WORSHIP/SERVICE: EITHER-OR/BOTH-AND

The miracle of the Incarnation is the basis for our worship and service. We believe that Christ, the eternal Son of God, became incarnate by the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary, and became man. He was and is not God who just appeared to be man, nor merely a man who became quite holy and god-like, nor half-god and half-man. Jesus Christ was and is fully God and fully man - two complete and unconfused Natures in one Person. What does this mean for our worship and service?

For well over a century we in the West have been wrestling with the liberal/conservative dilemma of focusing either on worship and dogmatic truth, or on social justice and concern for the poor. This has created in us a mindset that is actually a false dichotomy. It has led us to the false conclusion and belief that we must choose one or the other: we must either "preach the Gospel" and focus on personal salvation, or we should care for "the poor, the lame, the maimed and the blind."

Why does the current dominant secular mindset say we shouldn't "shove religion down other people's throats" when we offer care for downtrodden and hurting members of society? I believe it is because the secularists strive to maintain this dualistic worldview of the spiritual being utterly separate from and opposed to the material world, to society in general. Secularism is the effort to separate and isolate a religious (in the West largely Christian) worldview from the state and society.

Remember how Jesus Christ taught His disciples to pray:

Our Father in heaven:
May Your name be kept holy,
May Your kingdom come,
May Your will be done
On earth as it is in heaven.

Notice the three petitions to our heavenly Father: keep God the Father's name holy - sacred, honored and set apart, yet at same time not separating God's kingdom, not limiting the doing of His will from this earthly life. We are taught here not to limit God the Father's holy name, His kingdom and His will to the sweet bye-and-bye, pie-in-the-sky, heaven-when-we-die; but rather to honor His name, bring about His kingdom and do His will on earth just as it is in heaven.

This is the full meaning of the Incarnation: God so loves the world, He is vitally concerned with and involved in the struggles, the joy and the pain of our human existence, and He wants them to conform to His will and His kingdom in heaven AND to have everlasting life with Him in eternity. It's not an either-or proposition of choosing either an ordinary worldly life or a spiritual life separated from the world: it's both-and!

The goal of socialism and secular humanism is the separation of the mention of God's name, His kingdom and His will from society and the state, in other words, to shove "all that religious stuff" off into a corner, kept locked up in churches and not mentioned or practiced in the public square. Their goal is for mankind to rely on the power and authority of the all-wise, benevolent state to take care of all our needs and wants from the cradle to the grave.

Their means to that end are to keep Christians divided by playing one confession against another, and keep them confused with expressions such as "separation of church and state" and "don't shove your religion down other people's throats!" But in reality it is shoving secularism down the throats of Christians by controlling the political process and passing laws and court rulings that oppose traditional Christian morality.

Christians often feel like we can't compete against free stuff, our small sacrificial offerings and volunteer service can't match what the government doles out to the poor, maimed, lame and blind. But in Psalm 156:3 we read - "Do not trust in princes, In mortal man, in whom there is no salvation." The political princes make promises designed to win votes, but we're finding out they can't deliver.

The nanny state that promises cradle-to-grave health care and a secure retirement until we fade away into the sunset simply cannot deliver on its promises: the money just isn't there, instead they're piling up enormous mountains of national debt that must eventually come due. The real deal, real salvation, is from the Lord, He Who made heaven and earth.

The Greek word for "salvation: is sodzo, but also the very same word means "healing." Jesus Christ came to bring salvation and healing, He preached the Gospel and healed the sick and the blind, He fed the hungry. There's no separation of the "spiritual" realm from the "material" world in genuine Christianity.

Under the guise of "freedom" and "democracy" we have been fed the lie of separation of church from the state, which nowhere appears in the U.S. Constitution. It did appear, however, in the Constitution of the U.S.S.R., which was swept into the dustbin of history twenty-five years ago. Now Russia is realizing the vital importance of spiritual values in the functioning of the state, but where are we in the West headed?

(Linked to www.Hosken-News.info of 21 Nov. 2015.)

Which Is the Real Jesus?

For many people - especially in the western world - the question "Which Is the Real Jesus?" is a sort of grab-bag game, or a cafeteria-style choosing of what suits your taste. The result is often a smorgasbord serving of logically contradictory, half-baked notions. This semester I'm auditing a course on Christology, and I thought it might be helpful to share some of it with you.

