow Christians he is trying to conciliate and not those who have lost any claim to Christian faith.
The Henoticon was understood to be an Imperial statement of faith which abrogated Chalcedon and the Tome of Leo. It seemed as though things could go back to the situation before Chalcedon had been called. Both Zeno and Acacius had been freed from the need to placate Western opinion by the establishment of a Vandal kingdom centred on Ravenna. The Henoticon caused a schism between the East and West which lasted 35 years but at the time the opinion of the Pope of Rome carried little weight in Constantinople.
Even though Zeno had expelled Basiliscus things were still going well for the opponents of Chalcedon. For the first time the great Sees of Constantinople, Antioch, Jerusalem and Alexandria were united and Zeno was praised as 'the triumphant star of Christ from the East'. Even the more extreme opponents of Chalcedon accepted that the Henoticon contained a right confession of faith.
Emperor Zeno died in 491 AD and was succeeded by Anastasius, a supporter of the anti-Chalcedonian position. The new emperor was determined to maintain the unity that prevailed in the East, and as a result of his policies 'the Council of Chalcedon was neither openly proclaimed, nor yet repudiated by all'. This is again evidence that the Orthodox Church at that time was able to cope with a certain plurality of opinion within the bounds agreed in the Henoticon. It was not that Christology no longer mattered, but with both the Nestorian and Eutychian positions being explicitly anathematised there was some scope for a variety of opinion about terminology.
In Egypt, however, there remained a large minority who insisted that the Henoticon didn't go far enough, and together with that Orthodox statement it was necessary to anathematise the Council of Chalcedon and the Tome of Leo. Thus the Patriarchs of Alexandria all anathematised the Council, indeed as described previously this was the method used to reconcile those who had been supporters of the Chalcedon. As the opponents of Chalcedon again gained influence in the empire the requirement to anathematise the Council became more insistent. By 512 AD the unity based on the Henoticon was still holding, but in the See of Antioch the Patriarch was now Flavian who was in sympathy with the doctrine of the two natures. He gathered together his bishops and most of them made it clear that they objected to the more rigorous policy being pursued by the opponents of Chalcedon. They supported the Henoticon but were unwilling to wholeheartedly anathematise the Council.
Flavian had left himself exposed and an edict of deposition was issued. The emperor fully supported all these moves and St. Severus, perhaps the greatest of Oriental Orthodox theologians, was brought to Antioch and made Patriarch. When he entered the cathedral and ascended the throne of St Ignatius all the people cried out,
"Set our city free from the Council of Chalcedon! Anathematise now this council which has turned the world upside down! Anathematise now the council of the distorters of faith! Let all the bishops anathematise it now!"
The supremacy of the opponents of Chalcedon was almost complete. At a synod held at Tyre the Henoticon was explained as abrogating the Council and the doctrinal statements which it issued, and which were viewed as additions to the faith, were anathematised. By 516 AD even the supporters of Chalcedon were willing to accept the Council and the Tome, 'not as a definition of faith, nor as a symbol, nor as an interpretation, but only as an anathema against Nestorius and Eutyches.'
Even at this high point of non-Chalcedonian influence and power there was no sense of their being two Churches in the empire. The struggle was for theological truth within the Church not between two different Churches. Both supporters and opponents of Chalcedon could co-exist in a compromise position based on the Henoticon but as the position of the opponents was increasingly established in the empire the requirement to explicitly anathematise Chalcedon meant that in all the great Sees it was the non-Chalcedonians who held the most important positions.
On July 1st, 518 AD, Anastasius died and almost overnight the situation changed. The opponents of Chalcedon now found themselves the opponents of the emperor. The new emperor, Justin, demanded strict uniformity throughout his empire, and he had determined that as far as the Church was concerned that would be a Chalcedonian uniformity. He entered into discussions with Rome about a re-union of East and West and within a year Rome had gained everything it asked for, Acacius was condemned and most of the non-Chalcedonian bishops had been deposed and exiled. Severus fled into Egypt where he spent the rest of his life supporting the non-Chalcedonian faithful and moving from monastery to monastery. Many other resisting bishops also found sanctuary in Egypt and it was at this time and under an increasingly severe persecution that the opponents of Chalcedon and its supporters found themselves becoming distinct Churches, though both still described themselves as Orthodox.
By 525 AD the imperial policy was that all resisting monks should be driven out of their monasteries. All over Arabia and Palestine the monks had to leave their monasteries, were robbed, put in irons and subjected to various tortures. Those faithful who gave them shelter were treated in the same way, and it seemed as if a great wave of persecution swept over all those who opposed Chalcedon. The monasteries of Syria broke off communion with the Chalcedonian bishops and all of them signed an anathema against Chalcedon and the Tome of Leo. In response the Imperial soldiers were sent to expel the monks. It was Winter, just two days before Christmas, and many of the faithful went out into the wilderness with the monks to accompany them some of the way in their journey. The old and sick were forced out and were borne along by the healthy on litters. These persecutions continued for many years until the godly empress Theodora was able to prevail on her husband to allow the monks to return to their monasteries.
In Egypt the Popes found themselves persecuted and imperial appointees imposed on the throne of St Mark. One such was Paul of Tinnis who arrived in Alexandria at the head of a body of soldiers. During his year in Alexandria no-one would communicate with him except the Imperial troops and provincial government. The emperor responded to these actions, which he viewed as a personal insult, by closing the Egyptian churches and setting a guard on them. Yet through this, and worse persecution, the people of Egypt refused to submit to the imperial policy of Chalcedonianism and felt themselves growing further apart from their Byzantine brethren.
Yet despite all of these difficulties there was still the possibility of a real union between the supporters and opponents of Chalcedon. In 530 AD the emperor relaxed his persecution of the resisting Christians and in 532 AD summoned the leaders of the non-Chalcedonians to Constantinople for a conference with the Chalcedonians. Severus did not attend this first meeting, but in 534 AD he made the long journey and was able to meet Anthimus who was made Patriarch of Constantinople and who refused to receive Chalcedon. In this year Theodosius, a friend of Severus, became Patriarch of Alexandria. Thus for a short time there were three opponents of Chalcedon in important positions.
The Emperor Justinian was never really committed to conciliating the non-Chalcedonians. He was more interested in union with Rome and the West. Thus in 536 AD Anthimus was deposed and Severus was condemned as a Nestorian and a Eutychian. The Empress Theodora, ever a supporter of Severus and the non-Chalcedonians helped him to escape back to Egypt where he died a few years later. But it was the last opportunity for any real chance at union. The persecution of non-Chalcedonians started again and the non-Chalcedonian's position increasingly became confused with national resistance to Byzantine oppression.
There were still contacts between the non-Chalcedonians and the Chalcedonians. There were further conferences between 550 and 564 AD, and when the Empress Theodora died a large body of Egyptian monks went up to Constantinople. On each occasion the non-Chalcedonians presented the Cyrilline doctrines about Christ and the reasons for their resistance to Chalcedon, but on each occasion they went home having achieved nothing. At the Second Council of Constantinople the writings of the Nestorians Ibas, Theodore and Theodoret were condemned, and the statements issued by the Chalcedonian bishops gathered there were still broadly in line with those of the Henoticon. The Council tried to express its opposition to the teachings of both Nestorius and Eutyches and spoke in its decrees came close to the non-Chalcedonian position. One such decree states,
"If anyone using the expression, "in two natures," does not confess that our one Lord Jesus Christ has been revealed in the divinity and in the humanity, so as to designate by that expression a difference of the natures of which an ineffable union is unconfusedly made, a union in which neither the nature of the Word was changed into that of the flesh, nor that of the flesh into that of the Word, for each remained that it was by nature, the union being hypostatic; but shall take the expression with regard to the mystery of Christ in a sense so as to divide the parties, or recognising the two natures in the only Lord Jesus, God the Word made man, does not content himself with taking in a theoretical manner the difference of the natures which compose him, which difference is not destroyed by the union between them, for one is composed of the two and the two are in one, but shall make use of the number two to divide the natures or to make of them Persons properly so called: let him be anathema."
There had certainly been a shift over time from the strictly Chalcedonian expressions about Christ, and at this Council it seemed that some non-Chalcedonian concerns had been given due weight. But Chalcedonian attitudes were hardening rather than softening and with the succession of Councils held by the Chalcedonians the non-Chalcedonians found themselves increasingly the subject of anathema and excluded from positions of influence within the empire.
Nevertheless, it can been seen that until the accession of Justin in 532 AD the opponents of Chalcedon had more influence and greater opportunity to further their theological position than had the supporters of Chalcedon. It was only with the reigns of the Emperors Justin and Justinian that the non-Chalcedonians found themselves facing the full weight of imperial aggression. Until that time the differences between the opponents and supporters of Chalcedon were predominantly theological and the Henoticon showed that the two sides could be reconciled. But such was the force of the persecution under Justin and Justinian that national feelings were aroused against the Byzantine empire and the theological position of non-Chalcedonianism became mixed with the political position of anti-Byzantinianism.
If a date should be placed on the separation of these two bodies of Christians it would be better to place it at 532 AD rather than 451 AD. The non-Chalcedonians had yet to reach the zenith of their influence in 451 AD and in 532 AD they were to suddenly find themselves at their lowest. Yet it is interesting that the two sides were still able to talk to each other, with some measure of equality, even up to 564 AD. This suggests that in the modern discussions between the Chalcedonians and non-Chalcedonians there is the possibility of dialogue as equals even while recognising the distinctives in each position. And it also suggests that Orthodoxy can accomodate such differences as exist between Chalcedonians and non-Chalcedonians as long as the heresies of Nestorius and Eutyches are explicitly condemned. An attitude of outright hostility between the two families of Orthodox is not a neccessity, and nor is there a requirement for either side to give up all distinctives in an imposed uniformity.
The history of theological tension after Chalcedon provides some hope for modern times. The ecclesiastical position of extreme Chalcedonians is not 'traditional', rather it represents a fear of any difference and a concentration on secondary issues while agreement in substantial matters is ignored. The conciliatory efforts of moderate Chalcedonians and non-Chalcedonians better represents the 'traditional' attitudes of the fathers of these years, and indeed of St Cyril himself. Following in their footsteps with humility and compassion there is once more the possibility of a real theological unity that respects difference and is able to cope with it.
Some further reading:
Pseudo-Dionysius of Tel-Mahre, Chronicle, (Liverpool University Press, 1996)
Torrance Iain R., Christology After Chalcedon, (The Canterbury Press, 1988)
Sellers R. V., The Council of Chalcedon, (S.P.C.K., 1953)
el Masri Iris Habib, The Story of the Copts, (Coptic Bishopric for African Affairs, 1987)
Peter Theodore Farrington
Sub-Deacon
British Orthodox Church
Coptic Orthodox Patriarchate
DYNAMIS, Prophets False and True
?Jeremiah 14:10-21 SAAS Twentieth Reading in Kellia from the
Prophecies of Jeremiah
10 Thus says the Lord to this people: 'They love to wander and have not
refrained from it;
therefore, God is not pleased with them. Now He will remember their
wrongdoings.'
11 Again the Lord said to me, 'Do not pray about this people for their good.
12 When they fast, I will not hear their petition, and when they present
whole burnt offerings and
sacrifices, I will not take pleasure in them. For I will consume them
by the sword, by the famine,
and by death.'
13 Then I said, 'O Lord, behold their prophets prophesying, and say,
"You shall not see the
sword, nor shall there be famine among you; for I will give you truth
and peace in the land and in
this place.'"
14 Then the Lord said to me, 'The prophets prophesy lies in My name. I
have not sent them, or
commanded them; nor have I spoken to them. Because of false visions,
divinations, prophesying
by the way of birds, and by the purposes of their hearts, they prophesy
to you.'
15 Therefore thus says the Lord concerning the prophets who prophesy
lies in My name: 'I did
not send them.' They say, 'Sword and famine shall not be upon this
land.' They shall die in the
deathbed of sickness, for the prophets shall die in famine.
16 The people to whom they prophesy shall be cast into the thoroughfares
of Jerusalem because
of the edge of the sword and famine. There shall be no one to bury
them, for even their wives,
sons, and daughters shall so die. I will pour out their evils upon them.
17 So you shall speak this word to them; 'Let your eyes flow with tears
night and day. Let them
not cease; for in ruin, the daughter of My people was crushed to pieces,
and her wound was very
painful.
