← The Lord of Spirits
The Lord of Spirits
Pantheon and Pandemonium XVI: Asynchronous Q&A June 2025
The Podfathers open their audio mailbag and turn it upside down to see what shakes out: How many will be saved? What's the deal with saints associated with certain themes? Is dancing wrong? And lots more!
Loading summary
Transcript674 lines
- [00:00]
A
He will be a staff for the righteous with which for them to stand and not to fall. And he will be the light of the nations and the hope of those whose hearts are troubled. All who dwell on the earth will fall down and worship him. And they will praise and bless and celebrate with song the Lord of spirits.
- [00:22]
The modern world doesn't acknowledge, but is nevertheless haunted by spirits, angels, demons and saints. In our time, many yearn to break free of the prison of a flat secular materialism, to see and to know reality as it truly is. What is this spiritual reality like? How do we engage with it?
- [00:42]
B
Well, how do we permeate everyday life with spiritual presence?
- [00:47]
A
Orthodox Christian priests, Father Andrew Stephen Damick and Father Stephen DeYoung host this live call in show focused on enchantment in creation, the union of the seen and unseen as made by God and experienced by mankind throughout history. Welcome to the Lord of Spirits. Greetings. Good evening. Well, it's not evening for me. It's morning for me because this is prerecorded, but. Greetings, giant killers, dragon slayers, gougers of gangrenous golems. You are listening to the Lord of Spirits podcast and this is episode number 117. I can't believe it. 117.
- [01:24]
B
My co host, prime number no good.
- [01:26]
A
Yes, Father Stephen DeYoung, the quixotic questing beast of the quicksand, is with me, straight from the swamp in Lafayette, Louisiana. I'm Father Andrew Stephen Damick in Emmaus, Pennsylvania, and I am perched precariously atop the arcane tower of podcasting, hovering dozens, dozens of stories above a disused gateway to the underworld and also former furniture factory and showroom. Believe it or not, this is a pre recorded episode. So we're not live. We are, however, sort of taking calls. But they're calls that you have already made. That's right. It's a spe Pipe palooza. Couple things I want you to take note of. We've sold out of rooms at the Antiochian village for the Lord of Spirits conference, but there are still lots of commuter tickets available. So you can go to store.ancientfaith.com events, get your commuter ticket and then find yourself a room somewhere else in the area. There are hotels and Airbnbs and campgrounds, I'm sure.
- [02:16]
B
Pull your car off the road in.
- [02:18]
A
A field, I mean, I wouldn't recommend that, but I'm not gonna stop you either.
- [02:24]
B
Yeah, who can stop you?
- [02:27]
Stick around a few more days, you might have squatters rights.
- [02:30]
A
Yeah, it is western Pennsylvania, so anything can happen.
- [02:34]
B
I'm Part of PA for yourself.
- [02:35]
A
That's right. The other thing I wanna mention is, and this is to feed all of you, all one podcast people. But tickets are on sale for Doxamut, the Orthodox Christian Tolkien Conference. It's Labor Day weekend this year right here in Emmaus, Pennsylvania. So you can go to eventbrite.com and look up Doxamoot D O X A M O and get your tickets for that. Should be love.
- [02:56]
B
What about all the people who scheduled the socialist revolution for that weekend?
- [03:00]
A
Oh, I forgot about that.
- [03:03]
Is that happening still?
- [03:05]
B
Well, you know, Labor Day.
- [03:07]
A
There we go. Workers of the world revolt. Is that how it goes? I can't remember now.
- [03:12]
B
Unite.
- [03:13]
A
Yeah.
- [03:15]
B
You have nothing to lose but your chance.
- [03:16]
A
That's right.
- [03:18]
B
So get them to unite and come to Doxamoot.
- [03:22]
A
We're starting.
- [03:22]
B
Well, you gotta.
- [03:24]
A
Quoting Marx at the beginning of this episode.
- [03:26]
B
You gotta, you know, canceled for sure. Liberate the Shire.
- [03:31]
A
That's right. I mean, the Lib. The Shire is already kind of a. I don't know, anarcho. I don't know what exactly. What kind of economy they have. People do complain when people start buying up the real estate.
- [03:44]
B
I think they're pre enclosure.
- [03:46]
A
So, like, there's commons. That's true.
- [03:50]
B
Yeah.
- [03:51]
A
There are comments. Anyway, as I said, this is a Speak by Palooza episode, meaning we are doing. It's all Q and A, but it's asynchronous, meaning it's not live. But this is all voicemail that you've left. So you're going to hear from people, references to days and times and dates and seasons that are in the past. Because we've been saving these, saving them up. And we've got. I think I've got 21, 21 that we're going to try to cover in this episode. Are you ready, Father Stephen?
- [04:22]
B
Sure.
- [04:23]
A
Okay. All right. Well, let's begin with our first half. So this first question is from Deacon Joseph. Hello, dear Fathers. This is Father Deacon Joseph from Azel, Texas. As we are once again in great Lent, the conversation has arisen in my circle of friends who are Protestant about Christians attending or conducting their own Passover or Sin Seder meals. I know that you've said in the past in clear terms that in the times of the apostles, those who were Jewish were expected to keep practicing Jewish purity rituals up to and including Passover. Since most of these modern Christians who are practicing are considering practicing a Passover meal or a Seder that doesn't seem to be in alignment with ancient Christianity or numerous Canons. I know we are not to judge those who are outside of our tent, but however, here in America, this question is asked of me directly upon occasion as to why we don't do that. Most online resources will simply state that we don't have to do it, but there's no problem with us doing it as Christians. But most of those online resources, unsurprisingly, are not Orthodox. So I'd appreciate your question, your answer on that. I covet your prayers and I thank you for all your great work. Good strength for the fast.
- [05:41]
All right. I mean, my. Like, the thing I say to people when they ask this question or something like it is to say pascha is Passover. So it's redundant. At the very least, it's redundant to celebrate it more than once. Pascha is the Christian Passover. And of course, in most languages, that's just one word. You know, Christians celebrate Passover and that's the resurrection of Jesus. But I mean, is there more to it than that? Obviously, there's, you know, canons about don't go and participate in rituals of Judaism because we're not Jews. What do you think, Father?
- [06:19]
B
Yeah. Well, first, almost no Protestants in the United States know that the actual name for the feast of Christ Resurrection is Passover.
- [06:28]
A
Right.
- [06:29]
B
I mean, even very. I had to point out to. When I was doing my PhD work, I had to point out to one of the professors in the Biblical Studies department who was talking about. So there's this. There's this weird place in the King James version where in the original Greek of Acts, it says that the apostles gathered in Jerusalem to celebrate Pascha. And the Original King James, 1611, King James translated that as Easter. And so the professor was like, this is just a weird translation. Like, why would you. And I had to point out, like, Pascha is what everybody who doesn't speak a Germanic language calls that feast. And some of the people who speak Germanic languages.
- [07:11]
A
Yes, right. It's just one little corner.
- [07:14]
B
So, yeah. So people don't realize that, frankly, the Orthodox Church does a super lousy job of trying to help them find that out because for some reason that's beyond me. We don't translate the word Pascha as Passover in our liturgics. And in some cases, that makes hymns just make no sense.
- [07:33]
A
Right.
- [07:34]
B
A new Pascha is revealed to us. A bright Pascha, a glorious Pascha, a Pascha in which we have passed from death to life. What does that mean? Is that just talking about this year's as opposed to last year's?
- [07:44]
A
It would make much more sense if it was. A new Passover has been revealed to us.
- [07:48]
B
Glorious.
- [07:51]
Grade and noble Passover a better Passover than the old one.
- [07:55]
A
I mean, you'd have to remeter a lot of hymns. And as someone who has done some of that work, it's a bunch of work. So I'm sure that presents a barrier.
- [08:02]
B
But, but, but someone who can't sing anyway, I want.
- [08:05]
A
You don't care.
- [08:07]
B
Precision in communication, as do I. But. So just successfully communicating that to people would solve a lot of these problems. But this whole Seder thing is actually emblematic of a whole problem in American evangelicalism, which is. So if you know the reality of the history and you could look at the work of like Yuval Israel, who's a Jewish scholar of Jewish liturgics. Okay. Agrees with this one I'm about to make. The modern Passover Seder deliberately borrows elements from the Christian Eucharist. They borrowed elements from Christianity informing the Seder service as it's currently celebrated. Meaning when you had that demonstration at your evangelical church and they talked about, oh, look at all the, the symbolism pointing to Jesus in this Passover Seder, it's because it was going the other way.
- [09:03]
Okay.
- [09:04]
A
I mean, this reminds me, I don't know, this is not a perfect analogy, everybody. But this, to me, this would be almost like if you visited Japan and you see the way that in Japan they celebrate Christmas, which Japanese Christmas is a thing aside from Japanese Christians. There are non Christians in Japan that celebrate Christmas and has its own particular Japanese character to it. It's almost like you say, well, okay, I'm going to celebrate Christian Christmas, but before I do that, we're going to do Japanese Christmas like a few days before, because we want that version too. And you can sit there and say, oh, wow, look, it's got stuff that's like our Christmas.
- [09:44]
B
Or if you pointed at it and said, wow, they had Christmas even before us.
- [09:48]
A
Right.
- [09:49]
B
Did Christ go to Japan?
- [09:51]
A
Actually, there is a. There is a place.
- [09:53]
B
I know, I know there is. I know there is.
- [09:55]
A
Yeah, sorry, I just had to mention that.
- [09:58]
B
Yeah. But so. So all of that stuff is going the other way. Like this is. The bread of our. Of our suffering is lifted from. This is my body. Right. They didn't do that in pre Christian times.
- [10:08]
A
Yeah. And it's not in the Bible. It's not in the Bible.
- [10:11]
B
Jewish scholars of this make this point and agree with this point. Okay, that's all backwards. But what. It's emblematic of the fact that then these evangelical Jews are doing these seders. It's emblematic of the fact that evangelical Christianity, especially even more than Protestantism, has completely severed itself from the Christian tradition.
- [10:34]
A
Spicy take right here in the first question.
- [10:36]
B
You don't know that the feast is called Passover. That's why nobody ever told you that you're completely severed from these things. You don't have really a Eucharist like three or four times a year, whether you need it or not, you do communion with something. And I have to say something because I'm talking about evangelicals. So I seen with my own eyes everything from pizza and Coke to all kinds of nonsense.
- [11:00]
A
I mean, there's a, there's a recent areopagus episode. I mean, that's not evangelical context, but there was a recent area, I guess, episode where our, our mutual friend Michael Landsman said that he was at an event where communion was a gluten free cracker and a grape, not grape juice, even a grape, a white grape.
- [11:18]
B
So, but that's not. You don't have the traditional Christian Eucharist. You don't have the words. Right. You don't have the ritual celebration and being cut off from that and being kind of romophobic about it. Like we can't delve back in that Christian tradition because then I might not be an evangelical anymore. We don't want to dabble in Roman Catholicism or something, as if that's the only place that has that. But I mean, becoming an Anglican would be bad enough for a lot of these folks, let alone Orthodox. But being completely severed from that and not willing to really delve into it, then they go to the Jewish stuff. And so you're sitting here parsing the words of the modern Seder, trying to connect it to Christ. You know, it's directly connected to Christ the way we celebrate the Eucharist in every Divine liturgy. So to me, that's the bigger issue. The bigger issue is a bunch of evangelicals who have, I mean, it's not like they, the current generation of evangelicals, choose to sever themselves from Christian tradition. That happened a long time ago.
- [12:13]
A
Yeah, they inherited it.
- [12:15]
B
They inherited it and now they're just, they don't know about it. Right. And not knowing about it and not having it, they're trying to reconstruct tradition and ritual. And so an ancient get in touch with something older. And so they're going to modern Judaism.
- [12:32]
A
Which again, they don't realize is not equal to first century Judaism. Yeah.
- [12:37]
B
Rather than the actual Christian tradition. That's right. Right there. It's not like it's a secret. You don't have to learn any handshakes. You don't have to be initiated. You can, you can pick up books. It's available to you. So go deeper into Christianity.