Christology sets us apart from other monotheistic religions including neo-atheism. It is the lynchpin of our theology, implicit in the Old Testament and explicit in the New Testament. It includes the two natures, two energies and two wills in one Person of Christ. Orthodox Christian theology possesses an intimate link between Christology and theosis – the deification of mankind. There is not a 3-stage process of justification, salvation, and sanctification. With Orthodox Christianity there is only one process: deification/theosis. Our anthropology flows from the Incarnation and to our deification.

St. Athanasius in The Incarnation of the Word (preface by C. S. Lewis) wrote that the image of God in man was defaced by the Fall, as a face in a painting is defaced by dirt, fading and with painting over it. It is renewed by the One from Whom the image was painted to come and renew the image. The image could not be renewed without death and sinful corruption being eliminated. For this reason it was required that the Logos take on a human body, to renew the image. God can't just wave His magic wand or snap His fingers to transform mankind: if God is love, He can't arbitrarily force change on human nature. We don't believe in magic: God only acts according to His nature.

The Son of Man did not immediately come and die on the Cross: He first lived, took on human nature, healed people and taught them to forsake their idolatry, rebellion and self-will. Only then could He heal the deformed image of God in mankind by the Atonement. Death had established a permanent limit to the dominion of sin, to keep men from turning into a demon. Sin is a leprosy that eats up a human body. Christ healed lepers as a sign that He would put an end to death and the dominion of sin.

Thus the Incarnation is the center-point, the pivot of history, it is why we have B.C. and A.D. The Incarnation of Christ surpasses the creation of man – St. Gregory. He said self-emptying and pouring out define the Incarnation (Phil. 2). He wasn't an apparition, but a real skin-and-bones human. It is analogous to the perechoresis, the mutual pouring-out of the Trinity. Without the Incarnation there is no Salvation. Even after the Incarnation, He remained what He was (divine) even after taking on Himself that which He was not (human), preserving His divinity whole: consubstantial with the Father from all eternity, He became consubstantial with us in our humanity.

No change occurred with God in the Incarnation: God is unchanging (apathia) because He is infinite, so by becoming man humanity changes, it becomes deified. Everything in our essence and destiny changed at the moment of the Incarnation. Christ's divinity has no “because” since He is everlastingly begotten of the Father, just as the Holy Spirit everlastingly proceeds from the Father. Everlasting is higher than eternal: eternity is just an indefinite extension of time.

God's saving plan, our Salvation, is part of God's economia, His leniency: St. Gregory contrasts the divine nature with God's economia. He came down to us so that we humans could ascend up to Him. This is part of our pastoral responsibility to explain the apparent paradoxes of Christ's two natures: Son (of God and of man), Word, Power, Truth, Wisdom, Image, Light, Right, Atonement and Resurrection all apply to both natures. Some names only apply to His human nature: man, Son of man, Christ, the Way, the Path of righeousness, the Door, the Shepherd, Archpriest, and Melchizidek. All these names make up the ladder we must ascend to achieve deification.

St. Isaac the Syrian lived three centuries after St. Gregory the Theologian. He wrote on the nature and names of Christ, the divine economia (plan) of Salvation, which is beyond the reach of human logic. Christ became incarnate not only to redeem mankind from sin, but to bring mankind to theosis/deification - to be "partakers of the divine nature" (2 Pet. 1:4), to make God's love perfectly manifest to man, to “make us captives of His love.” He “humbled himself with such humility” to become man and demonstrate God's love. Creation could not gaze upon God unless He assumed human nature, accepting a part of it (creation). St. Isaac taught that God coming to earth is of universal significance, directly related to the destiny of the cosmos.

St. Gregory Palamas wrote that the nature of the first-formed Adam did not need healing because it was not damaged. Christ had to assume Adam's fallen nature because that was what needed healing. Augustine on this point wrote that we assume Adam's guilt. But Christ assumed Adam's damaged nature that leads to death, not Adam's sinful nature. Christ sweated blood because of the fear of death. He wept. He grieved for the dead daughter of Jairus.

His birth, not from a usual mingling of a man and woman, but from the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary who remained always virgin, is precisely, singularly the reason why Christ continued to have a divine nature as well as a human nature. Mary remained the Bride of God, never having children by Joseph. Only if God would have died, could Mary have children by Joseph.

It is only because Christ assumed fallen human nature that He could redeem that nature. His human nature was affected by His divine nature: communicatio idiomatum – communication or intermingling of natures, even as a zygote. He did not, however, inherit Adam's fallen predisposition to sin. He was tempted, but was able to overcome temptation by His divine nature. When we partake of this divine nature, we too can overcome temptation.