18 If I go out into the plain, then behold, there are the soldiers
wounded by the sword. If I enter
into the city, then
behold, there is the pain of famine, for priest and prophet have
traveled to a land they do not
know.'
19 Have You utterly rejected Judah? Has Your soul departed from Zion?
Why did You strike
us, and there is no healing for us? We waited for peace, but there was
no good thing; for a time
of healing, but behold, there was trouble.
20 We know, O Lord, our sins and the wrongdoings of our fathers, for we
sinned against You.
21 Stop for Your name's sake. Do not destroy the throne of Your glory.
Remember, and do not
break Your covenant with us.
__________________________________________________________
Jeremiah 14:10-21 (10/18-10/31)
Twentieth Reading in Kellia from the Prophecies of Jeremiah
Signs For Awakening III ~ Prophets, False and True: Jeremiah 14:10-21,
especially vs. 14: "Then the Lord said to me, 'The prophets prophesy
lies in My name. I have not sent them, or commanded them; nor have I
spoken to them. Because of false visions, divinations, prophesying by
the way of birds, and by the purposes of their hearts, they prophesy to
you.'"
Whenever a Bishop or Priest of the Church stands to preach the word of
the Lord and you are present, pray for him. Do not passively wait for
the message and assume that he will readily speak the truth of the
Gospel. Pray that he proclaims the truth of the Lord, is guided by the
Holy Spirit, is free of delusion, and does not hold back because of any
cost to himself of what he shall say.
Our Bishops are closely examined and chosen for the capacity to proclaim
and defend the truth of the Gospel. Still, they are fallible men. Pray
to God for them. At ordination, most of our Priests are vested with the
'epigonation,' the oblong vestment suspended on the right hip,
symbolizing that they bear "...the sword of the Spirit, which is the
word of God..." (Eph. 6:17), for they are trusted with "...rightly
dividing the word of truth" (2 Tim. 2:15). These are men with human
limitations and definitely need prayer and Divine grace. Constantly
pray to God for them!
Today's reading portrays a submitted and proven Prophet, a man who
unflinchingly obeyed God and was found true, for "...not one of his
words fell to the ground" (1 Kg. 3:19). The Jeremiah who is portrayed
in this passage reveals the struggle of every godly preacher who resists
wavering in proclaiming the truth. Few in Jeremiah's congregation
prayed or "...held him up before the Lord" in his trials declaring God's
truth.
God required Jeremiah to announce His judgment to His people who not
only 'wandered' into sin, but also never hesitated from it (Jer.
14:10). Few find the 'hell-and-brimstone' preacher charming! Among
people who enjoy their sins, there is little true openness to hearing
that God disapproves of them or will punish them. "Who is he to tell me
that?" is the likely response.
Not only was Jeremiah's message unpopular, true though it was, but also
God even restrained him from praying "... about this people for their
good" (vs. 11). Still, his congregation was an active one: they
attended services, made offerings, and kept the fasts. But God found
their religion superficial and without moral or spiritual substance.
Therefore, Jeremiah was to avoid praying that God would withhold the
consequences of their behavior. A loving pastoral response was
forbidden: what was to be, must not be inhibited by a righteous man's
prayer (Jas. 5:16).
Here was a Prophet who spoke against the prevailing trend of false
teaching by his fellow prophets, men doomed to receive exactly what they
said would not happen: "...sword and famine..." with "...no one to bury
them" (Jer. 14:16). God made Jeremiah a 'lone voice.'
In his isolation, the Prophet was to grieve openly before the people:
"Let your eyes flow with tears night and day. Let them not cease..."
(vs. 17) People were to see him sorrowing for the wounds that were
coming on them. This kind of behavior merely served to alienate him
further from those to whom he carried the message of the Lord.
Finally, Jeremiah had to live knowing that substantial terror was coming
for his people, despite their fondest hopes and their open
acknowledgment of wickedness (vs. 20). Only one prayer would be heard:
while they would feel the consequences of their sins, God would not
break His covenant with them. They would go into exile, but their
descendants would return. As our clergy take up the prophetic task of
ministry, how much they need our prayers!
O God, uphold our Bishops and Priests that they may stand in innocency
before Thy Throne, proclaim the Gospel of Thy kingdom, and rightly
minister the word of Thy truth.
Prophecies of Jeremiah
10 Thus says the Lord to this people: 'They love to wander and have not
refrained from it;
therefore, God is not pleased with them. Now He will remember their
wrongdoings.'
11 Again the Lord said to me, 'Do not pray about this people for their good.
12 When they fast, I will not hear their petition, and when they present
whole burnt offerings and
sacrifices, I will not take pleasure in them. For I will consume them
by the sword, by the famine,
and by death.'
13 Then I said, 'O Lord, behold their prophets prophesying, and say,
"You shall not see the
sword, nor shall there be famine among you; for I will give you truth
and peace in the land and in
this place.'"
14 Then the Lord said to me, 'The prophets prophesy lies in My name. I
have not sent them, or
commanded them; nor have I spoken to them. Because of false visions,
divinations, prophesying
by the way of birds, and by the purposes of their hearts, they prophesy
to you.'
15 Therefore thus says the Lord concerning the prophets who prophesy
lies in My name: 'I did
not send them.' They say, 'Sword and famine shall not be upon this
land.' They shall die in the
deathbed of sickness, for the prophets shall die in famine.
16 The people to whom they prophesy shall be cast into the thoroughfares
of Jerusalem because
of the edge of the sword and famine. There shall be no one to bury
them, for even their wives,
sons, and daughters shall so die. I will pour out their evils upon them.
17 So you shall speak this word to them; 'Let your eyes flow with tears
night and day. Let them
not cease; for in ruin, the daughter of My people was crushed to pieces,
and her wound was very
painful.
18 If I go out into the plain, then behold, there are the soldiers
wounded by the sword. If I enter
into the city, then
behold, there is the pain of famine, for priest and prophet have
traveled to a land they do not
know.'
19 Have You utterly rejected Judah? Has Your soul departed from Zion?
Why did You strike
us, and there is no healing for us? We waited for peace, but there was
no good thing; for a time
of healing, but behold, there was trouble.
20 We know, O Lord, our sins and the wrongdoings of our fathers, for we
sinned against You.
21 Stop for Your name's sake. Do not destroy the throne of Your glory.
Remember, and do not
break Your covenant with us.
__________________________________________________________
Jeremiah 14:10-21 (10/18-10/31)
Twentieth Reading in Kellia from the Prophecies of Jeremiah
Signs For Awakening III ~ Prophets, False and True: Jeremiah 14:10-21,
especially vs. 14: "Then the Lord said to me, 'The prophets prophesy
lies in My name. I have not sent them, or commanded them; nor have I
spoken to them. Because of false visions, divinations, prophesying by
the way of birds, and by the purposes of their hearts, they prophesy to
you.'"
Whenever a Bishop or Priest of the Church stands to preach the word of
the Lord and you are present, pray for him. Do not passively wait for
the message and assume that he will readily speak the truth of the
Gospel. Pray that he proclaims the truth of the Lord, is guided by the
Holy Spirit, is free of delusion, and does not hold back because of any
cost to himself of what he shall say.
Our Bishops are closely examined and chosen for the capacity to proclaim
and defend the truth of the Gospel. Still, they are fallible men. Pray
to God for them. At ordination, most of our Priests are vested with the
'epigonation,' the oblong vestment suspended on the right hip,
symbolizing that they bear "...the sword of the Spirit, which is the
word of God..." (Eph. 6:17), for they are trusted with "...rightly
dividing the word of truth" (2 Tim. 2:15). These are men with human
limitations and definitely need prayer and Divine grace. Constantly
pray to God for them!
Today's reading portrays a submitted and proven Prophet, a man who
unflinchingly obeyed God and was found true, for "...not one of his
words fell to the ground" (1 Kg. 3:19). The Jeremiah who is portrayed
in this passage reveals the struggle of every godly preacher who resists
wavering in proclaiming the truth. Few in Jeremiah's congregation
prayed or "...held him up before the Lord" in his trials declaring God's
truth.
God required Jeremiah to announce His judgment to His people who not
only 'wandered' into sin, but also never hesitated from it (Jer.
14:10). Few find the 'hell-and-brimstone' preacher charming! Among
people who enjoy their sins, there is little true openness to hearing
that God disapproves of them or will punish them. "Who is he to tell me
that?" is the likely response.
Not only was Jeremiah's message unpopular, true though it was, but also
God even restrained him from praying "... about this people for their
good" (vs. 11). Still, his congregation was an active one: they
attended services, made offerings, and kept the fasts. But God found
their religion superficial and without moral or spiritual substance.
Therefore, Jeremiah was to avoid praying that God would withhold the
consequences of their behavior. A loving pastoral response was
forbidden: what was to be, must not be inhibited by a righteous man's
prayer (Jas. 5:16).
Here was a Prophet who spoke against the prevailing trend of false
teaching by his fellow prophets, men doomed to receive exactly what they
said would not happen: "...sword and famine..." with "...no one to bury
them" (Jer. 14:16). God made Jeremiah a 'lone voice.'
In his isolation, the Prophet was to grieve openly before the people:
"Let your eyes flow with tears night and day. Let them not cease..."
(vs. 17) People were to see him sorrowing for the wounds that were
coming on them. This kind of behavior merely served to alienate him
further from those to whom he carried the message of the Lord.
Finally, Jeremiah had to live knowing that substantial terror was coming
for his people, despite their fondest hopes and their open
acknowledgment of wickedness (vs. 20). Only one prayer would be heard:
while they would feel the consequences of their sins, God would not
break His covenant with them. They would go into exile, but their
descendants would return. As our clergy take up the prophetic task of
ministry, how much they need our prayers!
O God, uphold our Bishops and Priests that they may stand in innocency
before Thy Throne, proclaim the Gospel of Thy kingdom, and rightly
minister the word of Thy truth.
Monday, August 9, 2010
MIA
Sorry I have been MIA for the past few months..There is so much going on I can hardly keep up, not the least of which the expected birth of my daughter, which should probably be this week (contractions are now here).
I just want you all to be encouraged, and to seek the Kingdom of God, or in other words, Gods way of doing things and having dominion! Remember the date 07-27-2011...thats all I can say..
I just want you all to be encouraged, and to seek the Kingdom of God, or in other words, Gods way of doing things and having dominion! Remember the date 07-27-2011...thats all I can say..
Thursday, April 29, 2010
Clergy Burnout!
by Fr. George Morelli
This excellent article was first published on Orthodoxytoday.org, where much of Fr. Morelli’s writings appear. We offer to our overworked, underpaid, and often exhausted brethren, in the hopes that they may be refreshed who are weary in well-doing. It is placed under ‘Sermon Resources’ because – and I want to be quite clear about this – the healthy preacher is the greatest sermon resource of all. God bless you, brothers.
The apostles returned to Jesus, and told him all that they had done and taught. And he said to them, “Come away by yourselves to a lonely place, and rest a while. For many were coming and going, and they had no leisure even to eat (Mk 6:30-31).
Come to me, all who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest (Mt 11:28).
In emulation of Our Lord Himself, priests are “on call” at all times. As St. Mark records of Jesus in his Gospel (1:33-34):
“And the whole city was gathered together about the door. And [H]e healed many who were sick with various diseases… ”
The priest, the icon of the healing Christ, is the instrumental physician of the souls they pastor. In the role of healer, the priest must hear their flock recount their personal problems. As discussed in Morelli, (2006c) many of these problems involve uttermost human and spiritual suffering, the disclosure of dysfunctional emotional reactions such as anger, anxiety and depression, the confession of helplessness, hopelessness and estrangement from God.
Priestly ministry is especially demanding because as Archbishop Hilarion Alfeyev (2002) writes:
“The sacrament of priesthood is deeply significant…Despite the Orthodox emphasis on the ‘royal priesthood’ of all believers, the Church also recognizes a difference between laypeople and ordained clergy, the latter being entrusted with the celebration of the Eucharist, and having the power of ‘binding and loosing’. Ordination into a hierarchical rank, be it of bishop, priest or deacon, is not only a change of status but a transition to another level of existence.”
He goes on to quote St. Silouan the Athonite:
“[This] grace is so exceedingly great that were men able to see the glory of this grace, the whole world would wonder at it; but the Lord has veiled it that His servants should not be puffed up but find salvation in humility … Truly noble is a priest —- the minister at God’s altar.”