- [12:50]
A
Indeed. Indeed. Okay, our next question comes from John, who has a question about the dedication prayer that Solomon delivered at the building of the temple. Hello Fathers, this is John from Allegan. I have a question concerning Solomon's Prayer of dedication in Third Kingdoms. And Father Stephen, you have mentioned previous podcasts that Solomon's prayer seems to be quite self serving, often asking that any invocation towards the Temple be, be answered. And I have just read this passage and I'm, and I've seen a couple of lines in the text that stuck out that say exactly as you do. But I've also noticed that there are several lines that talk about when, when famine come because the people of Israel has turned their back on God, when we're plagued by the invasion of foreigners, when we've sinned against, you know, the Lord, you know, let us turn to the temple and let us pray. And that language seems to be more common than the language that you've emphasized that seems to be more self serving. Could you elaborate a bit more on this text? Maybe there's something I'm missing in translation, but could you talk more about Solomon's Prayer and maybe give some specifics about why this prayer is far more self serving than it is actually an accurate depiction of, of what the people of God have done and continue to do as they turn away from God and sin against him. Thank you. Yeah, this is one of those things that I think if you just read that passage, it may not be super obvious what's going on there and why there's a distinction between what Solomon says and then how God responds to him. Tease that out for us, Father.
- [14:29]
B
Well, and that's the key. That's the place where you find that is by comparing what Solomon says and then what God says in response. Because what you have to understand is even, even the things he mentioned there about, oh, he sinned, so he turned to the temple. Temples, especially temples like the one Solomon built, which he built after the, the Phoenician pattern were understood to be the, the building itself was understood to be a body for the God.
- [14:57]
A
Oh, kind of an idol on some level. On its own, yes.
- [15:02]
B
The two pillars represented the jugular and the carotid. There's a whole thing of this down to the parts. Right. Like of the, of the temple. And so the temple served this function of like an idol. And that's the language. You see, even in the parts that our caller is referring to as the better parts, it's always turned toward the temple. Whatever they pray to the temple, whatever. The temple, the temple, the temple. And.
- [15:32]
What God then says in the response, what he corrects is, look, I don't live in buildings. I am bigger than that.
- [15:42]
A
That's a frequent theme in many places in the Bible. God does not dwell in temples made by hands.
- [15:48]
B
Right. But what that means is he's talking about not being contained. He's not saying. Because then he goes on to say he's going to be president of the temple. So what does that mean? What it means is he's not contained by it. Think about how idols function. They're used to contain and manipulate and control a spiritual being. So God is saying, that's not how the temple is going to work. Nevertheless, I will be present here in this temple among you. And when you come and repent, I will forgive your sins. And when you do these things. But the place where this becomes really key, and you really see this is at the other end of Israel's history. Judah's history, really, by that point, is in the book of Jeremiah. Because in the book of Jeremiah, you've got a whole bunch of people saying Jeremiah is a false prophet. Because they're saying God's not going to let his temple be destroyed. We don't have to worry about the Babylonians. They're using the temple in this sort of talismanic way, the same way they tried to use the Ark of the Covenant, remember, when it got captured?
- [16:50]
Just take it out there, we'll win. Right?
- [16:51]
A
Yeah.
- [16:52]
B
Because it's God's thing. And so the key there is that even though in this case, this isn't the only temple Solomon built, unfortunately. And he put some idols in this one. But even with this one, he's not really thinking about the relationship between the true God and a temple in the correct way. And he's wanting it to have this kind of talismanic sort of function on automatic.
- [17:19]
A
Yeah. Pray in this direction, you'll get what you want.
- [17:22]
B
Yeah. And that kind of thinking is also why God eventually says, stop offering me the sacrifices because you're not repentant. But they wanted to think of it. No, no, you just do this. This is the technology, right? You go the God technology. You go and you offer the sacrifices and he forgives you. That's why he has to keep saying, I don't delight in the blood of bullets. And goats when he told them to offer him bulls and goats.
- [17:42]
A
All right, our next question comes from Rachel, who she's asking about dancing. Hello, fathers. I have a few questions about dancing. This is a topic close to my heart because I'm a caller of square dance and contra dance. I met my husband through a contra dance community before either of us became Orthodox. Our church in Nashville has a lovely Greek dancing program showcased at the Greek Festival each year. I love community dance and have seen people find much joy and fellowship through it. So first, why do the saints have so many negative things to say about dancing? For example, St. John Chrysostom, in his writings on marriage, strongly discourages dancing at weddings. And in light of this, can there be a place for dancing in a healthy Orthodox Christian community? If so, what potential pitfalls should one watch out for as a Christian who loves to dance and teach others to dance? Thank you so much for your show and for providing a place to ask these questions. All right, I have to begin by saying that I still. Even though it's been over 20 years since I was a stagehand, I still have some level of PTSD dealing with. With dancing school, dance schools, when at the theater where I worked. So pray for me, you know, and all of you dance moms out there, you know exactly what I'm talking about. I mean, number one, there's dancing in the scriptures, in the Psalms, even. There's references.
- [19:02]
B
Dancing in the Streets.
- [19:04]
A
Yeah, exactly. I mean, and, you know, you don't even need Mick Jagger for that.
- [19:09]
B
I think a lot of things that you need Mick. Just to be fair.
- [19:15]
They'Re relatively few. A Rolling Stones concert, that's. That's most of it.
- [19:20]
A
Definitely.
- [19:22]
B
A really faithful remake of Free Jack.
- [19:27]
That. I don't know.
- [19:29]
A
Wasn't David Bowie also in that.
- [19:32]
B
In Freejack?
- [19:33]
A
No, in Dancing in the Streets.
- [19:35]
B
Oh, yeah.
- [19:36]
A
With Mick Jagger. Yeah, yeah.
- [19:37]
B
Emilio Estevez was in Freejack with Mick Jagger.
- [19:41]
A
I think I would have to go back and look exactly at the passages she references from Chrysostom. But, I mean, he also talks, for instance, against horse racing and theaters and stuff like this. And there are canons, for instance, against, as I recall, against clergy attending wedding receptions.
- [19:59]
B
That was just self interest. We just don't like going to them.
- [20:04]
A
I have to say, one of my. The funniest things. Okay, so here in the Lehigh Valley, we have tens of thousands of Syrian Americans, and many, many of them are Orthodox Christians. And so I've done lots and lots of weddings that involve people, particularly of Syrian background, sometimes Lebanese and Palestinians too. But mostly Syrians. And at every single one of them, I do when I go to the reception to be polite and so forth, at some point someone will come up to me and say, so, Father, have you ever been to one of our weddings before?
- [20:37]
How to say, yes, this is the 25th one I have done since I arrived, or something like that this week. Yeah, right, exactly. I know, like, you don't remember me from when I married your cousin, you know, last year. But, yes, I was at that one.
- [20:50]
B
Because it was a fun reception.
- [20:52]
A
That's right. Yeah.
- [20:54]
But I think that.
- [20:57]
The. The context. I think the cultural context is the thing that's really important with those statements from the church fathers about some of the stuff. Because there's not. It's not like a blanket statement, like, dancing is bad. Because again, there's stuff we see in this, in the Bible, that's. It's commanded. Commanded in the Psalms, for instance, not in the temple or the tabernacle. Everybody, by the way.
- [21:20]
But it's. It's rather that the kind that was going on was not good for people. Right. So we could. We could analogize this to our modern situation and say, okay, Rachel, the kind of dancing you describe to me sounds lovely, wholesome, community building, wonderful. But that is a different experience than. I don't know, do they still have this term now, the kids? Do they still say Dirty Dancing? Is that still a thing? No, no one says Dirty Dancing anymore.
- [21:49]
B
Not a thing. Grandpa.
- [21:50]
A
I am probably just a few years.
- [21:52]
B
Away from being a grandpa. Remember that one summer in the late 80s where they came out with, like, three different movies and a TV show about Lambada, the Forbidden King?
- [22:05]
A
I do remember that pretty well. And then, of course, you know, nobody puts Baby in a corner, but, yeah, it's really.
- [22:14]
B
Gary Orbach makes that movie.
- [22:16]
A
Yes, I know. I have to say, since we're talking about this someone, some genius, and this is one of the things that the Internet exists for. Some genius took the final scene from Dirty Dancing, you know, the big sort of showcase with Patrick Swayze. And I'm blanking on the actress's name now, Jennifer Gray. And they took. They cut out the soundtrack that was in it, and they put instead the theme from the Muppet Show. And it was the most brilliant thing. And every time I come across it, I laugh for a good five minutes after.
- [22:51]
B
Allow me to go even deeper cut on you.
- [22:54]
A
Okay, okay.
- [22:55]
B
There was a guy who for years had this movie he wanted to make about these young people in love during the Cuban Revolution to comment on The Cuban Revolution. And he could not get funding. He could not get it made. Eventually, he did get it made by giving it a certain title, and that is Dirty Dancing to Havana Nights.
- [23:16]
A
I never watched that. That's wonderful.
- [23:20]
B
It has nothing to do with the first movie. By making it a quasi sequel, he was able to get the funding and get it made in his movie. Right?
- [23:29]
A
Yeah. I mean, the late 80s and early 90s was definitely a time for numbered sequels, big time.
- [23:34]
B
But, yeah, people picking the people who then saw that movie saw a very different movie than they thought they were going to see.
- [23:40]
A
Right. When they like, are we going back to the Catskills? No. No, you're not. So, yeah, Rachel, I. I mean, I. What you described is. Is wonderful and lovely and good. It really is. I. I would say that the kind of dancing that the church fathers are. Are speaking out against is the kind that leads to all kinds of other things and. And is in, probably in many cases, is bad in and of itself. Like, the reason why there are, for instance, cannons against a man who has ever entered a theater not being allowed to be ordained is because theater in those days was very different than it is now. Of course, you know, that hits very close to home for me. As you know, Father, I used to work in a theater.
- [24:14]
B
Maybe theater in Tijuana.
- [24:15]
A
Indeed. Indeed. All right, unless you have anything more to add to that, Father, we're gonna go on to the next one.
- [24:21]
B
I mean, I feel like I should as a gold medal winning ballroom dancer.
- [24:25]
A
That's right.
- [24:25]
B
But I don't really have it.
- [24:26]
A
I forgot to bring that up. Are there photos of this somewhere? Like with you with your gold medal on?
- [24:31]
B
There's photos of me with the metal in a little suit with the metal. Yeah.
- [24:35]
A
Wow. I have to see this.
- [24:37]
B
I have to. I mean, it wasn't that little a suit either. Like, I was younger, but I was still large.
- [24:42]
A
I'm going to contact your mother. I need to see pictures of this. All right, moving on to the next question. This is from George, who has a question about the throne and in Elam. Greetings, podfathers. Christ is risen. My name is George. I live in Virginia, and I am an original listener. Been listening since the very first Lord of Spirits podcast dropped, but have never called in. And I have a question about Elam. So recently I was reading Jeremiah and I came across in my orthodox study Bible prophecy about Elam, where the prophet prophesied destruction for Elam, and then the prophecy ends. And this is in chapter 25, verses 18 through 20. Then I will set my throne in Elam, and from there shall send forth the king and his nobles. It shall come to pass in the last days that I will bring back the captivity of Elam, says the Lord. This word concerning Elam came in the beginning of King Zedekiah's reign. I also noticed that this prophecy is not included, at least as far as I could find, in the Masoretic text of Jeremiah that I have in my English Standard Version. And it's kind of bewildering to me because I don't know what the significance of Elam is and what it means that God will set his throne there or bring back the captivity of Elam. Was hoping that maybe you could shed some light on it. Thank you very much. And again, Christ is risen. All right. So I actually just noticed that. And maybe disconnected, I don't know. Tell me that in our reading for Pentecost, that when we're recording this Pentecost is yesterday.
- [26:23]
That there's references to people in Jerusalem who are Elamites, who are Judeans, who are hearing the Gospel in their own language.
- [26:31]
B
Yes, there's a. Yeah, there's a reason for that.
- [26:34]
A
Okay, what's going on?
- [26:36]
B
It is in the Masoretic text. It's in chapter 49 in the Masoretic text.
- [26:40]
A
Yeah. Because isn't Jeremiah. Isn't Masoretic Jeremiah and Greek Jeremiah very different things?
- [26:47]
B
Well, so, yeah, there were two. There were in the Second Temple period, two different versions of Jeremiah.
- [26:56]
A
Okay.
- [26:57]
B
A longer version and a shorter version.
- [26:59]
A
Okay.
- [27:00]
B
And that's because Jeremiah didn't sit down and write the book of Jeremiah. We know he had a scribe, Baruch, who recorded things. And both versions were compiled after Jeremiah's death. We also have the Book of Baruch in orthodox Old Testament. Lamentations is in obviously both. And then the Epistle of Jeremiah is in the orthodox Old Testament. So there's this parallel hominin, Jeremias, meaning there's this other Jeremiah material floating around out there. And so it got compiled in different ways during the Second Temple period. The Greek that's usually referred to as Septuagint, Jeremiah, which, of course, we've explained on the show why that's. It's not Septuagint, but the common Greek version of Jeremiah is a translation of the shorter version, and the Masoretic text has the longer Hebrew version. We know there are two different Hebrew versions because we found both Hebrew versions at Qumran in the Dead Sea Scrolls, literally side by side. They had both versions and didn't think it was a problem. Didn't think they had to decide which one was the real one. But everything that's in the shorter Greek version is in the Masoretic text, but not vice versa, because the longer Hebrew text is about a third longer, but it is rearranged. It's not just that more material was added. It's that the material they both share is in a different order.