There you have it: Jesus Christ is fully God and fully man, not half-god and half-man, nor God who only appeared to be man, nor merely a godly man. In Him both the divine and human natures are united without confusion in one Hypostasis, one Person. I hope you've enjoyed this brief introduction to Christology!

(Linked to www.Hosken-News.info of 07 Nov. 2015.)

INTERNATIONAL DAY OF PRAYER

INTERNATIONAL DAY OF PRAYER

Friday, October 30th, is the International Day of Prayer (IDOP). Click on this link for a live webcast starting at 8:00 p.m. ET, and to sign up to receive a free IDOP kit. For many years (actually decades now!) we've been urging Christians to pray for persecuted Christians in lands controlled by communism, now called the former soviet bloc countries.

Although the USSR collapsed on December 25th, Christmas Day, twenty-four years ago (I was in Moscow at the time, watching President Gorbachiov on TV as he signed the decree that dissolved the Soviet Union), these countries continue to struggle to cope with their communist past. In some of these lands we still witness acts of religious repression: public ridicule, discrimination, arrests, imprisonments, damage and destruction of church buildings, and laws that limit or prohibit the free exercise of one's religious faith.

Freedom of religion is a fundamental human right. It is so basic, that without religious freedom many other human rights begin to wither and die. The right to life for the unborn and the elderly, freedom of speech, the right to vote, women's rights are based on the right to live out our Christian faith. But today we are witnessing strong efforts by the "progressive" (leftist) media elite and politicians to denigrate and ridicule the public expression of the Christian faith. Some have even stated outright that traditional Christian beliefs must change, and that religion is a private matter that shouldn't be expressed in public. Thus much of the same types of discrimination against and public ridicule of religious faith that existed in the former soviet bloc countries is coming to the West.

How should we define the freedom of religious expression in a multi-cultural society? Does religious toleration mean that all religions are equally true, or only that the state should treat them equally? What about religions that aren't tolerant of other religions - should we also tolerate them? In my essay "Our Homecoming" I've dealt with these issues:

In the Eastern Church more attention is paid to two things: unity and doctrinal purity. In Eph. 4:3-6 we read - "being eager to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. There is one body, and one Spirit, even as you also were called in one hope of your calling; one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is over all, and through all, and in us all."

Many other Bible texts stress the oneness of the Body of Christ. The Eastern Church believes that "one body" means one visible, united Church. In contrast, Paul writes in Gal. 5:20 that "strife... divisions, heresies" are works of the flesh, right along with adultery, murder, drunkenness and gluttony, and he writes, "those who practice such things will not inherit the Kingdom of God" (v. 21). So strife and division are just as serious "mortal" sins as is heresy. When Western toleration is taken to the extreme that all viewpoints are equally acceptable and true, we've crossed the line into approving of theological and moral relativism, strife, divisions and heresies.

In the West, if we disagree with others in church, we often will simply start a new church, denomination or an un-denomination. But because strife and divisions are just as serious sins as heresies, the Eastern Church looks upon "sectarians" who split away from the Church as just as sinful, even though they may have fairly orthodox doctrines, as "heretics" whose doctrines may deny the Trinity (Molokans, United Pentecostal Church, Children of God, Witness Lee movement, etc.) or deny the unique God-manhood of Christ (Arianism, Nestorianism, Jehovah's Witnesses, Mormons).

And because the tsar or emperor was blessed by the patriarch or pope as the protector of the Church, the clergy could call upon state power to put down both "sectarians" and "heretics." The enforcement of Church teachings with state power gradually diminished in the West after the Protestant Reformation led to Western Europe's population being decimated by decades of religious wars, which finally caused the Austro-Hungarian Emperor to issue an Edict of Toleration. So it may not be such a tragedy that there has never been a Reformation in Russia: it may have been spared decades of religious wars. All of this at least partially explains why there is a lack of western-style religious toleration in the former USSR.

Christians, Jews and Muslims all believe God is one, not many. But which one is the true God? That is our free choice. Religious freedom, however, includes the chance of being wrong. Historically, those who have claimed to know all truth absolutely have tended to force others to accept their beliefs. But ecclesiastical and doctrinal authority should not extend to all of society, only within that religious organization. There should be religious toleration in today's multi-cultural society, because having one state-enforced religious confession brings only superficial unity at the price of insincere belief.