The words of Christ Himself given to his apostles and followers tell us of the consequences of receiving His gifts:
“…to whom much is given, of him will much be required…” (Lk 12:48)
Behavioral science researchers have noted the deleterious psychological effects on the healing professionals who are exposed to secondary trauma, that is to say by listening to individuals reveal traumatic events and or their reactions to such events. Figley (1995) calls this compassion fatigue. Pearlman and Saakvitne, (1995) have an even more pointed name for this diagnostic category: vicarious traumatization. In other words, the mental health professional, and by implication, the priest of Christ, is open to be traumatized themselves by simply being exposed to the verbal recounting of the traumatic events others have suffered.
Signs of compassion fatigue
Compassion fatigue has many indicators that are shared by other psychological disturbances such as depression. The following, therefore, should be taken as warnings, yellow flags so to speak, to consult a licensed, scientifically trained and Christ-centered mental health professional for evaluation and possible psycho-spiritual intervention. (Morelli, 2006a,c) Some of these signs include:
* A general unhappiness, preoccupation with those whom the priest is helping.
* A lack satisfaction with one’s healing ministry.
* A lack of connection with those being helped or other parishioners.
* A lack of feeling ‘energized’ after a helping encounter.
* A difficulty separating one’s thoughts, feelings and spiritual life from the problems being dealt with.
* Feeling the trauma of the one(s) seeking aid, feeling trapped in the pastoral ministry of helping.
* More irritability about everyday matters.
* A general feeling of discontent.
* A general feeling of dissatisfaction with one’s ministry.
* Feelings of being overwhelmed exhausted and fatigued, and a sense that one’s priestly efforts are not worthwhile.
Orthodoxy uses the synergia of medicine and Christ’s spiritual gifts in healing
Many are familiar with the adage: grace builds on nature. This is consistent with the words of St. Maximus the Confessor who notes
“the grace of the most Holy Spirit does not confer wisdom on the Saints without their natural intellect as capacity to receive it.”(Philokalia II).
Thus as St. Paul tell us:
“…for in Him all things were created, in heaven and on earth… and in him all things hold together. (Col. 1:16-17).
The early church fathers who used the medicine of their day in healing, considered this use of the intelligence God created us with in just this way. (Morelli, 2006c) As Fr. Stanley Harakas notes:
“Medical treatment is also seen as a human cooperation with God’s healing purposes and goals…[medicine has] … generally been understood throughout history in the Church to be appropriate, fitting and desirable ways of cooperating with God in the healing of human illnesses.”i
Psychological Aids to Prevent and Combat Compassion Fatigue
Limit mental rehashing time (Time Management)
Make out a detailed work schedule for each day of the week. With computer Personal Data Assistant (PDA) programs or old fashioned daily planners, this is not a difficult task and will reap great psychological and spiritual reward. Train your mind not to entertain or converse with the factual and emotional details of the situation or case. Some years ago when I was actively counseling and teaching, in addition to my pastoral tasks, I was very busy and was in a position to easily “burnout.” I developed what I called the “Appointment Book Technique.” I would write down all pastoral, clinical, academic, and spiritual tasks with the specific start and end time and travel time, then close the book.
I would not think about what I had written until the appointed day. Tasks that required preparation would be listed in a specific slot on the days before. Other than praying for them, and keeping in mind the presence of God (“pray constantly, 1Th. 5:7), I did not dwell on the details involving any person I had to counsel or to whom I had to minister. I closed the book: keeping it “out of sight, out of mind”, until the time of the event. Doing this takes practice but it can be done.
The depth of compassion I felt for the suffering person was not lessened, but the amount of time I spent exposed to secondary trauma was limited to the time I was actually with that person.
Prioritizing events
Intellectually we all know events differ in their importance. But this is very easy to ignore in everyday life and can be a cause of stress and leave us susceptible to burnout. In effective time management it is critical to prioritize the events that are listed in our schedule. For example, under usual conditions (excluding for example, natural disasters, catastrophes, warfare, etc.) Divine Liturgy on Sundays and Feast Days (and their preparatory services) would be highest in priority. Also visiting a critically ill parishioner would be an emergency “high priority’ and require a modification in the Priests schedule. That means a lower priority event may then have to get re-scheduled.
In prioritizing the events in one’s daily, weekly monthly and yearly schedule, balance of major life domains must be maintained. For the Orthodox Priest this means: Ministry, including prayer life, Family, and Recreation. Each of these domains can be subdivided into sub-domains. For example, Ministry, would include: The Divine Services and Holy Mysteries, parish administration, Scripture Study, pastoral visitations, pastoral counseling, etc. Family would include, dinner time, time spent with spouse, children, their school and extra-curricula activities, and special family events, etc. Recreation (re-creation) is for many priests, the forgotten domain.
Note above I emphasized the parts of the word, recreation, that is to say: to re-create oneself.
Another frequently encountered prioritizing situation occurs when a priest is faced with an unexpected encounter with someone in the parish who communicates a need for prompt attention. This is even more stressful if the parishioner perceives themselves as entitled to special attention because of their ‘status,’ for example a parish council member or officer. I discuss in more detail the problem of entitlement in the context of marriage (Morelli, 2007a) but the points I make are quite applicable in priest-parish situations. Basically entitlement is psychologically an unrealistic expectation and spiritually is based on the sinful passion of pride.
In such encounters the parish priest has to discern the “realistic” importance of the stated ‘need.’: If the request is critical, (e.g. need for immediate confession and reception of communion of someone in danger of death), then the priest would re-prioritize his schedule. In other situations, the priest has to learn to be assertive, and straightforwardly, firmly and in Christ-like charity, set up an appointment when the issue can be addressed. Assertiveness is discussed in more detail below.
The special case of prioritizing: Re-creation
Here I am only going to consider this psychologically below I will consider this domain from a spiritual viewpoint. We all need a time out from usual activity so to speak. This could be anything from walk, run or bicycle in the park to listening to a favorite musical piece. It could be a visit to a museum, walk on the beach, a walking trail in a park. (All these activities should and can involve a sense of the presence of God.) Re-creation conveys a sense of dissociating with and leaving the active world behind and just being absorbed by the present moment.
Some psychologists have even developed techniques of psychological meditation, which is a mental self discipline exercise the aim of which is to learn to focus attention, raise awareness and bring cognitive and physical processes under voluntary control (Bloomfield & Kory, 1976).
In a meditative state, electroencephalograph (EEG) studies (Travis, 2001) indicate an increase in brain alpha and theta waves, accompanying attenuation of heart rate, carbon dioxide output, oxygen intake respiration rate, and skin conductance. Subjectively those tested reported feeling quite un-aroused and relaxed. Sympathetic nervous system hormones which are associated with anxiety (Morelli, 2009a), are also lowered (Davidson, Kabat-Zinn, Schumacher, Rosencranz, Muller, Santorelli, Urbanowski, Harrington, Bonus & Sheridan, 2003).
Re-creation time should be scheduled at various times during the day, week, month and year. The length of time of the re-creation period should be commensurate with the time interval involved. For example, several 10-30 minute sessions would be adequate for a given day, a longer time period scheduled for each year.
Knowing memory limitations
Human working memory, also called working consciousness, has limited capacity. Research psychologists have found that the average individual has seven slots, plus or minus two, in which to store information at any one time. George Miller (1956) conducted the initial study some years ago given the whimsical title: The Magical Number Seven, Plus or Minus Two: Some Limits on Our Capacity to Process Information.ii
When the capacity of working consciousness is filled, new information is either not stored or replaces the information currently in store. Applying these findings to burnout, or compassion fatigue, the more we try to rely on our memory to recall our task schedule or the details of the troubling experiences of those we are counseling, the more additional fatigue strain and tension we are putting on ourselves over and above the events we are dealing with or individuals we are ministering to. Use of digital or paper calendars and notes is highly recommended.
One Time, One Event
Multitasking in today’s world is commonplace. But it is a psycho-spiritual disaster for priests in any counseling ministry or in prayer life. During the time I am with Jack Smith, so to say, I am with him and him only, I totally focus on him and what we are talking or praying about. Tom, Dick or Harry are out of sight and out of mind. It is like I tune out alternate radio or TV stations by tuning into the one I want to hear. This also means, for example, during breakfast, lunch or dinner, that is the only task being performed: eating.—this is not the time for work, etc. Once again this technique has to be practiced.
Permit me a non-pastoral personal example. Several years ago I was working on research study. I had several students working under my supervision. Typically I would be behind my desk with computer data punch cards, computer printouts of statistical information, a partially written report, frequently on the phone on matters related to the study. At times a research assistant or student would come into the office and ask me a question. In my own mind I would do my best to answer, usually in one or two words, with gesture, and keep on ‘multitasking.’
Now in my view, I was being accommodating. I soon got feedback, I was ‘uncaring and aloof.’ I asked the assistant who gave me this feedback to interrupt me with a signal when I was doing an activity that was perceived as being ‘uncaring and aloof.’ I very quickly discovered what I just described above as the problem. My solution was to place the importance of the assistant and his question first, by stopping all other tasks. I invited him to sit down, I looked him in the eye with full attention, and answered his question.
It was not a difficult adjustment. I am happy to report, favorable feedback began to follow. I learned a valuable lesson. “Stretching myself” was perceived by me to be ‘caring and helping.’ but was not the perception of others. In this case changing my own behavior was aiding the research project by increasing morale and was more in fulfillment of Christ-like charity.
Delegate
Another common practical adage: An executive with ten secretaries can do ten times the work than ten executives with one secretary. In the average Orthodox parish, the pastor could easily get bogged down with clerical or even building maintenance tasks.
This is said not to denigrate these valuable functions, but the primary function of the parish priest is to be a servant as minister, that is to say, preach, teach and sanctify. Letter writing, addressing envelopes, preparing the Sunday Bulletin, scheduling Baptism and Holy Marriage, putting water in the baptismal font, filling Holy Water bottles, preparing service booklets for the parishioners can easily be done by those of the royal priesthood in their service to the Body of Christ, or in the case of a technical or extended work designation such as Parish Secretary, a salaried position (by someone not a member of the parish).
The Shepherds of the Church using the gifts of all
The visible Churchiii is ‘conciliar,’ but is not a democracy. The Church founded by Christ and enlivened by the Holy Spirit at Pentecost is also hierarchical, that is to say made up of bishop, priest, deacon and those baptized into the royal priesthood. The teachings of Christ are understood and expressed in Council by the bishops and confirmed by the priests that surround them and the people of God, the royal priesthood. This is done in union with the common teaching and common mind of the church as passed on through the apostles and Church Fathers. Bishop Hierotheos (1998) quotes St. John of Damaskos on this matter:
“We accept all those things which have been handed down by the Law and the Prophets and the Apostles and the Evangelists. We know and revere them, and over and above these things se seek nothing else.”
St. Basil in his Divine Liturgy of reminds all who surround the Holy Table:
“Be mindful also, O Lord, of the Priesthood, the Deaconate in Christ, and every priestly rank, and put not to confusion any one of us who stand about Thy Holy Altar.”
The ministry of service of the priest-bishop is to preach, teach, sanctify and pastor, that is to say lead the flock of Christ. But the grace that outflows from ordination is not personal but is effectuated by God. Archbishop Hilarion (2002) quoting St. Ambrose of Milan says:
“It is not Damasius, or Peter, or Ambrose or Gregory who baptizes. We are fulfilling our ministry as servants, but the validity of the sacraments depends upon you. It is not within human power to communicate the Divine benefits – it is your gift, O Lord.”
Thus all who make up the visible Church on earth each a different function depending on God’s grace. As St. Paul tells us:
“Now there are varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit; and there are varieties of service, but the same Lord; and there are varieties of working, but it is the same God who inspires them all in every one. (1Cor 12: 4-6)
The priest has to reflect on this fact and the parish reminded and taught the meaning of the words of St. Paul:
“For by the grace given to me I bid every one among you not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think, but to think with sober judgment, each according to the measure of faith which God has assigned him. For as in one body we have many members, and all the members do not have the same function, so we, though many, are one body in Christ, and individually members one of another. Having gifts that differ according to the grace given to us, let us use them…” (Rm 12:3-6).