- [28:28]
A
So they're both compilations.
- [28:30]
B
Right. They're compilations of Jeremiah material done by probably different people.
- [28:35]
A
Okay.
- [28:36]
B
At different times. So there's also this other factor of. Within the book of Jeremiah, if you read it, there's a point at which the original collection of Jeremiah's prophecies is destroyed and then it's rewritten. So that may factor into this in terms of the two versions. And, of course, plenty of journal articles theorizing how they're related. Right. Dissertations. But. Yeah. So that's why you have things radically different chapter numbers. And you'll have stuff that's in one order in one version, in the reverse order in the other one. So that is to say it's in the. It's in both versions. It's just hard to find sometimes when you're going from one to the other trying to locate where the verses are.
- [29:23]
Elam is in Persia, So the prophecy there that he will set his throne in Persia. And reverse the captivity is a prophecy about Cyrus. And as we talked about in our series on Israel, when that captivity ended, not everybody went back. There were people still living. There are still today. Not as. Not very many anymore, but Jewish people living in Iran, living in Persia. So that's why there were Elamites there. So there we go at Pentecost.
- [29:51]
A
Yeah. And I guess Elamite was even its own language as well. Interesting. All right, well, there we go. That was pretty simple. Okay. Our next question comes from Kester, who is wondering about what is the scope of salvation? Like, how many people are going to be saved or could be saved?
- [30:11]
B
10 to 12.
- [30:12]
A
Father's bless. My name is Kester from Virginia. I'm a recent Orthodox convert. And a statement was made in the recent Q and A about the number of people that may be saved. That made me realize I had some Protestant presuppositions. I hadn't even thought about that, being that when it comes to salvation, the only real options were universalism or that a very, very small fraction of people will ultimately be saved. I find the idea, Father Stephen mentioned that maybe a large number of people are saved, but we can't dogmatically Say everyone. Very encouraging and hopeful. However, I'm curious how we square this idea with statements like the gate is narrow and few find it, or the idea that this life has been given to us for repentance and there is no repentance after death.
- [31:09]
And if we look around, maybe many people are not doing much repenting, including those like myself in the church. Or the idea that salvation only comes through the church and so those that are saved are joined to the church. But then if most people are not.
- [31:25]
B
In the church in this life, but will be in the life to come.
- [31:28]
A
It seems joining people to the church in the life to come is really the more normative or at least more frequent means of salvation. Any insights you have on this would be very helpful. Thank you for all that you do. Yeah. So what do we do with that language in the Bible that seems to be referencing how many might be saved? What's going on with that?
- [31:49]
B
So there's a bunch of equivocation going on here on the word saved.
- [31:53]
A
Okay.
- [31:55]
B
And where this is going to go is particularly the, you know, narrow is the way and straight is the path, and few find it. That's not talking about how many people will be saved.
- [32:03]
A
Okay.
- [32:04]
B
That's talking about the fact that salvation requires a lot of effort and is difficult. Protestant people haven't pointed that out to you, but if you read it right, broad is the way it. Easy is the path, narrow and difficult is the path.
- [32:16]
A
Yeah.
- [32:17]
B
Our Protestant friends aren't going to tell you that salvation requires effort, are they?
- [32:20]
A
Matthew 7.
- [32:21]
B
Yeah, that's what that's talking about. So the bigger issue is we're equivocating on the word saved. The way it's kind of being used in the question, and the way it's used in a lot of Protestant circles is how many people go to heaven instead of hell. That's not what salvation is. Salvation is not going to heaven instead of hell. Salvation is being united to God.
- [32:44]
A
It's becoming like Christ becoming elevated, exalted.
- [32:48]
B
Which is on a continuum, an infinite continuum.
- [32:53]
A
Right. There's those who are greater in the kingdom of heaven and then those who are lesser. Jesus says that.
- [32:58]
B
And that is difficult. And that requires effort. And there are relatively few people. They're the ones who the church recognizes as saints, which are a minority among the Christians who have lived, who have really found and walked that path in this life. That doesn't mean everyone who's not a glorified saint in the Orthodox Church went to hell. That's not how that works at all. Yeah, we have to fix how we're. How we're thinking about salvation there because, right, like, you bring about repentance. It's not that you have to hit some certain repentance bar and then you're in. And if you don't hit that repentance bar, you go to hell. Right? Well, you repented, but not quite enough. So.
- [33:38]
To hell you go, well, you repented just enough so you made it into heaven. Even though, obviously. See, this is part of why we understand this is a continuum. No one ever achieves perfect repentance. The people we've glorified as saints would be the first ones to tell you that they have not achieved perfect repentance.
- [33:54]
A
That's like saying someone achieves perfect health.
- [33:57]
B
Yes.
- [33:58]
A
I mean, you've got. You definitely, you have. You have athletes, elite athletes who are doing everything right. And so as a result, their bodies are in great, amazing shape. And then you have people who are, you know, big health nuts, and they're really working on it, and they're. They're pretty good. They're probably adding some years to their life, you know. And then you have people that are like, okay, I better exercise every so often or else I'm just going to completely turn into a puddle. That's. That's where I am, by the way. And then you have the people that, you know, will say things like, I should probably take a walk once in a while. And they might do that. And then the people who pay zero attention to their. Their. The state of their body. But it's not like even the super elite athletes, you know, the people, you know, the guy. The people doing the Tour de France or whatever, that it's absolute. It's just they've done. They've worked so hard on this that they have these kinds of results. I mean, and it's no coincidence that, like, the word asces, from which we get the. We get asceticism originally is an athletic term. This is the metaphor that the apostles pick when talking.
- [35:02]
B
Paul uses that metaphor all the time.
- [35:04]
A
Yes. Works righteousness, Father Stephen. Works righteousness.
- [35:07]
B
Yes. And you're gonna, you're gonna. And you're gonna end up reading things really weirdly. Like when he talks about pressing on toward the prize, they're like, oh, is the prize salvation? Only the guy who wins goes to heaven? Like, no, that's not what he's saying, like, at all. So the question we were asking, for example, in the universalism, was not.
- [35:32]
Framing salvation in this way. The question was, how many people are going to end up when all is said and done in a state of eternal condemnation. And Lord willing, we could hope that that is going to be very few and we each need to be doing everything we can to make sure I'm not the one who ends up there, if anyone does.
- [35:56]
A
There's so much binary thinking about this that it really poisons the well, I think.
- [36:01]
B
Yeah, yeah. There's this whole salvation structure in the west of there being this bar that gets met or not met. And the differences between Protestantism and Roman Catholicism are basically differences in how one meets that bar, you know, and then to go to heaven instead of hell. And that is a sub Christian basically Gnostic eschatology going to heaven and hell because the bodily resurrection gets dropped out.
- [36:25]
A
Yep.
- [36:25]
B
Nobody denies. Well, not nobody probably William Lane Craig, but.
- [36:34]
There are the majority of people in the west do not deny the bodily resurrection. It's like when you read Tertius, Spartas of Thomas, Aquinas, Summa Theologica. Obviously he affirms the bodily resurrection. But when you read through and you read what he says about the bodily resurrection and you read what he says about the beatific vision, it's kind of hard to figure out how the two things fit together because he's got some play doh, and he's got some Bible and the two actually go together like chalk and cheese. But he's trying because the Plato stuff is part of the Christian tradition he had received in the west from the Platonist period of Western theology. Think media. And so he's, he's tried to reconcile those things. And yes, I know he didn't actually finish writing the third part so we could just describe it to that. He probably would have worked it all out brilliantly but didn't get to. But it makes my point that there is sort of this tension in that. I'm not saying Western Christians deny most of them the bodily resurrection is just. It's when they talk about, they talk about going to heaven or going to hell for eternity after you die. And that again, that's not it, man.
- [37:47]
A
Yep.
- [37:48]
B
And it's unclear how that then fits together with the bodily resurrection that folks affirm.
- [37:53]
A
Okay, our next question comes from Ezekiel, who wonders about human non existence. Father's bless my name is Ezekiel from Redding, California. Could you expand a little on the orthodox understanding and difference between death and non existence, especially as it pertains to the human person? My understanding is that a person does not exist until conception, at which point their soul and body are created together. Death of the body is separation from the soul and death of the soul is separation from. From God. So is there ever a point at which the human person ceases to exist? Thank you. I mean, short answer. No. Right. There's not. There's not a non existence.
- [38:35]
B
Nothing ceases to exist. In that sense. Yeah, in the sense that we use existence today. Now we've talked about how the ancient way of thinking was more about with existence was more about order and chaos that about existence and non existence, the way we think about it now.
- [38:53]
A
Right. So in that sense, death is a form of chaos because it's disintegration.
- [38:58]
B
Right, Right. So they. That kind of language would be used. Right. In the ancient world.
- [39:08]
But even when something decomposes, the elements that made it up still exist in our modern terms. The example I've used before on this show is, you know, you have a tower, the tower collapses, the tower no longer exists. All the bricks that made it up are still laying there in a pile, but it's now a pile of bricks. The tower doesn't exist anymore. That's closer to how I was using the ancient in the ancient world. So yeah, there's not a point where humans cease to exist because of the incarnation and the resurrection.
- [39:41]
A
Okay, the last question we're going to handle for this half is from Father David, who wants to know about saints being associated with particular stuff. This is Father David. I hope you are having a fruitful lent on the last episode. Your skin makes me crawl. It was said that God doesn't grant prayers based on the number of people that pray or particular people. You have to get a certain saint, for example, to pray for something in order to convince him to do something. And of course that's true, that makes total sense. But I wonder if you could comment on why some saints seem to be associated with certain types of healings or requests. I know that in orthodoxy this is not as developed as it might be to have patron saints over certain things or professions. It's not as developed as it might be in Catholicism, for example, but we still do have like St. Fanurios, for example, to help find lost things. So I wondered if you could comment on saints who are associated with certain types of prayers or requests and what is happening there. Thank you so much. I just realized he got the title of that episode wrong in a hilarious way.
- [41:09]
B
Apparently we make his skin crawl.
- [41:12]
A
No, it's your skin. He said, your skin makes me crawl. Crawl.
- [41:19]
Which is not weirder than your skin makes me cry, which is the actual name of the episode.
- [41:25]
B
Father David is just Not a Radiohead fan?
- [41:27]
A
Yeah, apparently not. I know him, actually. He had a weird job. He used to be a maritime inspector. So he would crawl down in the bowels of ships to make sure that they were still in order and this kind of thing. So, I mean, he's a man with a lot of nerve and a very. Just sort of decent, humane person. So I'm so happy he called. My understanding of. Of how it is that saints get associated with particular things and, you know, there's the human experience. Right. And then there's what we might try to imagine is going on in the heavenly realm. Like I. I was saying to my wife recently, she was telling me that somebody had cancer, and I said, oh, well, you know, we'll ask Saint Nictarios to help, help, help that person, because he's so associated with this. And I said, you know, I have to imagine that at some point, you know, when God is sort of handing out assignments, he says, okay, all right, who's. Who's going to take cancer? And Saint Nectaria said, oh, I'll take cancer. And my wife said, it does not work that way. And. But nonetheless, I mean, we do have scenes of God in heaven saying, who's going to do this for me?
- [42:30]
B
Right.
- [42:31]
A
You know, the whole Ahab putting the lying spirit in the mouths of his.
- [42:34]
B
Prophets, that's very specific tasks.
- [42:37]
A
Yes, yes, right, right. Rather than, you know, what is your profession going to be, so to speak. But I mean, I think that the reason why particular saints get, from a human point of view, get associated with particular themes is that at some point someone calls upon them for that thing and they receive help. And so then that word spreads.
- [42:58]
B
Tell other people.
- [42:59]
A
Yeah, right. And obviously God is letting them do that, empowering them to do that, because he's giving gifts to mankind through that saint's prayers. So it's a synergistic thing, is my understanding of it. And so, I mean, sometimes if you read the life of the saint, there's a clear association between that saint and the ailment or the difficulty or the profession or whatever. Other times it's okay. I have no idea what the connection is here.