True belief can't be forced, or else it leads to unbelief. President Eisenhower, when Americans were deciding to put "under God" in the pledge of allegiance, stated the matter with secular clarity: "Our government makes no sense unless it is founded in a deeply felt religious faith - and it doesn't matter which one." No, it matters very much which one is true, but it is not within the domain of the state to tell its citizens which faith is the true one.

So religious toleration in society needs to be carefully framed something like this: "The state upholds freedom of religious belief, confession and practice, and cannot enforce only one or a few religious confessions. This does not mean, however, that the state upholds the idea that all beliefs are equally true, that no belief is ultimately true, or that only unbelief is true. Each person's right to believe does not make wrong beliefs right, rather, the freedom to choose inherently includes the possibility of making wrong choices. But we acknowledge that religion has historically played a leading role in forming society's laws and morals. Laws assume moral standards, so it is impossible to keep religion and morality private, because religious beliefs or the lack of them affect all of human behavior, both public and private. Therefore the state encourages all citizens, including those with religious beliefs, to participate in the formulation of morals and laws."

What do you think about this? Please post your opinion below.

(Linked to www.Hosken-News.info of 24 Oct. 2015.)

DON'T COUNT ON IT!

The Old Testament Jews trusted in their Temple as a talisman that would always protect them from harm - even if they strayed from God's commandments. The Lord would always keep guard over His Temple.
But the prophet Jeremiah warned them: "Don't count on the Temple! If you don't change your ways and start giving justice to the foreigners, orphans and widows in your midst, if you keep on shedding innocent blood by sacrificing babies to Baal, stealing, committing murder and adultery, and think that the Temple will protect you, DON'T COUNT ON IT!"

In today's context we could say - DON'T COUNT ON YOUR CHURCHGOING! Don't count on your baptism or taking communion once or twice a year, don't count on your Bible reading or studying the Church Fathers, your knowledge of doctrines inside and out and backwards and forwards. "What does the LORD require of you? To act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God" (Micah 6:8).

And yet, I find myself patting my back, thinking - "What a good guy I am! I go to church every Sunday, I read the Bible and say my prayers often during the day, I even memorize lots of Bible texts! And I do my little thing of volunteer work for the poor once a week or so!"

But what about those thousands of fighters killing each other and civilians being killed in Ukraine, Syria, Iraq and elsewhere? What are we actually doing to stop this carnage and destruction? Or do we just passively swallow the propaganda our respective governments and media pump out to justify this murder and mayhem?

What about the discrimination and outright persecution of Christians in the former USSR, China, Vietnam, North Korea, India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Sudan, Libya, Egypt and the Middle East? What can we DO about all these atrocities?

Yes, the problems of the world are overwhelming, and it's easy to simply sigh and say - "It's just too much! I can't do everything!" But we can do something: it doesn't give us an excuse to do nothing.

We can start with the persons next door, or across the street who are poor, or disabled, or elderly and can't take care of themselves. We can mow their lawn, or shovel their snow, or fix their broken-down front porch. We can help the unemployed improve their skills and find jobs. These are all practical, down-to-earth ways we can care for "the poor, the lame, the maimed and the blind."

But when the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then he will sit on the throne of his glory. Before him all the nations will be gathered, and he will separate them one from another, as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. He will set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left.

Then the King will tell those on his right hand, "Come, blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world; for I was hungry, and you gave me food to eat; I was thirsty, and you gave me drink; I was a stranger, and you took me in; naked, and you clothed me; I was sick, and you visited me; I was in prison, and you came to me."

Then the righteous will answer him, saying, "Lord, when did we see you hungry, and feed you; or thirsty, and give you a drink? When did we see you as a stranger, and take you in; or naked, and clothe you? When did we see you sick, or in prison, and come to you?"

The King will answer them, "Most assuredly I tell you, inasmuch as you did it to one of the least of these my brothers you did it to me."

Then he will say also to those on the left hand, "Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire which is prepared for the devil and his angels; for I was hungry, and you didn't give me food to eat; I was thirsty, and you gave me no drink; I was a stranger, and you didn't take me in; naked, and you didn't clothe me; sick, and in prison, and you didn't visit me."

Then they will also answer, saying, "Lord, when did we see you hungry, or thirsty, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and didn't help you?"
And he will answer them, saying, "Most assuredly I tell you, inasmuch as you didn't do it to one of the least of these, you didn't do it to me."