The service of the laity baptized into the ‘royal priesthood’ is to unite their prayer of offering, their sacrifice of praise, during Divine Liturgy with that of the priestiv and offer their talents to Christ’s Church under the shepherding of the pastors and arch-pastors of the Church in accordance with their gifts.
Assertiveness
Assertiveness is defined as an honest and true communication of real feelings in a socially acceptable (and for the Christian in a Christ-like) manner. It starts with the least effective response, that is to say the most gentle words in meaning and tone of voice that is needed to communicate a message. This can escalate to a firm neutral tone, in keeping with Christ-like charity in choice of words and tone of voice (emotional control: Morelli, 2006b). Development of this psychological cognitive-behavioral skill enables the priest to remove self-imposed or other-imposed demands that do not fit with the event prioritizing discussed above or that could be better handled by delegating tasks. The priest with an understanding of the structure of the visible Church founded by Christ and the individual gifts that may be of service to the parish community will not hesitate to assertively ask for aid needed in the parish. In imitation of Christ’s words
“Follow me” (Mt 4:19).
As mentioned above assertiveness may also have to be used in setting and maintaining priorities especially when requests are made by parishioners out of a sense of entitlement, those who misconstrue their role in the parish structure or some who wants preferential treatment of some type that would set a bad example, be seen as blatantly unfair or even puts undue stress on the pastor that minimizes his effectiveness.
I am sure priests can come up with many example of all of the above. I will use a rather common example of a request that I am sure every pastor received. A young person applying to college or university asks for a recommendation. Situation I: He/she have given a least a months notice. I ask the applicant to email me all relevant information (e.g. GPA, school honors, extra-curricular activities, Church/social service etc.) I will schedule doing the letter of recommendation, promptly (one-two weeks) based on my personal knowledge of the person and the information supplied me. Situation II: He/she tells me a letter of recommendation is needed immediately (right then and there, tomorrow). I find out this is not a last minute request (therefore emergency request) from the school, the applicant procrastinated in asking me. Speaking assertively, but (I pray) with Christ-like kindness, I simply tell the student,
“it will take me a couple days after I get the required information. I feel sorry for the problem, but it was your responsibility to come to me earlier.”v
Once again in the context of marriage I discuss this communication problem more extensively (Morelli, 2009b)
Have a psycho-spiritual expert to talk to
Clinicians and researchers who have worked with professionals who have dealt with victims of trauma, have themselves pointed out the importance of having a knowledgeable professional with which they can debrief and have support. It has been found that mental health professionals have attenuated their own compassion fatigue by having a peer support network, in which their own thoughts and emotional feelings can be shared (Figley, 1995, Boscarino, J. A., Figley, C. R. and Adams, R. E. (2004).
Distress tolerance
Albert Ellis (1962) has expended much of his clinical intervention with psychologically suffering individuals helping them to lean to tolerate distress:
“And we have Rational-Emotive imagery, where we get people to imagine the worst and then feel terrible, and then work on their feeling. We have my famous shame attacking exercise, because shame is the essence of much disturbance, where we get you and other people and our clients to go out and do something asinine, ridiculous, foolish, and not feel ashamed. Now don’t get in trouble; don’t walk naked in the streets or anything like that. But yell out the stops, if you’re civilized enough in your city to have a subway, like we’re civilized enough in New York. And stop somebody on the street and say, “I just got out of the loony bin. What month is it?” and not feel ashamed when they look in horror at you and think you’re off your rocker, which they think you are but you’re really not; you’re being very much saner than they are.”vi
Learning to tolerate distress in such exercises, can be applied to other distressing situations. “Yes very unpleasant events occur in life, but I can learn to get through them and go on.” In actuality this is very similar to an intervention that would be given to person that has actually experienced a traumatic event. (Morelli, 2009a).
The priest who is subject to compassion fatigue can learn to perceive shocking narratives with coping thoughts. Below is a partial list of such coping thoughts:
* This situation won’t last forever.
* I have been through similar painful experiences and have survived.
* I can do what I have to while still being anxious.
* This is an opportunity to learn to bear with my fears.
* My anxiety or sadness won’t kill me; it just doesn’t feel so good right now.
In my pastoral-clinical experience I have given those I have counseled as well as myself ‘homework’ exercises that are geared to practice distress tolerance. I might accompany the distressed counselee during the exercise either close or at a distance as necessary. Debriefing takes place as soon as possible after the exercise. During debriefing, the patient is helped to identify the feelings accompanying the exercise and, most importantly, to recognize that they can modify the thought pattern they attached to the exercise. They did survive, thus change is possible and can be acquired. Such exercises are repeated as necessary. I recommend priest-counselors discuss their particular experience with such exercises with their personal psycho-spiritual ‘expert.’
Spiritual aids to prevent and combat compassion fatigue
Re-creation: Desert in the City
The Holy Gospels record one of the first events at the beginning of Jesus’ public life. St. Mark (Gospel, 1: 10-12) writes that after the Theophany in which:
“… the Spirit descending upon him like a dove; and a voice came from heaven, “Thou art my beloved Son; with thee I am well pleased.” The Spirit immediately drove him out into the wilderness [desert].”
It is in the desert that Our Lord, God and Savior encountered the evil one and triumphed.
Throughout Jesus ministry, the evangelists record events of Our Lord going off by Himself to pray. For example, this account by St. Luke (5: 15-16):
“But so much the more the report went abroad concerning him; and great multitudes gathered to hear and to be healed of their infirmities. But He withdrew to the wilderness and prayed.”
Before the greatest of sacrifices for our salvation which St. Basil in his Divine Liturgy describes as
“…His voluntary, and ever-memorable, and life-creating death…His saving Passion and life-giving Cross, His three day burial and Resurrection from the dead…”
Jesus is in the Garden of Gethsemane praying:
“And he came out, and went, as was his custom, to the Mount of Olives; and the disciples followed him. And when he came to the place he said to them, “Pray that you may not enter into temptation.” And he withdrew from them about a stone’s throw, and knelt down and prayed…” (Lk 22: 39-41)
We have to imitate these withdrawal actions of Christ in ourselves. In this way we can make effective in our own lives and ministry, the priest’s supplication after The Lord’s Prayer in the Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom to be united to the Christ who:
“…[heals] the sick, Thou who art the physician of our souls and bodies.”
The importance of the desert and prayer for priests and all contemporary committed Christians, is delineated by Carlo Carretto (1985) in describing his own ‘desert’ experience:
“In the desert we had discovered the Divine Absolute, and problems were no more, including the gap between city and desert. For there was no gap: the desert was no longer absence of men, but presence of God…The desert trail leads through the city now, summoning man to contemplate the mystery of the Absolute God”
This mystery is love.
St. Isaac of Syria tells us
“Purity of prayer is silence ..[whereby we can contemplate the meaning of Our Lord’s death] that the world might become aware of the love which God has for creation.” (Brock, 1997).
This is because: “God is love.” 1Jn 4:8). When we imitate the withdrawal of Christ into the desert and pray we can take the first step in interiorizing God’s love for us, our love for God and our love for all mankind.
Retreating in the Midst of the City
St. Theophan the Recluse tells us:
“Begin retreating into solitude at your own home, and dedicate these hours of solitude to praying above all for one thing: ‘Make known to me, O Lord, the way wherein I should walk [Ps 142: 8]. Pray thus not merely in words and thought, but also from your heart. For this time of solitude, set aside certain hours every day ….” (The Art of Prayer).
In the spirit of St. Paul who tells us:
“…pray constantly…” (1Thes 5:17)
“Pray at all times in the Spirit, with all prayer and supplication.” (Eph 6:18)“
St. Theophan also reminds us;
“Some Godly thoughts come nearer the heart than others. Should this be so, after you have finished your prayers, continue to dwell on such a thought and remain feeding on it. This is the way to unceasing prayer.”
Prayer is also an instrument of compassion fatigue prevention and healing. St. Isaac of Syria notes: Once someone has doubted God’s care for him, he immediately falls into a myriad of anxieties…Knowledge of truth [through experiencing God in prayer] fills the heart with peace, establishing a person in joy and confidence.” (Brock, 1997). St. Theophan explains how this can be accomplished in the city, in the world:
“I remember that St. Basil the great solved the question how the Apostles could pray without ceasing, in this way: in everything they did, he replied, they thought of God and lived in constant devotion to Him. This spiritual state was their unceasing prayer…What is required is a constant aliveness to God —- an aliveness present when you talk, read, watch, or examine something.”
The Church is a hospital
Consider the Parable of the Good Samaritan (Lk 10: 30-37):
A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and he fell among robbers, who stripped him and beat him, and departed, leaving him half dead. Now by chance a priest was going down that road; and when he saw him he passed by on the other side. So likewise a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. But a Samaritan, as he journeyed, came to where he was; and when he saw him, he had compassion, and went to him and bound up his wounds, pouring on oil and wine; then he set him on his own beast and brought him to an inn, and took care of him. And the next day he took out two denarii and gave them to the innkeeper, saying, ‘Take care of him; and whatever more you spend, I will repay you when I come back.’ Which of these three, do you think, proved neighbor to the man who fell among the robbers?” He said, “The one who showed mercy on him.” And Jesus said to him, “Go and do likewise.”
Bishop Hierotheos Vlachos (1994) emphatically states:
“In St. John Chrysostom’s interpretation of this parable it is clearly evident that the Church is a Hospital which heals those sick with sin, while the bishops and priests, like the Apostle Paul, are the healers of the people of God.”
It is in this context that we can understand the other words of Bishop Hierotheos: “..the priest is properly a spiritual physician who cures people’s sicknesses. Worship and sacrament must be placed within the therapeutic method and treatment.”
The fullness of this healing can only be enlivened with the reception of the Holy Mysteries of the Church. Holy Baptism; Chrismation; Eucharist, (reception of the very Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Christ); Holy Confession, (metanoia, repentance in mind, heart and action, true sorrow for sin and longing for and working on being in communion with God); Holy Unction, the quintessential Holy Mystery of healing in which the priest prays:
“… this oil, that it may be effectual for those who are anointed therewith, unto healing and unto relief from every passion, of every defilement of flesh and spirit, and every ill; that thereby may be glorified Thine all holy Name, of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit: now and ever, and unto ages of ages. Amen.”
Healing can also come from the grace of the Holy Mysteries blessing an individual’s personal calling in life: Holy Orders, (ordination to the diaconate, priesthood, episcopacy) and Blessed Marriage, (male and female uniting to become one flesh, blessed by the Church).
The fullness of Healing: Communion with Christ’s Church
It is important for all priests to reflect on the enormity of the gift of healing for themselves and for those to whom they minister by being in communion with the Church, founded by Christ Himself. As St. Paul told the Hebrews (5: 1: 2-3,6):
“For Every high priest chosen from among men is appointed to act on behalf of men in relation to God, to offer gifts and sacrifices for sins. He can deal gently with the ignorant and wayward, since he himself is beset with weakness. Because of this he is bound to offer sacrifice for his own sins as well as for those of the people. … “Thou art a priest for ever, after the order of Melchizedek.”
St. Paul tells us what this dignity and healing grace is based on:
“The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ? Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread.” (1Cor 10: 16-17).
Thus ordinary path of the fullness of healing Grace becomes possible only by being in communion with the Orthodox Church, whose spirit, came upon this Church at Pentecost.
Extreme thankfulness of Communion with the Church, but with extreme humility
However, not only is the glory of the priesthood veiled to save priests from the passion of pride, as St. Silouan tells us, but all of us who have received this Divine gift of ordination must consider that God cannot be limited in the economia of His Grace. In this regard I want to quote the caveat of Archbishop Hilarion Alfeyev (2002):
When dealing with the difficult questions of Christian divisions, we must also bear in mind that God alone knows where the limits of the Church are. St. Augustine said, “Many of those on earth considered themselves to be alien to the Church will find on the day of Judgment that they are her citizens; and many of those who thought themselves to be members of the Church will, alas, be found to be alien to her. To declare that outside the Orthodox Church there is not and cannot be the grace of God would be to limit God”s omnipotence and to confine Him to a framework outside which he has no right to act. Hence faithfulness to the Orthodox Church and her dogmatic teaching should never become naked triumphalism by which other Christian Churches are regarded as created by the “cunning devices” of people, while the whole world and ninety-nine per cent of [mankind] is doomed to destruction.