- [43:29]
B
I'm a big fan of the dark comedy of the western saint associations.
- [43:34]
A
Yeah.
- [43:35]
B
Like St. Lucy, who gouged out her own eyes so the world wouldn't distract her from prayer, is the patron saint of ophthalmologists. Right. I'm not joking.
- [43:45]
A
I know, I know. There's some weird stuff like that.
- [43:48]
B
There's a lot of dark comedy going on there, which I could appreciate on the level of dark comedy, but I'll leave it at that.
- [43:55]
A
I mean, most of the ones in the Orthodox tradition are flipped. It's, you know, this saint suffered through this, and so they're going to be there with you in your suffering of the same thing is where you typically see it. All right, well, that wraps up this first half of this prerecorded episode, the Lord of Spirits. We'll be right back with the second half. The centuries after the Protestant Reformation brought about a radical reinterpretation of The Epistles of St. Paul, disconnected from any historical reality. But Paul operated during his entire life as a faithful Pharisee within the Roman Jewish world. In St. Paul the Pharisee, Jewish apostle to all nations, Father Stephen DeYoung surveys Paul's life and writings, interpreting them within the holy tradition of the Orthodox Church. This survey is followed by DeYoung's interpretive translation of St. Paul's Epistle, which deliberately avoids overly familiar terminology. By using words and ideas grounded in 1st century Judaism, DeYoung hopes to unsettle commonly held notions and help the reader reassess St. Paul in his historical context. Available now at store.ancientfaith.com Again, that is store.ancientfaith.com and we're back. It's the second half of this pre recorded episode of Lord of Spirits podcast. It's a speak Pipalooza. And this is the half that I'm referring to as the Dutch half. So this is specially dedicated to your Dutchness, Father Steve.
- [45:30]
So, okay, this first question comes from.
- [45:33]
B
Or as I refer to them, the people.
- [45:36]
A
Exactly.
- [45:37]
B
Not to imply that people who aren't Dutch aren't people, but who are lesser people. If you're not Dutch, as the sign.
- [45:46]
A
Says, I mean, we are. I mean, that's literally true because Dutch people do tend to have more mass, more size, more height. That is true than most other people. So that's literally true. If you're not Dutch, you're not as much.
- [46:02]
B
Yes.
- [46:03]
A
Okay, here we go. This is from Nicholas. Hi, Fathers. This is Nicholas from the Netherlands. I was talking with a fellow parishioner and friend about politics. Terrible. I know he expressed his concerns about this and that political or environmental problem. And I said, well, if those people are indeed doing bad things, then God will turn that into something good. My friend, however, was convinced that God simply allows bad people to do bad things because of free will, even if that would mean those bad people would destroy the entire creation. And so, according to my friend, we good people must stop the bad People from doing the bad things because otherwise they will destroy the entire creation. So during this conversation the question came up, does God allow bad people to do bad things for the sake of free will? No matter what the outcome? Is it true that anything that happens to me personally bad and good, has passed through the hands of Christ for my own spiritual benefit? And if so, does that extrapolate to large scale events caused by so called bad people? Thank you for your answer. And.
- [47:25]
Jung van er Nederland o Monseler hu Christen en gemeenschapor de vorme e gordrach. All right. The shibboleths out there at the end for the Dutch people. Yes.
- [47:37]
B
And greetings from the Dutch sojourning here in America.
- [47:43]
A
So, I mean, this is a theodicy question essentially. Right.
- [47:47]
B
Well, his friend is in full rebellion against Dutch Calvinism. Clearly seems to have gone to the other extreme. Yes.
- [47:55]
A
I wonder if his friend, I mean, he's in the Netherlands, so maybe his friend is Dutch. I mean, Netherlands is a pretty, pretty secular country these days, isn't it?
- [48:05]
B
Yes, but there, there are inextricable elements of Dutch culture formed around.
- [48:16]
Calvinism. Just like in the United States. There's a little bit of evangelical Protestant in everybody culturally.
- [48:25]
A
Yeah, sure.
- [48:27]
B
And Puritanism culturally.
- [48:29]
A
Right, right.
- [48:29]
B
Even the atheists are sort of Protestant atheists.
- [48:33]
A
Yeah. I mean, my reaction to what he's asking about is on some level, all of the above. Right. That we do have free will.
- [48:46]
But the great ark of history is in God's hands. And so anything that we do out of our free will, he's taken that into account. And that he works all things together for good. Right. Or you know what? God. Man is meant for evil. God has turned to good. That it doesn't violate our free will that he's doing that. It doesn't mean we're not responsible for any evil that we do. And it also doesn't mean that we shouldn't try to bring justice to the world to the extent that we can and heal suffering of other people. We're working. God is working. Everyone's working.
- [49:17]
B
And we can be and should be and ought to be and are called to be the instrument through which God brings good.
- [49:26]
A
Yeah.
- [49:26]
B
Out of evil. But there's a very particular question embedded in there.
- [49:30]
A
Okay, okay.
- [49:31]
B
That you may not have heard.
- [49:32]
A
Not being Dutch and never having been.
- [49:34]
B
Calvinist, that has to do. Yes. When he asked if everything that happens to him passes through the hands of.
- [49:41]
A
Christ, I heard that and it sounded like code to me.
- [49:46]
But I wasn't sure what it was code for. I mean, you could say, well, God is. Does that mean that God is the author of evil?
- [49:55]
B
Well, so this has to do with. So. And this is part of the influence of Calvinism on Dutch culture and Dutch Calvinist thing. Like that's an element, right? So there's a certain Dutch stoicism that is the product of the Calvinist idea that everything that happens to you is coming sort of directly from God, good and bad. If it's bad, you deserve it. If it's good, don't let it give you a big head. And so there's just sort of this sort of like grim stoic kind of grim stoicism sort of accepting whatever happens is God's will. That's why I said his, his friend is sort of the opposite extreme, rebelling against that idea and saying, no, we have to sort of take this into our own hands. But the opposite extreme, that sort of Calvinist extreme is also dot fully correct. And the key here is that part of our free will is in how we receive the things that happen to us. There is. There's a kernel in that sort of Calvinist view of this. The problem is the Calvinist view also has total depravity involved, which means no matter what happens, you're going to do the wrong thing anyway. To speak more broadly and outside of that specific tradition, anything that happens to you, there are different ways you can receive it. And that will make that thing that happened a good thing or a bad thing. This is part of the part that you play as a person in terms of God bringing good out of evil. So let's say you lose all your money, you suffer financial catastrophe, your accountant runs off with it or something, or stock market crashes, or you make a bad investment, you end up broke. That can drive you into despair. That can cause you to reevaluate how much importance you are placing on possessions and things in your life. The second one of those could be positive. First one obviously is negative. But it's the same event. It's the same thing that happened to you either way on the other side, right? You could experience some great success or some windfall and get a bunch of money. Depending on what you do with it and how you receive that and how you handle it, that could be the best thing that ever happened to you, or it could end up being one of the worst things that ever happened to you. So it's not the thing itself that happened that's good or bad. It's how you received it and what you did with it. If you go, like you mentioned, certain saints who have been through certain struggles, and so now they're able to identify, or you're able to identify with them, when you're facing similar struggles that can happen to you. You can go through certain struggles in your life that can make you able to help and counsel other people who are going through similar struggles for the rest of your life, or you can let those struggles, you know, shipwreck you again. That's. That's how you receive it.
- [52:43]
A
Yeah, it seems like an, I would say, a lovely revision of one of those things that Hamlet says where he says there's nothing good or bad, but thinking makes it so. But he's wrong. He's wrong. It's, you know, repentance or lack thereof makes it so.
- [53:01]
B
And even if it is, I mean, there are some things that are bad things.
- [53:04]
A
Yes, but bad.
- [53:05]
B
If you're victim of something good for you salted. Right. You're right. That's a bad thing. You know, you failure, that's a bad thing. So I'm not saying there are no bad things. Those are somehow good things. Yeah, right.
- [53:18]
A
Yeah.
- [53:19]
B
But I'm saying you can. Good can come out of that. You can bring good out of them by what you do then and how you receive them and how you respond. Even when those bad people do bad things to you or to someone you care about, there are ways in how you receive it and with God's help that you can be the vehicle through which good can come out of that. Nevertheless.
- [53:42]
A
Indeed. Okay, our next question comes from Maria, who is a moderately frequent caller and actually whom I had the pleasure of meeting last summer. Hi Pod fathers. Thank you for the continual churning out of content on the Lord of Spirits podcast. My question for you today is.
- [53:59]
B
Is the ephod that Gideon creates out of the plunder of the Midianites an.
- [54:04]
A
Attempt at self divination? We are told that after the Midianites are defeated, he takes part of the plunder from all the people of Israel.
- [54:13]
B
And he creates a statue out of it. The statue is worshipped by all of.
- [54:17]
A
Israel and it becomes a stumbling block to Gideon and his family. The reason I have this theory and am not convinced that it's just another God is because throughout his time as.
- [54:29]
B
Judge, Gideon has this constant tension and.
- [54:32]
A
Battle with baal and as soon as.
- [54:34]
B
He dies, it says that Israel goes immediately to worshiping BAAL in place of Gideon. Almost kind of a weird theory, but.
- [54:43]
A
I wanted to know if there's any.
- [54:45]
B
Truth to this or if there are any other hints in the text that maybe he was setting up an idol.
- [54:51]
A
To a different deity. Now, she also sent a clarifying email where she writes, Judges 8 describes Gideon crafting an ephod, or the vestment worn by the Israelite priesthood. Since these vestments were an inversion of the robes used to clothe idols, I interpret this as synecdoche and that Gideon was making an idol, not a golden robe. What's going on with all of this stuff?
- [55:18]
B
Well, I think you have to. There's another piece to this with Gideon, who is a shifty character.
- [55:25]
A
Yeah. I mean, he's.
- [55:26]
B
We'll put it that way.
- [55:27]
A
We all remember the whole thing for, you know, the sword. Sword of the Lord and Gideon. We remember that.
- [55:32]
B
Yeah.
- [55:33]
A
But the rest is a little off.
- [55:35]
B
He's not full on, like Samson or Jephthah, but he's also no Othniel, like, who is really. Well, Shamgar is close. But the other piece here is that Gideon was also very much trying to set himself up as the king of Israel. See, people who don't know at least a little Hebrew don't see the joke in part of this story, because when you read it, they're like, why are you setting yourself up as a king? And he's like, far be it for me to set myself up as a king. I would never do that.
- [56:03]
A
All right. But it's the name of his son, right?
- [56:06]
B
Yes. And they're like. Then it says his son Abimelech was standing there. Avimelech means my father is king. He names his kid. That is like, what do you mean? I'm trying to make myself a king.
- [56:15]
A
Right.
- [56:17]
B
Who, me? That's what I mean by shifty character.
- [56:20]
A
I mean, giving your kid a name like that. It's like naming your kid. My father is successful at selling cars.
- [56:29]
B
Yeah. Anyway, I'm not a car salesman. What? So that's Gideon. But. So I take the ephod in that context. Right. And you have to think about kingship in the ancient near east of this period, where the king was at least the high priest of the God.
- [56:49]
If not divine himself, sometimes both.
- [56:56]
And so I think. I think the ephod was functioning in that regard, and that's why it talks about it being a snare not just to him, but to his family, was the idea that he and potentially some family members were trying to claim this kind of role for themselves, which obviously is outside the bounds of what was prescribed by the Torah.
- [57:18]
A
And what do you think of her idea of the synecdoche that he's not actually making an ephod, but he's making an idol or that.
- [57:24]
B
I mean, that's. That's certainly possible.
- [57:26]
A
Okay.
- [57:27]
B
But I interpret it in light of that kingship thing, so her take is not impossible. But I think it's more that he. It was an ephod for himself to wear and that he's trying to take on this kind of authority that isn't rightfully his. He's ambitious.
- [57:40]
A
Yeah, yeah. Okay.
- [57:43]
B
Ambition was a bad thing in the ancient world.
- [57:47]
Ask Julius Caesar where it got him.
- [57:50]
A
Right.
- [57:51]
B
It got him 23 times in the back. But that's.
- [57:53]
A
Oh.
- [57:56]
All right. The next question comes from Jacob. He's wondering about something that you said in your conversation with Gavin Ortland about iconography. Hey, Father Andrew and Father Stephen.
- [58:05]
B
My name's Jacob.
- [58:06]
A
I am calling from Michigan and really big fan of the podcast. Thank you guys for all you do.
- [58:12]
B
I had a quick question regarding rabbinical Judaism.
- [58:17]
A
I believe this was 3rd, 4th century around there.