These will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.
(Mat. 25:31-46)

WHICH SIDE ARE YOU ON: THE RIGHT, OR THE LEFT?

(Linked to www.Hosken-News.info of 10 Oct. 2015.)

Are Freedom and Tolerance Bankrupt?

This sign appeared in an article "The Double Standards of France Over Freedom of Expression" shortly after the massacre at the Charlie Hebdo magazine's Paris office in January this year. The article referred to a recent visit by Pope Francis to the Philippines - "'There are limits to the freedom of expression.' He said that freedom of speech and expression are fundamental human rights. However he added that he believes there should be limits to offending and ridiculing the faiths and beliefs of others. By way of example, he referred to Alberto Gasparri, who organizes his trips and was standing by his side on board the papal plane. 'If my good friend Dr. Gasparri says a curse word against my mother, he can expect a punch,' Francis said while pretending to throw a punch in his direction."

It seems that the "progressive" liberal-leftists in the West, especially in politics, the media and academia, have failed to grasp and heed this warning. Freedom of expression and toleration of others' views neither means that we must agree with and accept as true other's beliefs or practices, nor does it mean that we must withdraw into our corners and ignore or shun others, nor attack or hurl insults and scorn on them. The first postition is relativism, the second is passive retreat, and the third is aggression.

Western media and politicians frequently take this relative-passive-aggressive approach: Christianity and Islam are two equally valid religions (relativism), but Christianity is regressive and out-of-touch with modern society (passive withdrawal), so we ought to demean and insult Christianity (aggression), while downplaying the almost daily atrocities committed in the name of Islam because the "Christian West" provoked them to anger.

A few websites have noted this not-too-subtle shift in emphasis coming from Pope Francis: we ought to try to understand Islam as a peace-loving, tolerant religion and have dialog with the Muslims. This is quite different from the previous pope's statements that caused quite a furor among Muslims and may have led to his early retirement. The article Cardinal Danneels admits: “Mafia” club brought down Benedict XVI to make Church “much more modern” mentions a dialog between "the erudite Byzantine emperor Manuel II Palaeologus and an educated Persian on the subject of Christianity and Islam, and the truth of both. It was presumably the emperor himself who set down this dialogue, during the siege of Constantinople between 1394 and 1402" as follows -

"In the seventh conversation... the emperor touches on the theme of the holy war. The emperor must have known that sura 2, 256 reads: 'There is no compulsion in religion.' According to the experts, this is one of the suras of the early period, when Mohammed was still powerless and under threat. But naturally the emperor also knew the instructions, developed later and recorded in the Qur’an, concerning holy war. Without descending to details, such as the difference in treatment accorded to those who have the 'Book' and the infidels,' he addresses his interlocutor with a startling brusqueness, a brusqueness that we find unacceptable, on the central question about the relationship between religion and violence in general, saying: 'Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached.'”

The reference to "the early period" indicates the time when Mohammed had not yet gained a large following of warriors. Later he taught that when weak his followers should act peacefully, but when they grow to a viable force they should abandon peace and use the sword to force their religion on others. The article continues -

"The emperor, after having expressed himself so forcefully, goes on to explain in detail the reasons why spreading the faith through violence is something unreasonable. Violence is incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the soul. 'God,' he says, 'is not pleased by blood — and not acting reasonably is contrary to God’s nature. Faith is born of the soul, not the body. Whoever would lead someone to faith needs the ability to speak well and to reason properly, without violence and threats… To convince a reasonable soul, one does not need a strong arm, or weapons of any kind, or any other means of threatening a person with death...'”

This statement by the Orthodox Christian Emperor of Constantinople needs to be heeded today by all those Orthodox who would advocate using violence to spread the area under control of their particular jurisdictions: Shedding blood is not acting reasonably and is contrary to God's nature. Here is more of the article -

"The decisive statement in this argument against violent conversion is this: not to act in accordance with reason is contrary to God’s nature. The editor observes: 'For the emperor, as a Byzantine shaped by Greek philosophy, this statement is self-evident. But for Muslim teaching, God is absolutely transcendent. His will is not bound up with any of our categories, even that of rationality.' Here Khoury quotes a work of the noted French Islamist R. Arnaldez, who points out that Ibn Hazn went so far as to state that God [Allah] is not bound even by his own word, and that nothing would oblige him to reveal the truth to us. Were it God’s will, we would even have to practice idolatry."