In other words we priests have to be spiritually thankful and be enlivened by the unique gift of grace given in the priesthood and recognize our position is not a , personal resplendence but is rather a ministry of humble service.
Acceptance of being a servant
Christ told His apostles,
“It [domineering others] shall not be so among you but whoever would be great among you must be your servant” (Mt 20: 26).
For as St. Paul told the Corinthians:
“For what we preach is not ourselves, but Jesus Christ as Lord, with ourselves as your servants for Jesus’ sake.”
This implies that we interiorize the compassion of Christ:
“When he saw the crowds, he had compassion for them, because they were harassed and helpless, like sheep without a shepherd.” (Mt 9: 36).
This recognizes that the priest and all who are true Christians
“Put on then, as God’s chosen ones, holy and beloved, compassion, kindness, lowliness, meekness, and patience, forbearing one another…”. (Col3: 12-13).
For as St. Paul explains
“if one member suffers, all suffer together; if one member is honored, all rejoice together. Now you are the body of Christ and individually members of it. (1Cor 12: 26-27)
But with discernment must come discrimination
“Behold, I send you out as sheep in the midst of wolves; so be wise as serpents and innocent as doves. (Mt 10: 16). St. Peter of Damaskos (Philokalia III):
This then is the general picture [preferring one’s own thoughts and wishes to those of God]. But situations and pursuits vary, and one needs to acquire discrimination, either through the humility given by God or through questioning those who possess the gifts of discrimination. For without discrimination nothing that comes to pass is good, even if we in our ignorance think that it is. But when through discrimination we learn how it lies in our power to attain what we wish, then what we do begins to conform to God’s will.
Especially for a priest, being a servant to others for Jesus sake make up part of their ‘path to perfection.’ St. John of the Ladder (1982) points out
“Among beginners, discernment is real self knowledge … it is the spiritual capacity to distinguish unfailingly between what is truly good and what in nature is opposed to the good.”
Opposition to being a good servant – the priest’s Achilles heal: not really ministering without ‘constant caring’
Empathy is defined in the psychological literature as thinking and feeling what the other is thinking and feeling. (Morelli, 2007b). It is my observation that many priests feel they are not fulfilling their presbyteral calling unless they ‘feel’ themselves the psycho-spiritual suffering of their parishioners at all times. This self-imposed definition of the service of priesthood would appear to be another significant contributor to compassion fatigue or burnout.
A reading of the Gospel accounts of Jesus’ public life indicates that after encountering someone suffering he would heal the person and then move on. There is no mention of Him perseveratingvii over the ill person. For example, in the account of healing of the man born blind as recounted by St. John (9: 1-41), there is the observation of Jesus healing, but in the context of the assurance and of the power of God that He possessed. He announces simply as a matter of fact:
“We must work the work of Him who sends me…I am the light of the world…” (4,5).
After the healing and the Pharisees’ disparagement of Jesus, He appears focused on the reality of his mission and not caught up in an emotional entanglement. Jesus asks:
“Do you believe in the Son of man?” He answered, “And who is he, sir, that I may believe in him?” Jesus said to him, “You have seen him, and it is he who speaks to you.” He said, “Lord, I believe”; and he worshiped him. Jesus said, “For judgment I came into this world, that those who do not see may see, and that those who see may become blind.” (35-39).
Thus the priest must minister in truth but also in wisdom.
I do not pray that thou shouldst take them out of the world, but that thou shouldst keep them from the evil one. They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world. Sanctify them in the truth; thy word is truth. As thou didst send me into the world, so I have sent them into the world (Jn 17: 15-18)
REFERENCES
Alfeyev, Archbishop Hilarion. (2002). The Mystery of Faith: An Introduction to the Teaching and Spirituality of the Orthodox Church. London: Darton, Longman and Todd.
Bloomfield, H.H., & Kory, R.B. (1976). Happiness: The TM program, Psychiatry, and Enlightenment. NY: Simon & Schuster.
Boscarino, J. A., Figley, C. R. and Adams, R. E. (2004). Evidence of Compassion Fatigue following the September 11 Terrorist Attacks: A Study of Secondary Trauma among Social Workers in New York. International Journal of Emergency Mental Health, 6:2, 98-108.
Brock, S. (1997). The Wisdom of St. Isaac the Syrian. Fairacres Oxford, England: SLG Press.
Carretto, C. (1985). Forward. The Jerusalem Community Rule of Life. Mawah, NJ: Paulist Press.
Davidson, R.J., Kabat-Zinn, J., Schumacher, J., Rosenkranz, M., Muller, D., Santorelli, S.F., Urbanowski, F., Harrington, A., Bonus, K., & Sheridan, J.F. (2003). Alterations in brain and immune function produced by mindfulness meditation. Psychosomatic Medicine, 65, 564-570.
Figley, C.R. (1995). Compassion fatigue as secondary traumatic stress disorder: an overview. In: Compassion Fatigue: Coping with Secondary Traumatic Stress Disorder in Those Who Treat the Traumatized, Figley, CR, (ed.). NY: Brunner/Mazel.
Kadloubovsky, E. & Palmer, E. M. (1966). The Art of Prayer: An Orthodox Anthology. London: Faber and Faber.
Miller, G.A. (1956). “The Magical Number Seven, Plus or Minus Two: Some Limits on our Capacity to Process Information,” Psychological Review, 63. 81-97.
Morelli, G (2006a, May 08). Orthodoxy and The Science Of Psychology. http://www.orthodoxytoday.org/OT/view/morelli-orthodoxy-and-the-science-of-psychology.
Morelli, G. (2006b, July 02). Assertiveness and Christian Charity. http://www.orthodoxytoday.org/OT/view/morelli-assertiveness-and-christian-charity.
Morelli, G. (2006c, December 05). Understanding Clergy Stress: A Psychospiritual Response. http://www.orthodoxytoday.org/OT/view/morelli-understanding-clergy-stress.
Morelli, G. (2007a, March 15). Good Marriage: How An Attitude of Entitlement Undermines Marriage. http://www.orthodoxytoday.org/OT/view/good-marriage-I-how-an-attitude-of-entitlement-undermines-marriage.
Morelli, G. (2007b, December 02). Forgiveness is Healing. http://www.orthodoxytoday.org/OT/view/morelli-forgiveness-is-healing.
Morelli, G. (2009a, January 13). Suicide: Christ, His Church and Modern Medicine. http://www.orthodoxytoday.org/articles-2009/Morelli-Suicide-Christ-His-Church-And-Modern-Medicine.php.
Morelli, G. (2009b, February 08). Good Marriage XV. Ensnared By Mindless Helping. http://www.orthodoxytoday.org/OT/view/good-marriage-xv-ensnared-by-mindless-helping.
Pearlman, L.A. & Saakvitne, K.W. (1995). Trauma and the Therapist: Countertransference and Vicarious Traumatization in Psychotherapy with Incest Survivors. NY: W.W. Norton.
Palmer, G.E.H., Sherrard, P. & Ware, K. (1981). The Philokalia, Volume 2: The Complete Text; Compiled by St. Nikodimos of the Holy Mountain & St. Markarios of Corinth. London: Faber and Faber.
St. John of the Ladder. (1982), John Climacus: The Ladder of Divine Ascent. NY: Paulist Press.
Travis, F. (2001). Autonomic and EEG patterns distinguish transcending from other experiences during Transcendental Meditation practice. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 42, 1-9
Vlachos, Bishop Hierotheos, (1994). Orthodox Psychotherapy: The Science of the Fathers. Lavadia, Greece: Birth of the Theotokos Monastery.
Vlachos, Bishop Hierotheos, (1998). The Mind of the Orthodox Church. Lavadia, Greece: Birth of the Theotokos Monastery.
NOTES
i. (http://www.goarch.org/en/ourfaith/articles/article8076.asp)
ii. An example of the original research is to give subjects in the experiment a list of random numbers or letters: increasing in span and asking them to repeat them back either forward or backward (e.g. 86, 249, 3409, 52647, 951438, 61824913, etc.). In another example, most individuals would find the following task quite difficult—hearing them repeating back a series of twelve letters grouped as follows: FB – INB – CC –IAIB – M. However, most people would readily recall FBI,NBC,CIA,IBM. The terms working consciousness and short term store are functionally synonymous. Another common example is remembering a telephone number with an unfamiliar area code that you cannot write down and must keep in working consciousness (short term store) to be able to call it immediately after it has been given to you.
iii. The Church also includes the invisible Church. As Bishop Hierotheos (1998) tells us: “Members of the Church exist in all the ages … [they are commemorated] on the paten during the Liturgy there are many people. They are the Panagia, the Angels, the Prophets, the Holy Fathers, the great martyrs, and, in general, the witnesses of the faith, the saints and ascetics, the living and the dead who have a share in the purifying, illuminating and deifying uncreated energy of God.”
iv. As is said in the Prothesis Prayer of the Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom.
v. My thanks to one of my editors Sh. Laura Sanders who commented on this section as “an old adage has it, ‘I am not required to hurry because you procrastinated.’”
vi. (http://www.intuition.org/txt/ellis.htm).
vii. Clinically, perseverating usually is accompanied by the dysfunctional emotions of anxiety or anger. It may also be related to certain personality and psychotic disorders. Spiritually may also be related to pride and vainglory.
V. Rev. George Morelli Ph.D. is a licensed Clinical Psychologist and Marriage and Family Therapist, Coordinator of the Chaplaincy and Pastoral Counseling Ministry of the Antiochian Orthodox Christian Archdiocese, (http://www.antiochian.org/counseling-ministries) and Religion Coordinator (and Antiochian Archdiocesan Liaison) of the Orthodox Christian Association of Medicine, Psychology and Religion. Fr. George is Assistant Pastor of St. George’s Antiochian Orthodox Church, San Diego, California.
Read more: Clergy Burnout and Fatigue | Preachers Institute
source: http://preachersinstitute.com/2010/04/clergy-burnout-and-fatigue-fr-george-morelli/
This excellent article was first published on Orthodoxytoday.org, where much of Fr. Morelli’s writings appear. We offer to our overworked, underpaid, and often exhausted brethren, in the hopes that they may be refreshed who are weary in well-doing. It is placed under ‘Sermon Resources’ because – and I want to be quite clear about this – the healthy preacher is the greatest sermon resource of all. God bless you, brothers.
The apostles returned to Jesus, and told him all that they had done and taught. And he said to them, “Come away by yourselves to a lonely place, and rest a while. For many were coming and going, and they had no leisure even to eat (Mk 6:30-31).
Come to me, all who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest (Mt 11:28).
In emulation of Our Lord Himself, priests are “on call” at all times. As St. Mark records of Jesus in his Gospel (1:33-34):
“And the whole city was gathered together about the door. And [H]e healed many who were sick with various diseases… ”
The priest, the icon of the healing Christ, is the instrumental physician of the souls they pastor. In the role of healer, the priest must hear their flock recount their personal problems. As discussed in Morelli, (2006c) many of these problems involve uttermost human and spiritual suffering, the disclosure of dysfunctional emotional reactions such as anger, anxiety and depression, the confession of helplessness, hopelessness and estrangement from God.
Priestly ministry is especially demanding because as Archbishop Hilarion Alfeyev (2002) writes:
“The sacrament of priesthood is deeply significant…Despite the Orthodox emphasis on the ‘royal priesthood’ of all believers, the Church also recognizes a difference between laypeople and ordained clergy, the latter being entrusted with the celebration of the Eucharist, and having the power of ‘binding and loosing’. Ordination into a hierarchical rank, be it of bishop, priest or deacon, is not only a change of status but a transition to another level of existence.”
He goes on to quote St. Silouan the Athonite:
“[This] grace is so exceedingly great that were men able to see the glory of this grace, the whole world would wonder at it; but the Lord has veiled it that His servants should not be puffed up but find salvation in humility … Truly noble is a priest —- the minister at God’s altar.”
The words of Christ Himself given to his apostles and followers tell us of the consequences of receiving His gifts:
“…to whom much is given, of him will much be required…” (Lk 12:48)
Behavioral science researchers have noted the deleterious psychological effects on the healing professionals who are exposed to secondary trauma, that is to say by listening to individuals reveal traumatic events and or their reactions to such events. Figley (1995) calls this compassion fatigue. Pearlman and Saakvitne, (1995) have an even more pointed name for this diagnostic category: vicarious traumatization. In other words, the mental health professional, and by implication, the priest of Christ, is open to be traumatized themselves by simply being exposed to the verbal recounting of the traumatic events others have suffered.