- [58:23]
B
I was just listening to the debate.
- [58:25]
A
Between Gavin Ortland and Father Stephen, and I wanted to ask the question. Could you please provide some further context and citation for the reference you made to the Talmud? I believe it was.
- [58:40]
B
And the. The Jews, actually, I believe that you.
- [58:43]
A
Had mentioned explicitly stating that the lining up and kissing of icons was idolatrous.
- [58:50]
B
According to rabbinical Judaism.
- [58:53]
A
And that is a pointer to the fact that the early Christian culture around them was practicing this and they were stating this to separate themselves from early Christians. This would be a great help to me and some others who I've had.
- [59:07]
B
Conversations with this about.
- [59:08]
A
Thank you so much and look forward to hearing back. Yes. So what's that all about? I don't even remember that.
- [59:16]
B
Yeah. So the Talmud reference, just to get that out of the way. I know. I never give citations for anything.
- [59:23]
A
You don't, because clearly you're just making stuff up.
- [59:26]
B
Yes. Tractate 763A is where that is. That discussion is. So what. And what happens there is there's a distinction, mean made between idolatry proper. There's the worship of idols, which is obviously idolatry. Idolatry proper. But then it also talks about the practice as a separate thing of lining up to kiss and in various other ways, venerate idols. They just use the word idol. And this is something, as I mentioned when I was talking to Ortland, that pagans didn't do. Pagans didn't line up at all. Walk into the temple and kiss the idol.
- [60:11]
A
Yeah. I imagine in Most cases it would be like, that's priest, priest area only.
- [60:17]
B
Yes. And in the big temples, the idol we're talking about is gigantic. Right. Like, you'd have to climb up on it to try and kiss it 15ft tall. They weren't made to be sort of manipulated by hand like that. Like by people. Yeah. Priests came in and cared for the idols, not regular people. So that's not a thing that happened. But it's also treated as a separate thing, Talmudically. This other practice, which is, they say is also a form of idolatry and is forbidden to Jewish people, but is not as bad as idolatry proper. They distinguish it from idolatry proper.
- [60:53]
A
Yeah. Distinction being made.
- [60:55]
B
They say it's not as bad, but it's forbidden to Jewish people. The fact that they make that distinction between this other practice, that it's a practice not found in paganism but isn't Christianity, but that they still condemn it to me, all points to the fact that they're talking about the Christian practice of venerating icons and saying, well, yeah, it's not the same as what the pagans do with idolatry, but it's still bad and Jews shouldn't do it. And this is in the period where iconography is being removed from synagogues, probably for related reasons. Synagogues up into the third century had iconography all over them. Old Testament scenes. Yeah, well, Hebrew Bible scenes, depictions of.
- [61:36]
Biblical figures, but those are being removed around the time that this discussion is happening.
- [61:41]
A
That's fascinating. All right, this next question comes from Christopher, who I think he's calling us out. I'm not totally sure, but here we go. Good evening, Fathers. I am an avid listener, but I have some reservations about your perspective. There it is. It seems to me that you reduced the Christian faith to a purity religion similar to Islam or the distortions of Judaism practiced by the Pharisees. Wow. I've also noticed that Father Stephen translates the Greek word righteousness as purification or purifying act quite a bit in his recent translation of Paul's Letter to the Romans. I was curious how you both respond to this concern. Okay, well, I mean, it's hard for me to believe, if he's an avid listener, that he honestly thinks that we reduce Christianity.
- [62:29]
B
I think you're Muslim Pharisees, but I love listening to your shit purity cult.
- [62:33]
A
It's just. I know.
- [62:34]
B
Who knows?
- [62:36]
A
I mean.
- [62:37]
B
Oh, yeah. Getting a purity cult the way we. Yeah, you clearly did listen to the episode about cleanness and uncleanness.
- [62:43]
A
God bless you, Christopher. But I doubt your cred just a little bit there, but okay, so. But you know, more to the point.
- [62:53]
Purification, righteousness, you know, what's going on with the way that in your book, St. Paul the Pharisee, that you chose to.
- [63:00]
B
Yeah, I'll get over that directly. Yeah. So should we translate the Greek word dika o sini?
- [63:09]
A
Yeah.
- [63:09]
B
Should we translate it the way it's used in Jewish sources written in Greek, including the Greek translation of the Old Testament, as I do, or should we translate it the way according to the way pagans used it? Oh, in the third and fourth century A.D. mostly the third. In the third century A.D. second to third centuries. That's the difference. So our Protestant friends want to insist that we translate that as this forensic legal term.
- [63:42]
A
Justification.
- [63:44]
B
Yeah. Which is a later pagan usage and not the way it's used, for example, in the Greek of the Book of Daniel when it talks about how the temple will be trodden underfoot by the Gentiles until the time at which the temple is justified. What does that mean?
- [64:04]
A
Obviously it means some complicated legal proceeding.
- [64:07]
B
Right. The temple is declared innocent of wrongdoing. Clearly. It means until the temple is purified and cleansed and restored.
- [64:13]
A
Yeah. I mean, the thing that the concept that binds all this stuff together is the idea that justice, that God's justice is putting things right, putting them in their proper order.
- [64:21]
B
Yes, yes.
- [64:22]
A
Which if it's dirty, you're going to clean it.
- [64:25]
B
But specifically. Right. So like when we're in Romans, where St. Paul is talking about justification in terms of baptism, connected to baptism, what is washing with water and is the precursor to receiving the Holy Spirit. That sounds a lot like its use regarding the temple. Right. The temple has to be cleansed and restored so that God can come to dwell in it again.
- [64:50]
And St. Paul talks about our bodies becoming the temples of the Holy Spirit when he comes to indwell us after we're baptized into Christ and die and rise again. So that's why I use the purification language, because that's the way Jewish people use that language at that time and contextually. That's what St. Paul's talking about.
- [65:09]
A
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
- [65:11]
B
And I don't know what that has to do with Islam.
- [65:13]
A
I don't know.
- [65:15]
B
It does have something to do with the Pharisees because they were Jewish people.
- [65:19]
A
And they're the Jewish people that are. Their teachings are the most like Christianity.
- [65:24]
B
Well, and St. Paul was one.
- [65:25]
A
Right? Exactly, exactly.
- [65:27]
B
So he probably used theological terms and language, especially when he was arguing with his fellow Pharisees. He probably used words the way they did.
- [65:37]
A
Yeah.
- [65:39]
B
So that he could argue with them rather than using them in a totally different sense where they would have a non productive discussion. Yeah, but that's, that's the key, because for the Protestant reformers, the Bible is talking to you in the 16th, 17th, 18th, 19th, 20th, 21st century. In reality, St. Paul was talking to someone who was alive at the same time as St. Paul. And seeing what St. Paul was saying to that person could have benefit for us in the 21st century.
- [66:10]
A
Yeah. It doesn't mean that, that we can't access what he's doing.
- [66:15]
B
But it's not a love letter from God to you in the 21st century.
- [66:19]
A
Right, exactly.
- [66:21]
B
That's not what the Bible is. Sorry.
- [66:23]
A
All right, our next question comes from Dylan, who asks about applying images from the Old Testament in multiple ways. Epidemiology. Dylan Paul from Michigan. I'm wondering about applying Old Testament images in multiple ways, like the saints seem to do. Like Saint Maximus will take an image and just give a dozen different allegories. Allegories. And they're all valid. So I'm wondering, I'm kind of following up on something like Psalm 82, where you guys had a disagreement on whether you can apply image, whether the saints can apply an image that doesn't necessarily align with your quote, unquote, original context. Is that possible? Or do we say, no, they were wrong in that case? Or is it more like an unfolding of the image in sort of contemplative ways that are helpful to people in their specific situation? Like there's a line to be drawn there somewhere. So I'm wondering where it is, where the balancing act is. So thank you, guys, Much love.
- [67:39]
B
Yeah.
- [67:41]
A
So it seems to me that his question is, it seems to be set against this backdrop that so often exists, particularly here in the modern West. And we see this in orthodox circles too, especially on the Internet, where the question is, what does this thing mean? What is its meaning? What is it equal to? Whereas if you look at the church fathers, they're often taking these things and applying them in multiple ways. And sometimes. And if you were to line them up as a list of things, that this is what this passage means, then you could say, well, the church fathers disagree with each other because this one says this to these people and he says this, and this other one says this to these people, and they're not identical. It's not the same. And yet I think this is what's key. They're all compatible with the orthodox tradition, even if they're not saying identical things to different people. Does that make sense? And do you think that's what's going on here?
- [68:32]
B
Well, yeah, I think there's a couple different things.
- [68:35]
A
Okay.
- [68:35]
B
Nothing you just said was wildly incorrect, but thank you. Yeah, no problem. That's a big compliment. That is.
- [68:42]
A
That's huge. Well, this is the Dutch half, too, so I'm really surprised.
- [68:45]
B
Yeah, yeah. You don't expect them now? I noticed that we have another actual, like, Dutch caller, but in between, I noticed we have a bunch of calls from Michigan.
- [68:53]
A
From Michigan.
- [68:54]
B
It's western Michigan, I assume.
- [68:56]
A
There you go. I told you.
- [68:57]
B
This is New Netherlands.
- [68:58]
A
This is the Dutch half.
- [68:59]
B
And by the way, I did actually watch that movie Holland on Amazon prime starring Nicole Kidman, which is, in fact, a horror movie based on my childhood.
- [69:08]
A
Everyone's gonna tune in now.
- [69:09]
B
They're like, ooh, to a scary degree. Like, my mother has some of the same wall decorations that they have in their house. Like, it's a little creepy. A little close, but yeah. So on one hand, part of what we have, and we've talked about this in terms of how prophecy actually works, works, is that you see in the Old Testament a lot of patterns, and then those patterns are sort of filled full in the New Testament. But if you think about them as patterns, obviously, patterns by definition, can be sort of applied and fulfilled in various ways at various times. So sometimes the.
- [69:46]
A
The.
- [69:46]
B
The fathers, when they're commenting on the Old Testament in particular, are commenting on the patterns and then giving a whole bunch of different ways in which we see that pattern play out. So an example I'm thinking of is the bush that was burning and not consumed. Or Gideon's fleece. We were just talking about Gideon. But the bush that's burning and not consumed gets used for a whole bunch of things, right? When we talk about the sacraments, that image gets used. When we talk about the conception of Christ, of the Theotokos and her burying him in her womb, we use that same image. Well, which is it an image of? Well, it's an image of God's creation becoming the vessel for the presence of God and not being destroyed or consumed by him and by his holiness. So that pattern has a whole bunch of fulfillments, like the sacraments, like the Theotokos buried Christ in her womb, like the tabernacle and the temple, Right? And then those things are connected to each other, and we talk about those in various ways. The other piece, besides sort of the application of patterns, is a lot of times we're Missing pieces. We're missing steps in the argument between what something meant in the original context and how it's being applied. So if you don't know that lift up your heads, O ye gates has something to do with the BAAL cycle, which we didn't for a long time, then it looks like our hymns and the Fathers are applying that verse really allegorically and weirdly, because they apply it to the Ascension, they apply it to the harrowing of Hades, both. Which is it? And they apply it in sort of these weird ways. If you understand that this is coming from the BAAL cycle and you understand something about baal, then you have sort of the middle term of the argument that you were missing before, and you say, oh, that's why they're applying it that way. So Psalm 82 is about theosis in that the groundwork for theosis is that humans in Christ are exalted and take the place of the fallen spiritual beings who are judged. In Psalm 82, there's not an either or. Either this is about Christ judging the gods the way it's interpreted on Holy Saturday, or it's just about theosis and they're just taking it allegorically. I've called you Gods because saying it's about theosis doesn't make any sense in the context of the whole Psalm. If you just do it directly, yeah, I called you gods, but you will die like men. People who have undergone theosis, what, get killed by God. What. There's a middle term of that argument that you have to know in order to understand what the Fathers are doing. The Fathers are so familiar with that. In the same way that we talk all the time on this show in our churches, we talk about things without laying out the whole argument. Right. We don't lay out the whole monarchical model of the Trinity every time we invoke the Trinity. But if someone asks us to explain, well, wait a minute, how does that. I thought you said, you know, you just said to Christ, thou art our God, and we know none other beside you. But what about the Father and the Holy Spirit? Well, then we answer that question and we explain what that means, but we don't lay out the whole argument every time we. We refer to the Trinity. So the Fathers don't lay out the whole argument every time they. They refer to a passage. But that doesn't mean they didn't have an argument to get from A to B. Those are the couple things I would add.