It is entirely acceptable in Muslim teachings to lie and deceive, to say that they are peace-loving and only want to live in harmony with us in our cities. But in actuality we see "no go" zones created where settlements of Muslims insist on living by Sharia law, beating and raping not only their many wives but also any Western woman who dares to intrude into their territory. "Living in harmony with us" means accepting our values, not imposing theirs on our society and culture. This is not just a recent Western view of Islam: see St. John of Damascus’s Critique of Islam in the seventh century.

Freedom and toleration are ideas that must be defined and limited. They are not absolute ideals: they are not infinite and unlimited. Freedom or liberty is not license to do whatever you want wherever you happen to be located. Rather, freedom is the ability to strive toward holiness - what is loving, good and true. Toleration is not smilingly accepting the insulting, vile, vulgar and obscene speech and behavior of those who think they're merely exercising their freedom. Rather, it is mutual respect for values and norms that build up society, and not those that undermine or destroy it. Only when all people promise to and actually do abide by these principles that are deeply rooted in Christ's teachings and example of self-emptying can we insure peaceful coexistence.

(Linked to www.Hosken-News.info of 27 Sep. 2015.)

Those Pesky Commas!

"Picky, picky, picky! What difference does it make, anyway? Are you from the Grammar Police?" - some people say, when you point out a misuse of the comma. But as the picture shows, leaving out a comma where it should be, or inserting a comma where it shouldn't be, can completely change the meaning of a sentence. A prime example of inserting commas where they shouldn't be is found in Eph. 4:11-12 -

“He gave some to be apostles, and some prophets, and some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers, to equip the saints, to do the work of ministering, to the building up of the Body of Christ."

What does this Scripture text say to you? It seems to list eight spiritual offices or tasks:

1. apostles, 2. prophets, 3. evangelists, 4. pastors, 5. teachers, 6. equip the saints, 7. do the work of ministering, 8. build up the Body of Christ.

This is the way the King James Version had the punctuation, which gives you the impression that apostles (bishops), prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers should equip the saints, do the work of ministering, and build up the Body of Christ. But is it what the Apostle Paul really meant when he composed these words?

Most newer translations omit those last two commas, as we show here. It completely changes the meaning, so we understand that the apostles (bishops), prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers are to equip the saints to do the work of ministering to build up the Body of Christ. The Church leadership offices aren't supposed to do all the work; instead, they are supposed to equip or train the saints (that's the rest of us in the congregation) to do diakonia-ministry!

What is diakonia-ministry? The Greek word diakonia simply means service, serving others, helping out. "Minister" sounds like an important title, such as "Prime Minister" or "Minister of Defense" or "Reverend." Today when we hear the word "Minister" we probably think of someone in a suit and tie, or a black robe and a clerical collar, someone who doesn't want to get his hands dirty. But in Greek a diakon (deacon) is just a servant, a slave, someone to do the dirty work.

These days we want to hire someone and pay barely over minimum wage to prepare and serve food, mow the lawn, shovel snow, take care of sick and disabled people, etc. But Eph. 4:11-12 tells us that all the saints (that's us!) are supposed to be serving food to the poor, caring for the sick, doing whatever it takes to maintain and build up the Body of Christ.

We know this is what the Apostle Paul meant, because just a few verses later he urged that "we may grow up in all things into Him Who is the head, Christ; from Whom all the Body, being fitted and knit together through that which every joint supplies, according to the working in measure of each individual part, makes the Body increase to the building up of itself in love." (verses 15-16).

Each individual member of the Church, each and every one of us, are to build up the Church, the Body of Christ, through what every joint, ligament, sinew and muscle supplies. And how to we do this? We allow ourselves to be trained and equipped to do hands-on ministry. We don't think so highly of ourselves that "we're too busy, or too highly-paid, to do some job that's below our station in life."

Instead, we submit to the leadership of the bishop, the pastor, the teacher, etc. so that we learn how to do diakonia-ministry. This is how the Early Church grew by leaps and bounds: it mobilized every member to do his or her share toward building up the Body of Christ!

(Linked to www.Hosken-News.info of 12 Sep. 2015 and 26 Jan. 2019.)

The Paganization of America, Part 2

Elevating the concept of liberty to the status of an absolute turns liberty into a god or goddess. Did you know that the French artist who designed and constructed the Statue of Liberty modeled it after a pagan goddess?