Signs of compassion fatigue
Compassion fatigue has many indicators that are shared by other psychological disturbances such as depression. The following, therefore, should be taken as warnings, yellow flags so to speak, to consult a licensed, scientifically trained and Christ-centered mental health professional for evaluation and possible psycho-spiritual intervention. (Morelli, 2006a,c) Some of these signs include:
* A general unhappiness, preoccupation with those whom the priest is helping.
* A lack satisfaction with one’s healing ministry.
* A lack of connection with those being helped or other parishioners.
* A lack of feeling ‘energized’ after a helping encounter.
* A difficulty separating one’s thoughts, feelings and spiritual life from the problems being dealt with.
* Feeling the trauma of the one(s) seeking aid, feeling trapped in the pastoral ministry of helping.
* More irritability about everyday matters.
* A general feeling of discontent.
* A general feeling of dissatisfaction with one’s ministry.
* Feelings of being overwhelmed exhausted and fatigued, and a sense that one’s priestly efforts are not worthwhile.
Orthodoxy uses the synergia of medicine and Christ’s spiritual gifts in healing
Many are familiar with the adage: grace builds on nature. This is consistent with the words of St. Maximus the Confessor who notes
“the grace of the most Holy Spirit does not confer wisdom on the Saints without their natural intellect as capacity to receive it.”(Philokalia II).
Thus as St. Paul tell us:
“…for in Him all things were created, in heaven and on earth… and in him all things hold together. (Col. 1:16-17).
The early church fathers who used the medicine of their day in healing, considered this use of the intelligence God created us with in just this way. (Morelli, 2006c) As Fr. Stanley Harakas notes:
“Medical treatment is also seen as a human cooperation with God’s healing purposes and goals…[medicine has] … generally been understood throughout history in the Church to be appropriate, fitting and desirable ways of cooperating with God in the healing of human illnesses.”i
Psychological Aids to Prevent and Combat Compassion Fatigue
Limit mental rehashing time (Time Management)
Make out a detailed work schedule for each day of the week. With computer Personal Data Assistant (PDA) programs or old fashioned daily planners, this is not a difficult task and will reap great psychological and spiritual reward. Train your mind not to entertain or converse with the factual and emotional details of the situation or case. Some years ago when I was actively counseling and teaching, in addition to my pastoral tasks, I was very busy and was in a position to easily “burnout.” I developed what I called the “Appointment Book Technique.” I would write down all pastoral, clinical, academic, and spiritual tasks with the specific start and end time and travel time, then close the book.
I would not think about what I had written until the appointed day. Tasks that required preparation would be listed in a specific slot on the days before. Other than praying for them, and keeping in mind the presence of God (“pray constantly, 1Th. 5:7), I did not dwell on the details involving any person I had to counsel or to whom I had to minister. I closed the book: keeping it “out of sight, out of mind”, until the time of the event. Doing this takes practice but it can be done.
The depth of compassion I felt for the suffering person was not lessened, but the amount of time I spent exposed to secondary trauma was limited to the time I was actually with that person.
Prioritizing events
Intellectually we all know events differ in their importance. But this is very easy to ignore in everyday life and can be a cause of stress and leave us susceptible to burnout. In effective time management it is critical to prioritize the events that are listed in our schedule. For example, under usual conditions (excluding for example, natural disasters, catastrophes, warfare, etc.) Divine Liturgy on Sundays and Feast Days (and their preparatory services) would be highest in priority. Also visiting a critically ill parishioner would be an emergency “high priority’ and require a modification in the Priests schedule. That means a lower priority event may then have to get re-scheduled.
In prioritizing the events in one’s daily, weekly monthly and yearly schedule, balance of major life domains must be maintained. For the Orthodox Priest this means: Ministry, including prayer life, Family, and Recreation. Each of these domains can be subdivided into sub-domains. For example, Ministry, would include: The Divine Services and Holy Mysteries, parish administration, Scripture Study, pastoral visitations, pastoral counseling, etc. Family would include, dinner time, time spent with spouse, children, their school and extra-curricula activities, and special family events, etc. Recreation (re-creation) is for many priests, the forgotten domain.
Note above I emphasized the parts of the word, recreation, that is to say: to re-create oneself.
Another frequently encountered prioritizing situation occurs when a priest is faced with an unexpected encounter with someone in the parish who communicates a need for prompt attention. This is even more stressful if the parishioner perceives themselves as entitled to special attention because of their ‘status,’ for example a parish council member or officer. I discuss in more detail the problem of entitlement in the context of marriage (Morelli, 2007a) but the points I make are quite applicable in priest-parish situations. Basically entitlement is psychologically an unrealistic expectation and spiritually is based on the sinful passion of pride.
In such encounters the parish priest has to discern the “realistic” importance of the stated ‘need.’: If the request is critical, (e.g. need for immediate confession and reception of communion of someone in danger of death), then the priest would re-prioritize his schedule. In other situations, the priest has to learn to be assertive, and straightforwardly, firmly and in Christ-like charity, set up an appointment when the issue can be addressed. Assertiveness is discussed in more detail below.
The special case of prioritizing: Re-creation
Here I am only going to consider this psychologically below I will consider this domain from a spiritual viewpoint. We all need a time out from usual activity so to speak. This could be anything from walk, run or bicycle in the park to listening to a favorite musical piece. It could be a visit to a museum, walk on the beach, a walking trail in a park. (All these activities should and can involve a sense of the presence of God.) Re-creation conveys a sense of dissociating with and leaving the active world behind and just being absorbed by the present moment.
Some psychologists have even developed techniques of psychological meditation, which is a mental self discipline exercise the aim of which is to learn to focus attention, raise awareness and bring cognitive and physical processes under voluntary control (Bloomfield & Kory, 1976).
In a meditative state, electroencephalograph (EEG) studies (Travis, 2001) indicate an increase in brain alpha and theta waves, accompanying attenuation of heart rate, carbon dioxide output, oxygen intake respiration rate, and skin conductance. Subjectively those tested reported feeling quite un-aroused and relaxed. Sympathetic nervous system hormones which are associated with anxiety (Morelli, 2009a), are also lowered (Davidson, Kabat-Zinn, Schumacher, Rosencranz, Muller, Santorelli, Urbanowski, Harrington, Bonus & Sheridan, 2003).
Re-creation time should be scheduled at various times during the day, week, month and year. The length of time of the re-creation period should be commensurate with the time interval involved. For example, several 10-30 minute sessions would be adequate for a given day, a longer time period scheduled for each year.
Knowing memory limitations
Human working memory, also called working consciousness, has limited capacity. Research psychologists have found that the average individual has seven slots, plus or minus two, in which to store information at any one time. George Miller (1956) conducted the initial study some years ago given the whimsical title: The Magical Number Seven, Plus or Minus Two: Some Limits on Our Capacity to Process Information.ii
When the capacity of working consciousness is filled, new information is either not stored or replaces the information currently in store. Applying these findings to burnout, or compassion fatigue, the more we try to rely on our memory to recall our task schedule or the details of the troubling experiences of those we are counseling, the more additional fatigue strain and tension we are putting on ourselves over and above the events we are dealing with or individuals we are ministering to. Use of digital or paper calendars and notes is highly recommended.
One Time, One Event
Multitasking in today’s world is commonplace. But it is a psycho-spiritual disaster for priests in any counseling ministry or in prayer life. During the time I am with Jack Smith, so to say, I am with him and him only, I totally focus on him and what we are talking or praying about. Tom, Dick or Harry are out of sight and out of mind. It is like I tune out alternate radio or TV stations by tuning into the one I want to hear. This also means, for example, during breakfast, lunch or dinner, that is the only task being performed: eating.—this is not the time for work, etc. Once again this technique has to be practiced.
Permit me a non-pastoral personal example. Several years ago I was working on research study. I had several students working under my supervision. Typically I would be behind my desk with computer data punch cards, computer printouts of statistical information, a partially written report, frequently on the phone on matters related to the study. At times a research assistant or student would come into the office and ask me a question. In my own mind I would do my best to answer, usually in one or two words, with gesture, and keep on ‘multitasking.’
Now in my view, I was being accommodating. I soon got feedback, I was ‘uncaring and aloof.’ I asked the assistant who gave me this feedback to interrupt me with a signal when I was doing an activity that was perceived as being ‘uncaring and aloof.’ I very quickly discovered what I just described above as the problem. My solution was to place the importance of the assistant and his question first, by stopping all other tasks. I invited him to sit down, I looked him in the eye with full attention, and answered his question.
It was not a difficult adjustment. I am happy to report, favorable feedback began to follow. I learned a valuable lesson. “Stretching myself” was perceived by me to be ‘caring and helping.’ but was not the perception of others. In this case changing my own behavior was aiding the research project by increasing morale and was more in fulfillment of Christ-like charity.
Delegate
Another common practical adage: An executive with ten secretaries can do ten times the work than ten executives with one secretary. In the average Orthodox parish, the pastor could easily get bogged down with clerical or even building maintenance tasks.
This is said not to denigrate these valuable functions, but the primary function of the parish priest is to be a servant as minister, that is to say, preach, teach and sanctify. Letter writing, addressing envelopes, preparing the Sunday Bulletin, scheduling Baptism and Holy Marriage, putting water in the baptismal font, filling Holy Water bottles, preparing service booklets for the parishioners can easily be done by those of the royal priesthood in their service to the Body of Christ, or in the case of a technical or extended work designation such as Parish Secretary, a salaried position (by someone not a member of the parish).
The Shepherds of the Church using the gifts of all
The visible Churchiii is ‘conciliar,’ but is not a democracy. The Church founded by Christ and enlivened by the Holy Spirit at Pentecost is also hierarchical, that is to say made up of bishop, priest, deacon and those baptized into the royal priesthood. The teachings of Christ are understood and expressed in Council by the bishops and confirmed by the priests that surround them and the people of God, the royal priesthood. This is done in union with the common teaching and common mind of the church as passed on through the apostles and Church Fathers. Bishop Hierotheos (1998) quotes St. John of Damaskos on this matter:
“We accept all those things which have been handed down by the Law and the Prophets and the Apostles and the Evangelists. We know and revere them, and over and above these things se seek nothing else.”
St. Basil in his Divine Liturgy of reminds all who surround the Holy Table:
“Be mindful also, O Lord, of the Priesthood, the Deaconate in Christ, and every priestly rank, and put not to confusion any one of us who stand about Thy Holy Altar.”
The ministry of service of the priest-bishop is to preach, teach, sanctify and pastor, that is to say lead the flock of Christ. But the grace that outflows from ordination is not personal but is effectuated by God. Archbishop Hilarion (2002) quoting St. Ambrose of Milan says:
“It is not Damasius, or Peter, or Ambrose or Gregory who baptizes. We are fulfilling our ministry as servants, but the validity of the sacraments depends upon you. It is not within human power to communicate the Divine benefits – it is your gift, O Lord.”
Thus all who make up the visible Church on earth each a different function depending on God’s grace. As St. Paul tells us:
“Now there are varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit; and there are varieties of service, but the same Lord; and there are varieties of working, but it is the same God who inspires them all in every one. (1Cor 12: 4-6)
The priest has to reflect on this fact and the parish reminded and taught the meaning of the words of St. Paul:
“For by the grace given to me I bid every one among you not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think, but to think with sober judgment, each according to the measure of faith which God has assigned him. For as in one body we have many members, and all the members do not have the same function, so we, though many, are one body in Christ, and individually members one of another. Having gifts that differ according to the grace given to us, let us use them…” (Rm 12:3-6).
The service of the laity baptized into the ‘royal priesthood’ is to unite their prayer of offering, their sacrifice of praise, during Divine Liturgy with that of the priestiv and offer their talents to Christ’s Church under the shepherding of the pastors and arch-pastors of the Church in accordance with their gifts.