- [73:01]
A
Yeah, yeah. All right, our next question comes from Jonathan, who wants to know about distinguishing between the work of the Holy Spirit and the work of angels. How would you disambiguate the workings of the Holy Spirit and angels? In a recent podcast, you talked about the noetic presence of angels and how they could be responsible for some good external thoughts that we might have. For example, if we're reading the scripture and get a sense of revelation of scripture that was new to us, that we'd never experienced before, would you attribute this to the Holy Spirit or to some angelic opening up of the Scriptures? I think that's just one example. But I would love to hear how you would disambiguate the workings of angels and the Holy Spirit. When we look in the scripture, it seems that people are very aware of angels and when they're talking to angels, often because they see them too. And so I'm wondering if you could expound on where scripture shows how angels could be talking to us and providing positive guidance. Thank you. Okay. To me, the distinction, he points out very, very well. I think that in many cases in the Bible, people see an angel and so they know that the angel is talking to them because they actually see the angel. Of course, there's a lot of cases in the history of the church where saints see angels. But when you think a good thought, when you have a good thought, it may not be very apparent. And one of the thoughts that I'm having about that is, does it super matter where the good thought comes from if it's a good thought? I mean, what's the sort of the practical application of trying to make this distinction? I don't know. What do you think?
- [75:02]
B
Yeah. Right. So, I mean. Yeah, that's the core of it. The core of the question is how do I determine whether this is directly from God himself or from God through an angel? Because all good things come from God, so ultimately it's from God. So we know in our experience. Right. Our life of experience, most of the time God works in our life through means. It is very, very rare that God talks to someone directly. And when that happens, you know, it's not ambiguous.
- [75:31]
A
And even in the Bible, I think.
- [75:32]
B
The Holy Spirit is telling me to do this. Right. Like people know when God's talking.
- [75:35]
A
Yeah. No one yet. No one in the Bible says, I feel that God is leading me to X, Y and z. Yeah.
- [75:42]
B
No, but far, far more common is other people in our lives say things to us. Most people, God heals. He heals through doctors these days. There's some times where he just heals people directly. And nobody can explain it. But if he heals you through a doctor's treatment, it's still God bringing you healing and health. It's not the doctor instead of God. And so in the same way, if an angel whispered to you a good thought or an insight, that wouldn't be different than. I mean, that would still be from God. It wouldn't be from the angel themselves. Over against God, as opposed to being from God. And the Holy Spirit is of course God controversial.
- [76:21]
A
Take.
- [76:23]
B
Maybe for William Blade Craig. Anyway, he's. He's catching strays today.
- [76:28]
A
You're going to mention him every half this time around.
- [76:30]
B
Yeah, William Lane Craig. He's, you know, the Holy Spirit is like one of God's three heads, but you know, whatever.
- [76:39]
A
That's going to generate some email.
- [76:41]
B
Oh, no, look it up. He said it.
- [76:43]
A
I know.
- [76:43]
B
He's like a cat skeleton. I don't know. It's another actual metaphor he used. That was for Christ, though. Christ is like a cat skeleton.
- [76:50]
A
Wow. Wow.
- [76:52]
B
The cat skeleton has the feline nature, but it's not a cat all by itself.
- [76:57]
A
Why?
- [76:59]
B
Okay, this man is not a Christian. I'm sorry, like basic Christianity, he rejects not just, he doesn't know, like he consciously rejects and substitutes his own reality.
- [77:09]
A
Yeah, you don't come up with a phrase like Neo Apollinarianism if you don't know anything about Apollinarius the heretic. Okay?
- [77:15]
B
The man is either just an omni heretic or he's psychotic and living in an imaginary fantasy world. You decide which is worse.
- [77:22]
A
Okay. All right. To wrap up this half, then the.
- [77:27]
B
Dutch half, we have.
- [77:28]
A
We have a Dutchman who is. Who is calling out your Dutchness. Father Stephen. So here we go.
- [77:33]
B
I found out I spent money.
- [77:35]
A
Good evening, Fathers. I'm sending you this speak bite because I'm not staying up until 2 in the morning just to call out Father Steve. So this question is directed at him. You always claim to be Dutch, but how often do you even speak Dutch? How many strohwafels do you eat on a yearly basis? And how much hagelslag do you put on your boatrum? I'm hoping you can answer these questions properly or I'll be petitioning to have your Dutch card revoked. Thank you.
- [78:02]
B
Wow.
- [78:04]
A
Well, what do you have to say for yourself, Father?
- [78:06]
B
I taught my wife how to cook. Cook Slovenkin and stroopwafels. Every. Everybody who goes to Starbucks here eats stroopwafels. It's a big deal. You get them at World Market Okay.
- [78:16]
A
You should tell everybody what slovenkin is.
- [78:18]
B
I get. I get bonket. Okay. And Rochabrot and speculos from Jarsma Bakery. Every. Every Christmas season, my family makes oli bolin according to the family recipe. On New Year's Day, I got the sprinkles for my. For my bread. I got bread in the freezer. You cannot touch my food. Dutch ness. Okay? So consider your call. It destroyed Slavinken, for the record. So you take equal parts ground beef and ground pork. You form them into a sausage shape, and then make a sausage by wrapping the ground beef and pork mixture in bacon. You then fry them in butter, and then after you're done frying them in the butter, you take them out and you fry potatoes in the grease to absorb all the flavors, and you serve it and.
- [79:04]
A
And your heart explodes.
- [79:07]
B
It was designed for farm labor, as was Rochabrut. Rochabrut is technically bread, but it's sort of halfway between bread and particle board. It is very heavy, but my grandfather and my great grandfathers would take, like, a chunk of that with some butter on it, wrap it in paper, and put it in their pocket, go out and do farm work.
- [79:25]
A
There we go.
- [79:26]
B
So my wife now uses all of these Dutch words, too.
- [79:31]
A
Wow.
- [79:32]
B
That she's picked up for me. You've Dutched her up in casual conversations. Some of them are Dutch cursing, so I won't say them on the air. But she's been partially assimilated just from being around me.
- [79:44]
A
Here we go. All right, well, that wraps up.
- [79:46]
B
So I have survived that call out.
- [79:50]
Basic stuff.
- [79:51]
A
Wraps up the Dutch half of this episode. Lord of Spirits, we'll be right back with the third half.
- [80:02]
Perhaps you are a seeker exploring the.
- [80:04]
B
Abundance of the Orthodox faith.
- [80:06]
A
Or maybe you're a young mother wanting.
- [80:07]
B
To share the fullness of Orthodoxy with your children and family. Or perhaps you are single, trying to.
- [80:12]
A
Find shelter from unclean images or words. Or an empty nester wanting to fill.
- [80:17]
B
Your time with edifying thoughts, prayers, discussions, and content.
- [80:20]
A
Or maybe you feel alone and just want to find solace and comfort, regardless of your own unique circumstances. Ancient Faith Radio is here to help with your Orthodox journey. Please consider partnering with us by becoming a monthly recurring donor so that we.
- [80:34]
B
Can continue our mission to spread the Orthodox faith and help support the spiritual lives of the already faithful.
- [80:40]
A
Any consistent donation, large or small, will.
- [80:43]
B
Enable us to focus on our mission unabated. Simply visit www.ancientfaith.com support and start your monthly donations today. All gifts are tax deductible. And greatly appreciated.
- [80:55]
A
Thank you.
- [80:58]
Welcome back. It's the third and final half of this Speak Pipe Palooza episode of the Lord of Spirits podcast. We're prerecorded, so don't call. We just completed the Dutch.
- [81:07]
B
I'm gonna go home and eat a bunch of Stampot just to stick it to that Johannes. How dare he?
- [81:11]
A
Yes.
- [81:11]
B
I don't even like Stampot.
- [81:13]
A
What even. What is that? Now I have to know what that even is.
- [81:15]
B
It is sort of like boiled mashed potatoes mixed with boiled vegetables with the life boiled out of them.
- [81:23]
A
So it's just for texture, basically.
- [81:26]
B
Usually potatoes and carrots.
- [81:27]
A
There's no nutrition involved. It's just for texture. Get some sheer calories in there. Okay, well, we've got seven more questions, and I've labeled this the uncomfortable half because some of these questions are on the uncomfortable side. So I don't know, should I throw out a parental advisory here maybe? Yeah, I'm just going to throw it out just for you.
- [81:44]
B
Should probably always do that when I'm talking. Although it's not live.
- [81:48]
A
It's true. That's true. Okay, this first question is from Claire, and she's asking about angels. Hi, pod fathers. This is Claire from St. Michael's Orthodox Church in Whittier, California. My question is, why would angels be attracted to women? I just listened to your episode Fiend Folio, and the idea of angels being attracted to women really bothers me because.
- [82:14]
B
I already have enough creeps who've been.
- [82:17]
A
Attracted to me, thank you very much. There you go. She sounded like she was laughing at the end here. I love that. I just love the way that she put that. What does that mean, angels being attracted to women? Setting aside. I don't know. Maybe not setting aside. I mean, God bless you, Claire. I hope. I hope you have fewer creeps in your life.
- [82:34]
B
I mean, there's an answer that'll get us canceled. Like, why. Why did the devil go for Eve instead of Adam?
- [82:39]
A
I don't know.
- [82:40]
B
Hazard a guess. Get yourself canceled.
- [82:42]
A
I don't think.
- [82:43]
B
Tell your wife not to listen to this episode.
- [82:45]
A
Yeah, I mean, they don't have bodies, right? They don't have human bodies. They don't have carnal bodies. So what exactly does that mean? You know, like in Genesis 6, they saw the daughters of men were attractive.
- [82:57]
B
Yeah, well, it's not unrelated to why the devil went to Eve and not Adam.
- [83:02]
A
Okay, try to put it as delicately as you can.
- [83:06]
I know you're not known for your delicacy.
- [83:07]
B
Going to be the. The. This is Going to be the Guinness canceled version. Oh, okay.
- [83:11]
A
Thanks.
- [83:11]
B
I was talking about. There are various, you know, other theories, 1950s style chauvinist remarks you could make.
- [83:17]
A
Oh, okay.
- [83:18]
B
Okay. That's what I was referring to.
- [83:20]
A
Okay, thank you.
- [83:21]
B
The connection, again, you have to understand the difference between men and women, which is increasingly dicey in our modern world. But as we've talked about in terms of the book of Genesis, humanity is created to put the creation in order and fill it with life. Those are the two things. Each one of the partners has one of those things that they major in, and then they participate in the other one. And the one that women major in is the filling things with life. And we've talked about how that's. That includes but is not limited to giving birth. That's sort of a very obvious. Women are the ones who give birth. Sorry. Various people in the 21st century give birth to do human life, but also they fill things with life in other ways. And we've talked about how when those things go wrong, you can have a kind of toxic masculinity that is, you know, tyrannical order, violent order, without life that is destructive to life. You could also have a toxic femininity, meaning something that's full of life. But the life. There's no order. It's chaos. It's out of control. Not to sound like Jordan Peterson here. By that, I don't mean doing a Kermit the Frog impression. I mean the whole, you know, feminine chaos thing not going all the way down that road, but just that's sort of when it. When it runs amok. And so there is therefore a kind of connection between disfigured or evil femininity and the kind of beings that demons are. So there is. There is a kind of. Of dovetailing there.
- [84:50]
A
Yeah, right. And it also occurs to me that if the idea is to try to bring chaotic life into the world, you know, life out of control, the way that women are made suggests that as being right.
- [85:05]
B
The past do that by seducing women to evil.
- [85:07]
A
Yeah. Because men don't give birth again. Sorry, 20. 20, 20ish and on. Yeah.
- [85:14]
B
So that's. That's what I think is going on there in terms of the book of Genesis. Right. So we'll just talk the book of Genesis. I think that's the connection that's being made.
- [85:23]
A
This next one comes from Zach, who I think he is also calling you out. There's multiple callings out going on here where he's heard you talk about. I think this is from whole counsel of God. Maybe I don't remember if you've said this on this podcast, but.
- [85:37]
About whether, if you're hungry, whether it's okay to steal or not. Hello, fathers. In a recent episode, Father Steven mentioned, while answering a question regarding how rules are applied, that when someone is hungry, he can go and take his neighbor's food if that neighbor has more than they can use in order to feed his family, and that this does not fall under the prohibitions against stealing. Yet I could not find anything that seemed to support that. And I'm hoping Father Stephen could elaborate and where he finds the justification for this, as I'm very interested. In particular, I hope he can address Proverbs 6, verses 30 and 31, where it says, people do not despise a thief if he steals when he is hungry, yet if he is caught, he must pay back sevenfold, even if it costs him all the wealth of his house. Thank you. All right, well, what's going on there? What is your justification for saying that? Father Stephen?