In the last two weeks we've witnessed drastic swings in the stock markets of China, Japan, Europe and the United States. This was brought about by the devaluation of China's currency, which threatened to bring on "currency wars" - other nations also devaluing their currencies in order to compete better in international trade. The final result of such actions, however, is rapid inflation and the plundering of the poor and the elderly whose limited finances are stretched to the breaking point.

When stock markets no longer serve the purpose of financing honest buyers and sellers of goods and services, but rather become the domain of mega-banks and giant investment funds near-instantaneously squeezing tiny slices of profits via electronic day-trading, the markets become subject to vast, rapid fluctuations. The honest small business owner loses his shirt in such a violently rapacious environment. When central banks create trillions of dollars out of thin air to bail out investment funds and private banks that went under by lending to totally unqualified home buyers, the common taxpayer is stuck with the bill in the form of higher taxes and inflation. Is that liberty, or debt slavery?

We also witnessed this week the celebration of New Orleans' recovery after Hurricane Katrina struck that city ten years ago. Hundreds of people were killed and thousands were devastated and left homeless. The storm surge, as high as 15 to 30 feet above normal sea level, flooded 80% of New Orleans, had affected about 60 miles of Louisiana coast, much of the Mississippi coast, and came several miles inland. Large swathes of this area that are located under sea level were to be protected by seawalls against the flooding that comes with hurricanes.

Now the new higher, stronger seawalls, built at the expense of billions of tax dollars, are supposed to protect that sinful city against such a catastrophic event for the next 100 years. But the rise of temperatures causes melting of glaciers and polar ice and more violent weather, bringing sea levels ever higher and increasing the risk of other Katrina-size hurricanes much sooner than in 100 years, producing another failed bailout at taxpayer expense.

"The rest of mankind, who were not killed with these plagues, didn't repent of the works of their hands, that they wouldn't worship demons, and the idols of gold, and of silver, and of brass, and of stone, and of wood; which can neither see, nor hear, nor walk. They didn't repent of their murders, nor of their sorceries, nor of their sexual immorality, nor of their thefts." (Rev. 9:20-21)

What is the cause of all this?

Mankind is in rebellion against all authority, both divine and human. The goddess of "Liberty" promises total autonomy of each and every individual. Children are to be free, not obedient to their parents' authority. Adults must be free to do whatever they like, disobeying the law of God and man, and flouting traditional morality. St. Paul wrote -

"But know this, that in the last days, grievous times will come. For men will be lovers of self, lovers of money, boastful, arrogant, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, without natural affection, unforgiving, slanderers, without self-control, fierce, no lovers of good, traitors, headstrong, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God; holding a form of godliness, but having denied the power thereof." (2 Tim. 3:1-5)

Woven into the fabric of western society is this rejection of authority: university and even high school students consider themselves on a par with their professors and teachers, ordinary citizens see themselves just as competent as or even better than experienced government officials (perhaps due to revelations of moral lapses by the latter), and even church members often have little or no respect for pastors, priests, bishops and patriarchs. They reject the idea that a holy, godly and righteous person could be any more of a saint than they are.

The result is that morality is turned inside-out and upside-down with sexual perversion winning court cases against those who try to practice traditional Christian morality. They are so convinced of the rightness of their error that they are totally unable to repent and turn from their wickedness. St. John describes this sad condition of hardened hearts -

"The fourth angel poured out his bowl on the sun, and it was given to him to scorch men with fire. People were scorched with great heat, and people blasphemed the name of God who has the power over these plagues. They didn't repent and give him glory. The fifth poured out his bowl on the throne of the beast, and his kingdom was darkened. They gnawed their tongues because of the pain, and they blasphemed the God of heaven because of their pains and their sores. Yet they did not repent of their works." (Rev. 16:8-11)

It is a terrible thing to be incapable of recognizing one's own sins, and instead projecting the guilt on God and His saints, even persecuting and killing them. But in the end, as St. John writes - "I saw thrones, and they sat on them, and judgment was given to them. I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for the testimony of Jesus, and for the word of God, and such as didn't worship the beast nor his image, and didn't receive the mark on their forehead and on their hand. They lived, and reigned with Christ for the thousand years." (Rev. 20:4)

As Christians, we look forward to this glorious hope of resurrection when God the Father and Christ His Son will set things straight again. But until then we must hold firm, because only "he who stands firm to the end will be saved." (Mat. 24:13)

(Linked to www.Hosken-News.info of 29 Aug. 2015.)