Assertiveness
Assertiveness is defined as an honest and true communication of real feelings in a socially acceptable (and for the Christian in a Christ-like) manner. It starts with the least effective response, that is to say the most gentle words in meaning and tone of voice that is needed to communicate a message. This can escalate to a firm neutral tone, in keeping with Christ-like charity in choice of words and tone of voice (emotional control: Morelli, 2006b). Development of this psychological cognitive-behavioral skill enables the priest to remove self-imposed or other-imposed demands that do not fit with the event prioritizing discussed above or that could be better handled by delegating tasks. The priest with an understanding of the structure of the visible Church founded by Christ and the individual gifts that may be of service to the parish community will not hesitate to assertively ask for aid needed in the parish. In imitation of Christ’s words
“Follow me” (Mt 4:19).
As mentioned above assertiveness may also have to be used in setting and maintaining priorities especially when requests are made by parishioners out of a sense of entitlement, those who misconstrue their role in the parish structure or some who wants preferential treatment of some type that would set a bad example, be seen as blatantly unfair or even puts undue stress on the pastor that minimizes his effectiveness.
I am sure priests can come up with many example of all of the above. I will use a rather common example of a request that I am sure every pastor received. A young person applying to college or university asks for a recommendation. Situation I: He/she have given a least a months notice. I ask the applicant to email me all relevant information (e.g. GPA, school honors, extra-curricular activities, Church/social service etc.) I will schedule doing the letter of recommendation, promptly (one-two weeks) based on my personal knowledge of the person and the information supplied me. Situation II: He/she tells me a letter of recommendation is needed immediately (right then and there, tomorrow). I find out this is not a last minute request (therefore emergency request) from the school, the applicant procrastinated in asking me. Speaking assertively, but (I pray) with Christ-like kindness, I simply tell the student,
“it will take me a couple days after I get the required information. I feel sorry for the problem, but it was your responsibility to come to me earlier.”v
Once again in the context of marriage I discuss this communication problem more extensively (Morelli, 2009b)
Have a psycho-spiritual expert to talk to
Clinicians and researchers who have worked with professionals who have dealt with victims of trauma, have themselves pointed out the importance of having a knowledgeable professional with which they can debrief and have support. It has been found that mental health professionals have attenuated their own compassion fatigue by having a peer support network, in which their own thoughts and emotional feelings can be shared (Figley, 1995, Boscarino, J. A., Figley, C. R. and Adams, R. E. (2004).
Distress tolerance
Albert Ellis (1962) has expended much of his clinical intervention with psychologically suffering individuals helping them to lean to tolerate distress:
“And we have Rational-Emotive imagery, where we get people to imagine the worst and then feel terrible, and then work on their feeling. We have my famous shame attacking exercise, because shame is the essence of much disturbance, where we get you and other people and our clients to go out and do something asinine, ridiculous, foolish, and not feel ashamed. Now don’t get in trouble; don’t walk naked in the streets or anything like that. But yell out the stops, if you’re civilized enough in your city to have a subway, like we’re civilized enough in New York. And stop somebody on the street and say, “I just got out of the loony bin. What month is it?” and not feel ashamed when they look in horror at you and think you’re off your rocker, which they think you are but you’re really not; you’re being very much saner than they are.”vi
Learning to tolerate distress in such exercises, can be applied to other distressing situations. “Yes very unpleasant events occur in life, but I can learn to get through them and go on.” In actuality this is very similar to an intervention that would be given to person that has actually experienced a traumatic event. (Morelli, 2009a).
The priest who is subject to compassion fatigue can learn to perceive shocking narratives with coping thoughts. Below is a partial list of such coping thoughts:
* This situation won’t last forever.
* I have been through similar painful experiences and have survived.
* I can do what I have to while still being anxious.
* This is an opportunity to learn to bear with my fears.
* My anxiety or sadness won’t kill me; it just doesn’t feel so good right now.
In my pastoral-clinical experience I have given those I have counseled as well as myself ‘homework’ exercises that are geared to practice distress tolerance. I might accompany the distressed counselee during the exercise either close or at a distance as necessary. Debriefing takes place as soon as possible after the exercise. During debriefing, the patient is helped to identify the feelings accompanying the exercise and, most importantly, to recognize that they can modify the thought pattern they attached to the exercise. They did survive, thus change is possible and can be acquired. Such exercises are repeated as necessary. I recommend priest-counselors discuss their particular experience with such exercises with their personal psycho-spiritual ‘expert.’
Spiritual aids to prevent and combat compassion fatigue
Re-creation: Desert in the City
The Holy Gospels record one of the first events at the beginning of Jesus’ public life. St. Mark (Gospel, 1: 10-12) writes that after the Theophany in which:
“… the Spirit descending upon him like a dove; and a voice came from heaven, “Thou art my beloved Son; with thee I am well pleased.” The Spirit immediately drove him out into the wilderness [desert].”
It is in the desert that Our Lord, God and Savior encountered the evil one and triumphed.
Throughout Jesus ministry, the evangelists record events of Our Lord going off by Himself to pray. For example, this account by St. Luke (5: 15-16):
“But so much the more the report went abroad concerning him; and great multitudes gathered to hear and to be healed of their infirmities. But He withdrew to the wilderness and prayed.”
Before the greatest of sacrifices for our salvation which St. Basil in his Divine Liturgy describes as
“…His voluntary, and ever-memorable, and life-creating death…His saving Passion and life-giving Cross, His three day burial and Resurrection from the dead…”
Jesus is in the Garden of Gethsemane praying:
“And he came out, and went, as was his custom, to the Mount of Olives; and the disciples followed him. And when he came to the place he said to them, “Pray that you may not enter into temptation.” And he withdrew from them about a stone’s throw, and knelt down and prayed…” (Lk 22: 39-41)
We have to imitate these withdrawal actions of Christ in ourselves. In this way we can make effective in our own lives and ministry, the priest’s supplication after The Lord’s Prayer in the Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom to be united to the Christ who:
“…[heals] the sick, Thou who art the physician of our souls and bodies.”
The importance of the desert and prayer for priests and all contemporary committed Christians, is delineated by Carlo Carretto (1985) in describing his own ‘desert’ experience:
“In the desert we had discovered the Divine Absolute, and problems were no more, including the gap between city and desert. For there was no gap: the desert was no longer absence of men, but presence of God…The desert trail leads through the city now, summoning man to contemplate the mystery of the Absolute God”
This mystery is love.
St. Isaac of Syria tells us
“Purity of prayer is silence ..[whereby we can contemplate the meaning of Our Lord’s death] that the world might become aware of the love which God has for creation.” (Brock, 1997).
This is because: “God is love.” 1Jn 4:8). When we imitate the withdrawal of Christ into the desert and pray we can take the first step in interiorizing God’s love for us, our love for God and our love for all mankind.
Retreating in the Midst of the City
St. Theophan the Recluse tells us:
“Begin retreating into solitude at your own home, and dedicate these hours of solitude to praying above all for one thing: ‘Make known to me, O Lord, the way wherein I should walk [Ps 142: 8]. Pray thus not merely in words and thought, but also from your heart. For this time of solitude, set aside certain hours every day ….” (The Art of Prayer).
In the spirit of St. Paul who tells us:
“…pray constantly…” (1Thes 5:17)
“Pray at all times in the Spirit, with all prayer and supplication.” (Eph 6:18)“
St. Theophan also reminds us;
“Some Godly thoughts come nearer the heart than others. Should this be so, after you have finished your prayers, continue to dwell on such a thought and remain feeding on it. This is the way to unceasing prayer.”
Prayer is also an instrument of compassion fatigue prevention and healing. St. Isaac of Syria notes: Once someone has doubted God’s care for him, he immediately falls into a myriad of anxieties…Knowledge of truth [through experiencing God in prayer] fills the heart with peace, establishing a person in joy and confidence.” (Brock, 1997). St. Theophan explains how this can be accomplished in the city, in the world:
“I remember that St. Basil the great solved the question how the Apostles could pray without ceasing, in this way: in everything they did, he replied, they thought of God and lived in constant devotion to Him. This spiritual state was their unceasing prayer…What is required is a constant aliveness to God —- an aliveness present when you talk, read, watch, or examine something.”
The Church is a hospital
Consider the Parable of the Good Samaritan (Lk 10: 30-37):
A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and he fell among robbers, who stripped him and beat him, and departed, leaving him half dead. Now by chance a priest was going down that road; and when he saw him he passed by on the other side. So likewise a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. But a Samaritan, as he journeyed, came to where he was; and when he saw him, he had compassion, and went to him and bound up his wounds, pouring on oil and wine; then he set him on his own beast and brought him to an inn, and took care of him. And the next day he took out two denarii and gave them to the innkeeper, saying, ‘Take care of him; and whatever more you spend, I will repay you when I come back.’ Which of these three, do you think, proved neighbor to the man who fell among the robbers?” He said, “The one who showed mercy on him.” And Jesus said to him, “Go and do likewise.”
Bishop Hierotheos Vlachos (1994) emphatically states:
“In St. John Chrysostom’s interpretation of this parable it is clearly evident that the Church is a Hospital which heals those sick with sin, while the bishops and priests, like the Apostle Paul, are the healers of the people of God.”
It is in this context that we can understand the other words of Bishop Hierotheos: “..the priest is properly a spiritual physician who cures people’s sicknesses. Worship and sacrament must be placed within the therapeutic method and treatment.”
The fullness of this healing can only be enlivened with the reception of the Holy Mysteries of the Church. Holy Baptism; Chrismation; Eucharist, (reception of the very Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Christ); Holy Confession, (metanoia, repentance in mind, heart and action, true sorrow for sin and longing for and working on being in communion with God); Holy Unction, the quintessential Holy Mystery of healing in which the priest prays:
“… this oil, that it may be effectual for those who are anointed therewith, unto healing and unto relief from every passion, of every defilement of flesh and spirit, and every ill; that thereby may be glorified Thine all holy Name, of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit: now and ever, and unto ages of ages. Amen.”
Healing can also come from the grace of the Holy Mysteries blessing an individual’s personal calling in life: Holy Orders, (ordination to the diaconate, priesthood, episcopacy) and Blessed Marriage, (male and female uniting to become one flesh, blessed by the Church).
The fullness of Healing: Communion with Christ’s Church
It is important for all priests to reflect on the enormity of the gift of healing for themselves and for those to whom they minister by being in communion with the Church, founded by Christ Himself. As St. Paul told the Hebrews (5: 1: 2-3,6):
“For Every high priest chosen from among men is appointed to act on behalf of men in relation to God, to offer gifts and sacrifices for sins. He can deal gently with the ignorant and wayward, since he himself is beset with weakness. Because of this he is bound to offer sacrifice for his own sins as well as for those of the people. … “Thou art a priest for ever, after the order of Melchizedek.”
St. Paul tells us what this dignity and healing grace is based on:
“The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ? Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread.” (1Cor 10: 16-17).
Thus ordinary path of the fullness of healing Grace becomes possible only by being in communion with the Orthodox Church, whose spirit, came upon this Church at Pentecost.
Extreme thankfulness of Communion with the Church, but with extreme humility
However, not only is the glory of the priesthood veiled to save priests from the passion of pride, as St. Silouan tells us, but all of us who have received this Divine gift of ordination must consider that God cannot be limited in the economia of His Grace. In this regard I want to quote the caveat of Archbishop Hilarion Alfeyev (2002):
When dealing with the difficult questions of Christian divisions, we must also bear in mind that God alone knows where the limits of the Church are. St. Augustine said, “Many of those on earth considered themselves to be alien to the Church will find on the day of Judgment that they are her citizens; and many of those who thought themselves to be members of the Church will, alas, be found to be alien to her. To declare that outside the Orthodox Church there is not and cannot be the grace of God would be to limit God”s omnipotence and to confine Him to a framework outside which he has no right to act. Hence faithfulness to the Orthodox Church and her dogmatic teaching should never become naked triumphalism by which other Christian Churches are regarded as created by the “cunning devices” of people, while the whole world and ninety-nine per cent of [mankind] is doomed to destruction.
In other words we priests have to be spiritually thankful and be enlivened by the unique gift of grace given in the priesthood and recognize our position is not a , personal resplendence but is rather a ministry of humble service.
Acceptance of being a servant
Christ told His apostles,
“It [domineering others] shall not be so among you but whoever would be great among you must be your servant” (Mt 20: 26).
For as St. Paul told the Corinthians:
“For what we preach is not ourselves, but Jesus Christ as Lord, with ourselves as your servants for Jesus’ sake.”
This implies that we interiorize the compassion of Christ:
“When he saw the crowds, he had compassion for them, because they were harassed and helpless, like sheep without a shepherd.” (Mt 9: 36).