- [86:45]
B
The Greek version of Deuteronomy literally says that.
- [86:47]
A
Okay, so then how does that line up with what he points out from. I mean, maybe he doesn't have the Greek version of Deuteronomy or doesn't know.
- [86:54]
B
About the Greek version. So if you go and look at the commentary on Proverbs 6, 30, both Jewish and Christian, they all use 630. They don't tie verse 31 to verse 30 in the sense that they take verse 31 to be talking about what actually happens in life. Not if you catch someone stealing to feed himself. You should do this to him. And how do we know that? Well, how do we. What do we have as evidence in terms of interpreting that? Well, you notice it says payback sevenfold. That's not what the Torah calls for. Even just a straight up regular thief doesn't have to pay back sevenfold. So Proverbs is describing a system of affairs that is incorrect in those verses. Once again, people can't assume that just because something appears in the Bible is being endorsed. Proverbs in particular, the way the book of Proverbs works is it is applying the Torah. It is directly related to the commandments of the Torah. So Proverbs is expecting you to know that paying back sevenfold is not what's required. So when you read commentary on Proverbs 6, they don't say, yes, this is right, he should pay back sevenfold. They say Proverbs 6, verse 30. They don't. You don't despise a man for stealing to feed himself when he's hungry is an example of the general principle of the Torah, beyond even what the Greek of Deuteronomy says, that to preserve a human life, you can violate any commandment of the. The Torah. And therefore a starving man with a starving family can steal enough food from someone who has more than enough. Not from another starving person, but from someone who has more than enough to feed his family. And it's not stealing.
- [88:35]
A
I mean, you know, it's just an.
- [88:36]
B
Explicit case of Deuteronomy, of the general rule of the Torah that you break any commandment to save a human life.
- [88:45]
A
As I say, even in modern society, we have this sense of right. Like it's illegal to kill someone unless it's in self defense. It's, you know, you shouldn't violate traffic laws, but no one's going to convict you if you, let's say you, you.
- [89:01]
B
You drive over on the hospital and you run a red light.
- [89:03]
A
Yeah. Or you drive over on the shoulder, you know, in order not to hit another vehicle. You know, no one's going to charge you for that because we have the sense that preserving human life is paramount.
- [89:17]
B
Right. And so.
- [89:21]
Proverbs 6 is not contradicting the Torah.
- [89:25]
A
Yeah, right.
- [89:27]
B
You have to interpret it. You interpret everything else in the Old Testament in light of the Torah, whether you're Jewish or Christian. It's not contradicting itself. It's pointing to an incorrect state of affairs. That this poor man who's stealing just because he's starving and taking from someone who has too much is treated by the law in an unjust. In a way that is unjust even for an actual regular thief. So this is pointing to a Jean Valjean type situation.
- [89:57]
Right. Not a prescriptive situation. The prescription for which you get in the actual Torah.
- [90:03]
A
Okay, the next question comes from Tyler, who is asking about in the Gospels where the Holy Spirit descends on Christ at his baptism, as we often translate it, in the form of a dove. And so he's. He's wondering about exactly what that means.
- [90:21]
This is Tyler from Louisville with a question about the Holy Spirit at Theophany. I've heard you say before that the Spirit descended like a dove would, descend and lit upon Christ as a dove would, but not the spirit did not become a dove. But I was reading St. John's exact exposition, and he says, spirit descended in bodily form. And the statement shocked me until I found that that's the wording in Luke 3. 22, Holy Spirit has been descended upon him in bodily form as a dove in Greek. So my teko edi. And, and I'm not really sure how else to interpret that other than that the Holy Spirit became like, took a body temporarily or appeared to have a body. I'm not sure. But, but it seems to be more than in the, in the way a.
- [91:08]
B
Dove lights on someone.
- [91:10]
A
So just wondered if you could clarify that for me. Thank you. Okay. Well, I mean, the actual phrase in Greek is somatiko ivi, which it doesn't say in the. In a body. A body. It's, you know, somatikos. Right. Is more of an adverb. Yeah. In a bodily way, a bodily shape, Bodily ethos. Form.
- [91:39]
B
So in a shape like a body. Yeah.
- [91:42]
A
Right. Like looking.
- [91:43]
B
You have to remember what body means also. Yeah, right. Again, body doesn't mean physical stuff. Yeah, we're interpreting that through modern physics. Right. Angels have bodies.
- [91:55]
A
I mean, the Holy Spirit is not incarnate as a dove.
- [91:58]
B
Right.
- [91:59]
A
So.
- [91:59]
B
But you would, if you were going to, you would use similar Greek language. If you were talking about an angel appearing to someone and they appeared in what looked like a human body, you would say they appeared in bodily form. That doesn't mean that angel was like incarnate the way Christ was. It would mean, you know, you're, you're looking and you're seeing what looks like a. Right. So it's. The idea is the descent of the Holy Spirit resembled a dove.
- [92:24]
A
Yeah, it looks like the movement of.
- [92:25]
B
A dove, but that's not, that's not implying a tangibility. Like, I mean, it's fun to sit and think about that. Well, could you, could you, could you have touched him? Right, right. Or like when an angel appears to somebody, could they have walked up with their hand, have gone through him? Would it be like a force ghost or pull off a feather, semi solid or what? You know.
- [92:45]
A
Well, and, and, you know, I think.
- [92:46]
B
Part of the interesting questions to speculate about.
- [92:49]
A
Yeah, yeah. I think part of the reason people get tripped up on this, mate, maybe is again, icons. You see a picture of a dove. I mean, that's what's in the icon. But also it's like, well, okay, how else would you draw that?
- [93:03]
B
You know, describing it as being like a dove. So what are you going to depict?
- [93:08]
A
Yeah, you can't depict fluttering because an icon is not. It doesn't move. You know, that's kind of the best you can do. I mean, there's a lot of stuff in icons that's symbolic.
- [93:22]
B
So it is important that the rule is you're only supposed to depict the Holy Spirit that way in Icons of Theophany.
- [93:30]
A
Yeah.
- [93:33]
Right.
- [93:33]
B
So he's not just a dove in general or.
- [93:36]
A
Yeah, yeah, yeah, exactly, exactly. Okay, this next one comes from Lexi. This is a little bit of a delicate question in some ways, but I think. I think we can extract out the general thing in response to this. That. So I'll just play it. Hi, Fathers. My name is Lexi, and I would love some wisdom from you guys. I have been very moved by this podcast and very enlightened. I grew up Protestant. Anyways, I've been married for five years almost, and I just always come back to First Corinthians 13, verse.
- [94:18]
6, 7. That whole passage about what love is, and sometimes my spouse is not totally honest with me. Kind of a touchy topic. But when it says love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, and endures all things, how do I be a good wife.
- [94:41]
While sometimes occasionally being lied to? I want to believe everything he says and hope for him and bear and endure, but at what point is that stupid? Or should I just love in the flying in the face of, like, worldly intelligence? I don't know. It's such a hard. Do you understand the question? It's not an easy answer, but thank you so much for your help. Yeah. So, Lexi, if you are listening to this episode, we do understand the question. I mean, the first thing I'll say is you should talk to your own priest about the particulars of your marriage. I think that's the main thing to say up front. But. But generally speaking.
- [95:34]
I don't think that that passage from First Corinthians 13, when it says believes all things means that you go through life gullible that you believe anything anyone says to you. I mean, there's all kinds of other stuff in Scripture about being wise and, you know, listening closely and being able to tell truth from falsehood and all that kind of stuff. So I don't think that's what that means, that you just take anything and believe it or whatever it might be.
- [96:04]
I think it's the word faithful. Yeah, right.
- [96:08]
B
Knock it off with the believe in the faith stuff.
- [96:11]
A
Yeah, faithful. There we go.
- [96:12]
B
It's faithful in all things.
- [96:14]
A
Faithful in all things. That. Yeah, but I mean, also, like, it's about, you know, this passage is about what is love. Right. Of course. Everyone's baby, don't hurt me. Yeah. I was gonna say everyone's hearing that in their minds now.
- [96:30]
But ultimately, I mean, it's beautiful because if you read it from the beginning, it talks about if you could do all of these impressive things, but if you don't have love, then you're nothing. And love, of course, is that self sacrificial care for another person. That's what that is. And so.
- [96:50]
Within a marriage in particular, because that's the context that Lexi's asking about.
- [96:57]
Husbands and wives are called to love each other in this self sacrificial way.
- [97:03]
That doesn't mean. And again, we don't know your marriage, Lexi. We don't. So you really should talk about this with your own father confessor, your own priest. But within a marriage, both people are going to be bad to each other on some level, sometimes very bad. And we can still give to them self sacrificially. Doesn't mean we have great feelings about them 24 hours a day.
- [97:31]
Or even often, you know, you may not have big feelings at all and still have a good marriage. It does not mean though that whatever happens that you just have to take any of doesn't. It does not mean that. It doesn't mean that. Certainly we have some examples of saints where, and frankly it's, you know, it's almost always women where their husbands were abusive and even maybe killed them, stuff like this, and they are regarded as martyrs and so forth. I would definitely not use that as a blanket application for someone being abused in a marriage. Again, I do not know if we're not talking about a particular marriage here, just generally speaking, you know, our faithfulness is to Christ and we are faithful to Christ by serving our husband or wife. And sometimes you have to kind of shrug your shoulders when they say or do stuff that's wrong or off and, you know, just kind of.
- [98:31]
You don't, you don't have to, you know, you don't have to, you know, like I said, you don't have to be gullible. You don't have to say. Okay. Anything you do or say is fine. Because that's not true. That's not true. Absolutely not true.
- [98:44]
So yeah, that's what I have to say about that. Thank you for that correction in the translation, Father. I don't even know why that didn't occur to me, because it's not like we haven't harped on that a thousand, thousand times on this podcast before.
- [98:55]
B
Yes, love is faithful in all things.
- [98:58]
A
Faithful.
- [98:59]
B
Very different.
- [99:00]
A
Yeah. Which is kind of of a piece with the rest of the verse. Bears all things, faithful in all things, hopes all things, endures all things.
- [99:09]
B
Yeah, it kind of makes more sense. Yeah.
- [99:15]
In general.
- [99:18]
I think that First Corinthians 13 is the most abused passage of the Bible, mainly because it mostly gets read at weddings.
- [99:26]
A
Yeah.
- [99:28]
B
Which means it gets associated people's brain with the wrong kind of love. Now, that said, we're called upon to love everyone and your spouse is someone. So it's not that it doesn't apply, right? It's just it doesn't exclusively apply to your spouse in some special way that it doesn't apply to other people who you're called to love. Like your neighbor, Right.
- [99:52]
And.
- [99:54]
What it means to love someone.
- [99:58]
Right? This why it's possible to love everyone. This has nothing to do with feelings. This has nothing to do with liking people. You're not called to like everyone. You're called to love everyone.
- [100:11]
This is a different thing. To love someone means you do everything within your power to help them find salvation.
- [100:20]
Now, for a lot of people, that's not a lot. For your spouse, that's a lot more than it is for most other people, right?
- [100:29]
Because you have obviously a closer and more intense relationship with them than you do with the average person, at least, hopefully. So that ratchets it up a little. Okay, but.
- [100:39]
Being super blunt, right? Does believing someone's lies help them find salvation? Does allowing someone to continue sinful behavior toward you or other people, does that help their salvation? Does letting someone remain unrepentant help their salvation? No, quite the opposite. If you love someone, you want to help them find repentance, you want to work things out.
- [101:04]
You want to make peace, you want to help them do better and be better, right? And ideally, in a Christian marriage, that's a two way street, right? Which means it requires humility of us too. I have to be willing to grow and change and repent and be corrected to not just, oh, I'm going to straighten out my spouse, right? Who, you know, messes up all these things, unlike me, right? That's not how that works. It's a two way street. But.
- [101:35]
You can't have repentance without accountability, right? And we get this with kids. Like if you just accepted and tolerated any behavior from your kid, that wouldn't be a sign that you really loved them. But for some reason where we're talking about other adults, we seem to think that if I don't just accept, however this other adult wants to behave toward me and other people, that I don't love them, somehow your teenage kid might throw that you hate me, you know, whatever. But that's adolescent nonsense, right?
- [102:08]
So, yeah, we have this really wimpy understanding of love. Right? And that's not. I mean, maybe it's, you know.
- [102:19]
I'm just gonna go wherever things take me.