This recognizes that the priest and all who are true Christians
“Put on then, as God’s chosen ones, holy and beloved, compassion, kindness, lowliness, meekness, and patience, forbearing one another…”. (Col3: 12-13).
For as St. Paul explains
“if one member suffers, all suffer together; if one member is honored, all rejoice together. Now you are the body of Christ and individually members of it. (1Cor 12: 26-27)
But with discernment must come discrimination
“Behold, I send you out as sheep in the midst of wolves; so be wise as serpents and innocent as doves. (Mt 10: 16). St. Peter of Damaskos (Philokalia III):
This then is the general picture [preferring one’s own thoughts and wishes to those of God]. But situations and pursuits vary, and one needs to acquire discrimination, either through the humility given by God or through questioning those who possess the gifts of discrimination. For without discrimination nothing that comes to pass is good, even if we in our ignorance think that it is. But when through discrimination we learn how it lies in our power to attain what we wish, then what we do begins to conform to God’s will.
Especially for a priest, being a servant to others for Jesus sake make up part of their ‘path to perfection.’ St. John of the Ladder (1982) points out
“Among beginners, discernment is real self knowledge … it is the spiritual capacity to distinguish unfailingly between what is truly good and what in nature is opposed to the good.”
Opposition to being a good servant – the priest’s Achilles heal: not really ministering without ‘constant caring’
Empathy is defined in the psychological literature as thinking and feeling what the other is thinking and feeling. (Morelli, 2007b). It is my observation that many priests feel they are not fulfilling their presbyteral calling unless they ‘feel’ themselves the psycho-spiritual suffering of their parishioners at all times. This self-imposed definition of the service of priesthood would appear to be another significant contributor to compassion fatigue or burnout.
A reading of the Gospel accounts of Jesus’ public life indicates that after encountering someone suffering he would heal the person and then move on. There is no mention of Him perseveratingvii over the ill person. For example, in the account of healing of the man born blind as recounted by St. John (9: 1-41), there is the observation of Jesus healing, but in the context of the assurance and of the power of God that He possessed. He announces simply as a matter of fact:
“We must work the work of Him who sends me…I am the light of the world…” (4,5).
After the healing and the Pharisees’ disparagement of Jesus, He appears focused on the reality of his mission and not caught up in an emotional entanglement. Jesus asks:
“Do you believe in the Son of man?” He answered, “And who is he, sir, that I may believe in him?” Jesus said to him, “You have seen him, and it is he who speaks to you.” He said, “Lord, I believe”; and he worshiped him. Jesus said, “For judgment I came into this world, that those who do not see may see, and that those who see may become blind.” (35-39).
Thus the priest must minister in truth but also in wisdom.
I do not pray that thou shouldst take them out of the world, but that thou shouldst keep them from the evil one. They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world. Sanctify them in the truth; thy word is truth. As thou didst send me into the world, so I have sent them into the world (Jn 17: 15-18)
REFERENCES
Alfeyev, Archbishop Hilarion. (2002). The Mystery of Faith: An Introduction to the Teaching and Spirituality of the Orthodox Church. London: Darton, Longman and Todd.
Bloomfield, H.H., & Kory, R.B. (1976). Happiness: The TM program, Psychiatry, and Enlightenment. NY: Simon & Schuster.
Boscarino, J. A., Figley, C. R. and Adams, R. E. (2004). Evidence of Compassion Fatigue following the September 11 Terrorist Attacks: A Study of Secondary Trauma among Social Workers in New York. International Journal of Emergency Mental Health, 6:2, 98-108.
Brock, S. (1997). The Wisdom of St. Isaac the Syrian. Fairacres Oxford, England: SLG Press.
Carretto, C. (1985). Forward. The Jerusalem Community Rule of Life. Mawah, NJ: Paulist Press.
Davidson, R.J., Kabat-Zinn, J., Schumacher, J., Rosenkranz, M., Muller, D., Santorelli, S.F., Urbanowski, F., Harrington, A., Bonus, K., & Sheridan, J.F. (2003). Alterations in brain and immune function produced by mindfulness meditation. Psychosomatic Medicine, 65, 564-570.
Figley, C.R. (1995). Compassion fatigue as secondary traumatic stress disorder: an overview. In: Compassion Fatigue: Coping with Secondary Traumatic Stress Disorder in Those Who Treat the Traumatized, Figley, CR, (ed.). NY: Brunner/Mazel.
Kadloubovsky, E. & Palmer, E. M. (1966). The Art of Prayer: An Orthodox Anthology. London: Faber and Faber.
Miller, G.A. (1956). “The Magical Number Seven, Plus or Minus Two: Some Limits on our Capacity to Process Information,” Psychological Review, 63. 81-97.
Morelli, G (2006a, May 08). Orthodoxy and The Science Of Psychology. http://www.orthodoxytoday.org/OT/view/morelli-orthodoxy-and-the-science-of-psychology.
Morelli, G. (2006b, July 02). Assertiveness and Christian Charity. http://www.orthodoxytoday.org/OT/view/morelli-assertiveness-and-christian-charity.
Morelli, G. (2006c, December 05). Understanding Clergy Stress: A Psychospiritual Response. http://www.orthodoxytoday.org/OT/view/morelli-understanding-clergy-stress.
Morelli, G. (2007a, March 15). Good Marriage: How An Attitude of Entitlement Undermines Marriage. http://www.orthodoxytoday.org/OT/view/good-marriage-I-how-an-attitude-of-entitlement-undermines-marriage.
Morelli, G. (2007b, December 02). Forgiveness is Healing. http://www.orthodoxytoday.org/OT/view/morelli-forgiveness-is-healing.
Morelli, G. (2009a, January 13). Suicide: Christ, His Church and Modern Medicine. http://www.orthodoxytoday.org/articles-2009/Morelli-Suicide-Christ-His-Church-And-Modern-Medicine.php.
Morelli, G. (2009b, February 08). Good Marriage XV. Ensnared By Mindless Helping. http://www.orthodoxytoday.org/OT/view/good-marriage-xv-ensnared-by-mindless-helping.
Pearlman, L.A. & Saakvitne, K.W. (1995). Trauma and the Therapist: Countertransference and Vicarious Traumatization in Psychotherapy with Incest Survivors. NY: W.W. Norton.
Palmer, G.E.H., Sherrard, P. & Ware, K. (1981). The Philokalia, Volume 2: The Complete Text; Compiled by St. Nikodimos of the Holy Mountain & St. Markarios of Corinth. London: Faber and Faber.
St. John of the Ladder. (1982), John Climacus: The Ladder of Divine Ascent. NY: Paulist Press.
Travis, F. (2001). Autonomic and EEG patterns distinguish transcending from other experiences during Transcendental Meditation practice. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 42, 1-9
Vlachos, Bishop Hierotheos, (1994). Orthodox Psychotherapy: The Science of the Fathers. Lavadia, Greece: Birth of the Theotokos Monastery.
Vlachos, Bishop Hierotheos, (1998). The Mind of the Orthodox Church. Lavadia, Greece: Birth of the Theotokos Monastery.
NOTES
i. (http://www.goarch.org/en/ourfaith/articles/article8076.asp)
ii. An example of the original research is to give subjects in the experiment a list of random numbers or letters: increasing in span and asking them to repeat them back either forward or backward (e.g. 86, 249, 3409, 52647, 951438, 61824913, etc.). In another example, most individuals would find the following task quite difficult—hearing them repeating back a series of twelve letters grouped as follows: FB – INB – CC –IAIB – M. However, most people would readily recall FBI,NBC,CIA,IBM. The terms working consciousness and short term store are functionally synonymous. Another common example is remembering a telephone number with an unfamiliar area code that you cannot write down and must keep in working consciousness (short term store) to be able to call it immediately after it has been given to you.
iii. The Church also includes the invisible Church. As Bishop Hierotheos (1998) tells us: “Members of the Church exist in all the ages … [they are commemorated] on the paten during the Liturgy there are many people. They are the Panagia, the Angels, the Prophets, the Holy Fathers, the great martyrs, and, in general, the witnesses of the faith, the saints and ascetics, the living and the dead who have a share in the purifying, illuminating and deifying uncreated energy of God.”
iv. As is said in the Prothesis Prayer of the Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom.
v. My thanks to one of my editors Sh. Laura Sanders who commented on this section as “an old adage has it, ‘I am not required to hurry because you procrastinated.’”
vi. (http://www.intuition.org/txt/ellis.htm).
vii. Clinically, perseverating usually is accompanied by the dysfunctional emotions of anxiety or anger. It may also be related to certain personality and psychotic disorders. Spiritually may also be related to pride and vainglory.
V. Rev. George Morelli Ph.D. is a licensed Clinical Psychologist and Marriage and Family Therapist, Coordinator of the Chaplaincy and Pastoral Counseling Ministry of the Antiochian Orthodox Christian Archdiocese, (http://www.antiochian.org/counseling-ministries) and Religion Coordinator (and Antiochian Archdiocesan Liaison) of the Orthodox Christian Association of Medicine, Psychology and Religion. Fr. George is Assistant Pastor of St. George’s Antiochian Orthodox Church, San Diego, California.
Read more: Clergy Burnout and Fatigue | Preachers Institute
source: http://preachersinstitute.com/2010/04/clergy-burnout-and-fatigue-fr-george-morelli/
Monday, April 26, 2010
HIT THE STREETS FOR THE HOMELESS
HIT THE STREETS FOR THE HOMELESS
Saturday, May 1, 2010, 10:00 AM
Meeting location-
My Dance Studio, Inc.
3184 Summers, Keego Harbor, MI 48320
There are an estimated 86 thousand people living in Michigan that are homeless! Mothers, Fathers, Children………….who need our help! How can you DO something?
The DO Foundation is partnering with My Dance Studio, Inc. (MDS) will be hitting the streets of Detroit on Saturday, May 1st. There are MANY ways you can help! Take this opportunity to help our brothers and sisters who are literally in our own back yards. Please, join us! Together, we CAN DO SOMETHING!
DO Bags
We are accepting donations for DO Bags that will be constructed and passed out during our mission on May 1st. These are items most requested for survival from the homeless themselves.
Please bring items with you Saturday morning (10am) or if you can’t join us, you can still help by making a monetary donation online at: www.dofoundation.net/donate.htm
mail donations to: P.O. Box 251151, West Bloomfield, MI 48325
or drop off items to (MDS) at the above address.
• Beef/cheese sticks (no refrigeration needed)
• Bottled water
• Fruit cups/plastic ware (applesauce, mixed fruit, etc)
• Canned meat or tuna
• Single rolls of toilet paper
• Feminine products (Maxi pads, tampons)
• Shampoo/conditioner/comb – Bar or liquid soap
• Deodorant/Shaving supplies - Toothbrush/toothpaste
• Socks
Let's stand together and DO SOMETHING!
www.dofoundation.net
Saturday, May 1, 2010, 10:00 AM
Meeting location-
My Dance Studio, Inc.
3184 Summers, Keego Harbor, MI 48320
There are an estimated 86 thousand people living in Michigan that are homeless! Mothers, Fathers, Children………….who need our help! How can you DO something?
The DO Foundation is partnering with My Dance Studio, Inc. (MDS) will be hitting the streets of Detroit on Saturday, May 1st. There are MANY ways you can help! Take this opportunity to help our brothers and sisters who are literally in our own back yards. Please, join us! Together, we CAN DO SOMETHING!
DO Bags
We are accepting donations for DO Bags that will be constructed and passed out during our mission on May 1st. These are items most requested for survival from the homeless themselves.
Please bring items with you Saturday morning (10am) or if you can’t join us, you can still help by making a monetary donation online at: www.dofoundation.net/donate.htm
mail donations to: P.O. Box 251151, West Bloomfield, MI 48325
or drop off items to (MDS) at the above address.
• Beef/cheese sticks (no refrigeration needed)
• Bottled water
• Fruit cups/plastic ware (applesauce, mixed fruit, etc)
• Canned meat or tuna
• Single rolls of toilet paper
• Feminine products (Maxi pads, tampons)
• Shampoo/conditioner/comb – Bar or liquid soap
• Deodorant/Shaving supplies - Toothbrush/toothpaste
• Socks
Let's stand together and DO SOMETHING!
www.dofoundation.net
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