- [102:23]
I think it may be based on a really wimpy version of Jesus that is very popular in Protestant evangelical circles of seeing Jesus as just this victim who just gets abused and just takes it. Instead of seeing Christ as the one who conquers hell, who goes to his death voluntarily and endures all these things voluntarily so that he could be victorious and set us free and rescue us, his bride, the church. That's a very different view of Jesus. Right. And what love is. Love is this heroic thing. Love requires, like, strength.
- [103:00]
And virtue from us. Right. It's not just sort of a passive or receptive thing where we sort of tolerate everything that happens to us and just, you know, I gotta. I gotta love everybody. I gotta accept them just the way they are.
- [103:20]
Get out of here with that. Toughen up. Man up, evangelicals.
- [103:24]
A
That's what I'm saying too. Okay, just a few more questions. It's another delicate one. That's why I call this the uncomfortable.
- [103:31]
B
Half that I'll probably handle indelicately.
- [103:33]
A
Well, hopefully they knew who they're calling here, so. All right, this one is from Bethany, who has a question about virginity. Hi, Pond fathers, this is Bethany, one of your Eastern Catholic friends in Montana. And I have a rather delicate question based on the comment that was made that most Protestants believe in the virgin conception but don't actually believe in the virgin birth and other comments that were made on the. In the episode on purification. So what does it mean for Mary to have been a physical virgin after giving birth? Because if we're going solely off of the hymen not being ruptured, then that would mean that certain women who tampons and menstrual cups but have never had intercourse or been otherwise enchased might not be physical versions. And then in the reverse situation, there are some women who have had multiple partners and never bled. So what does that mean to be a physical virgin then? Thank you. I mean, number one, physical virgin is not a category in our. Like, that's not a phrase. It just talks about virginity. And certainly the sense of the virginity of the theotokos. I mean, frankly. I mean, this is a little. We're a little squeamish about this language now. But frankly, in our hymns, it's pretty clear that part of what's being talked about is, as Bethany mentions it, that there's not a physical rupture there. But I think one of the problems is then to extract that set of language that surrounds the theotokos and say, okay, this is the definition of what it means to be a virgin that we're going to apply to everybody else. That to me seems a problem. What do you think, Father?
- [105:19]
B
Well, and there's. But.
- [105:23]
There'S a problem. And I'm going to be self critical because this is some orthodox people. When the anatomical realities associated with the theotokos are mentioned and they're mentioned, they're not really dwelt on that much by the fathers of the hypnography and stuff, but when they're mentioned, that's just mentioned as being emblematic of her virginity. Yeah, right.
- [105:45]
A
Yeah.
- [105:46]
B
And so when you hear certain people talking about it in sort of obsessive and creepy and weird ways, like, that's not good.
- [105:54]
A
Yeah.
- [105:54]
B
Especially since they're talking about the theotokos.
- [105:57]
A
Right.
- [105:58]
B
Like, if you talk that way about my mom, I'd punch you. So.
- [106:03]
Just think about it. But yeah, so we can't get obsessed with that. And, you know, we live in a culture deeply formed by puritanism, so we're all a mess and unable to talk about sex like adults. But the virginity. So let's talk about the word. Right. Parthenos. In. In Greek.
- [106:24]
Bad news, people who have spent your life arguing online about this. When parthenos was used in Isaiah, in the Greek, Isaiah to translate.
- [106:35]
Chapter 7, verse 14, about.
- [106:41]
A woman bearing a child, parthenos didn't mean virgin, it meant young woman.
- [106:45]
A
Right. Yeah.
- [106:47]
B
Just like Alma in Hebrew. So your whole point is moot anyway.
- [106:52]
A
Well, I mean, yeah, virgin. You know, like the.
- [106:57]
Semantic range between virgin in the way that we use it now meaning a person who has not had sex and a young woman.
- [107:09]
Like, it kind of encompassed all of that because there was a sense of this is what you are until you get married.
- [107:15]
B
Well, there's a shift. There's a shift in the word parthenos.
- [107:20]
By the time you get to the first century ad, it had already started shifting. And we know it had shifted because that word starts to be used to describe men.
- [107:30]
A
Hmm.
- [107:33]
B
That's how, you know, the rage had shifted.
- [107:35]
A
Yeah.
- [107:35]
B
To describe a man who had not had sex.
- [107:39]
As a virgin. Even though. So you're not saying a man who hasn't had sex is a young woman. Right. That's not what they were trying to say.
- [107:45]
A
Or, or, you know, to bring it back to what Bethany asked. Yeah, That a man doesn't have a, you know, he doesn't have that membrane, you know, like, it's. Right, yeah.
- [107:54]
B
Right. So it can't be referring to that either. Right.
- [107:58]
And so then there's a further shift. So by the time you get to.
- [108:06]
The 3rd and 4th centuries AD and thereafter. Parthenos does not describe someone who hasn't had sex. Parthenos describes a monastic.
- [108:18]
A
Yeah. That's where you get, like, virgin martyrs.
- [108:21]
B
You'll find patristic treatises, you know, on virgins, or letters written to the virgins. And it's written to a men's monastery.
- [108:31]
A
Yeah. It has nothing to do.
- [108:33]
B
Right. So it has. It has nothing to do with physiology.
- [108:37]
A
Or whether you've ever had sex.
- [108:39]
B
Right. Before they became a monastic.
- [108:41]
A
Yeah. You can certainly become a monk or a nun having had sex at some point in your life.
- [108:46]
B
So. Right. And so it begins to just describe chastity. Right. So St. Basil the Great could famously say that he had never had sex, but was not a virgin.
- [108:55]
A
It.
- [108:56]
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
- [108:59]
B
Meaning that he had in his life, at various times, sinned in that way in. In thought, if not in action.
- [109:05]
A
Right.
- [109:09]
B
And then he's admitting that in his humility. Right.
- [109:14]
So.
- [109:16]
And what all this is about is when we talk about the Ever Virginity of the Theotokos, we're not primarily talking about her anatomy.
- [109:27]
Those few scattered anatomical references are, like I said, emblematic. Ever virgin. We're essentially pointing out that she spent her whole life as a nun, if you want to use modern terms.
- [109:38]
A
Yeah. I think the most important thing to take away, the most important definition of virginity is the way you're living your life.
- [109:47]
B
Right. That she lived her whole life dedicated to God from beginning to end, from when she was brought to the temple by her parents and dedicated to God to the day she died.
- [110:00]
Right. She lived her whole life dedicated to God.
- [110:04]
A
Yeah.
- [110:04]
B
Right. Which runs counter to the common modern evangelical Protestant view. This was not historically the Protestant view, but the modern evangelical Protestant view, which is basically, she gives birth to Jesus and then just like, goes and becomes a regular woman and ignore where she shows up in Acts, because they're not aware that's even there.
- [110:29]
And I say that not to take a cheap shot. I've had multiple Protestants tell me she's not in the Book of Acts, and I have to take them and show them. Yeah. So that's what we're emphasizing in the Ever Virgin, that this wasn't sort of like, oh, no, she was just, as some modern evangelical Protestants will.
- [110:47]
Vaguely blasphemously say, that she was just this conduit or this birthing vessel.
- [110:53]
A
Yeah.
- [110:54]
B
For Jesus to come into the world. And then after that she's not important anymore and she just goes and becomes a regular. I don't know what they think. Housewife. That didn't exist in the first century.
- [111:04]
A
But whatever they think it's just anti Catholic. Blargle. Yeah, frankly.
- [111:09]
B
Yeah. It really is. Yeah. I mean, it'd be anti orthodox too, if they. Do we exist.
- [111:13]
A
Yeah. It's not like they read the Bible and found that there. No, that's not what we find in.
- [111:18]
B
The Bible is that she's there with her son, following him as one of his. As the foremost of his female disciples through his whole life. Death, resurrection, and then she's a central part leading the women in the early church in the book of Acts. That's what you find if you read the Bible.
- [111:36]
A
Yeah, yeah. Never says that she has other children. It never says that she's basically, you know. Yeah, it never says that. It doesn't. So you're making that up. Okay, two more questions.
- [111:48]
B
I like that the passage. I like that the passage that talks about Jesus brothers and sisters. You know, they're like, see, it says he has brothers and sisters. I'm like, yeah. It starts out with. Is this not the carpenter's son? Okay.
- [111:58]
A
Okay, couple more questions. This next one is from Gigi, who wonders what the spirit spiritual ramifications of reproductive technology are in keeping with your themes of scientific materialism. Giants and progress. I was curious if you guys believed that children of assistive reproductive technology were in some way spiritually affected by the circumstances. Stances of their conception. When you talk about how giants were created by this ritual which.
- [112:41]
Called a spiritual being into the circumstances of conception, and how these giant clans.
- [112:54]
Use human sacrifice and some sexual deviants to perpetuate their society. I did see some parallels to IVF and sort of the modern obsession with scientific realism. And it made me feel squicky, and I wanted to know your thoughts on it. All right, the Squicky feeling. The first thing I'll say is.
- [113:23]
And we've said this a number of times, but I think it's maybe important to underline this again, is that with. With giants, it's not just the circumstances of their conception and birth that make them giants, Even if that might be the things that's. That pagan stories say about them. It's the fact that they're raised in this way where their life is about interaction with demons and inviting them demonized people.
- [113:50]
B
Yeah. It's not about DNA and it's.
- [113:52]
A
Yeah, it's not like they're born Something that happen you.
- [113:54]
B
That you're not.
- [113:56]
A
Yeah, they're not born tainted in. In that sense. So. And I think that maybe that gives us a little bit of a guide as to what to think about this. I mean, by no means, by the way, anything about to say should be construed as an endorsement of reproductive technology of whichever one.
- [114:12]
B
You might have a lot of moral issues there.
- [114:15]
A
Massive numbers of. Yeah, yeah, yeah. I definitely err on the side of the.
- [114:22]
Of accepting God's will the way things are, which can be hard.
- [114:29]
B
Well, but let me just put in a plug for the thousands and thousands of children out there who could be being adopted.
- [114:37]
A
Yes, yes.
- [114:40]
B
If people weren't sort of obsessed with their kid having their DNA or kids.
- [114:45]
A
Growing up in the foster system, that is generally not great.
- [114:49]
B
Yeah.
- [114:49]
A
I mean, sometimes that is amazing.
- [114:51]
B
Historically, that is historically what Christians did.
- [114:55]
A
Yes. Taking in the orphans, they went out.
- [114:57]
B
And found the babies that the Romans were exposing and they adopted.
- [115:00]
A
Yeah, well. And even, like, even our alma mater, Father, you know, back in the day, that monastery ran an orphanage. Yeah.
- [115:07]
B
Without entering into detail on all the moral problems associated with different forms of reproductive technology, allow me to offer you an alternative.
- [115:15]
A
Give.
- [115:15]
B
That is a very Christian thing to do, and that's adopt children in need.
- [115:20]
A
Yeah. I don't think, Gigi. I don't think that children who are conceived through whatever these other means have some kind of taint on them. I don't think that. So, no, no squickiness required.
- [115:38]
I just don't think that that's true. You know, setting aside whatever moral issues the people involved in doing that were, I don't think that the children conceived in that way have some kind of mark, you know. All right, our final question for this Speak by Palooza. And this comes from Steve.
- [115:58]
Hello, this is Steve from Philly. In the spirit of cooperation or fostering good ties, I do wonder if it would be possible for the Orthodox and Christian or Catholic churches to recognize each other's saints, even as an example. I just. I feel that there's some Catholic saints that Orthodox parishioners could learn from and vice versa. Anyways. I don't know what you think about that. Maybe you can talk about a future show, but either way, thank you. Goodbye. Okay, so is it possible for the Orthodox Church and the Roman Catholic Church to kind of trade saints, you know, line up saints from the other side and go ahead and just bring them in? I mean, on the one hand, there are orthodox saints who were never part of the Roman Catholic communion, whom the Roman Catholics have added to their list of saints.
- [116:50]
B
Right.
- [116:51]
A
Particularly Eastern Catholics have a number like this. There are some, and it's been controversial in the past, but there are definitely some that venerate St. Gregory Palamas, who his theology in many cases was directly aimed at Roman Catholic disagreements. And I've even heard of some that venerate Saint Mark of Ephesus. But there are other examples too that are probably less controversial. For instance, the three martyrs of Vilnius, who are 14th century orthodox martyrs. They are on the Roman Catholic calendar of saints, particularly in ca. We went almost the whole episode without me mentioning Lithuania, but particularly in Lithuania. Aren't you proud of me, Father Stephen? We dedicate a whole half to Dutchness there.
- [117:29]
B
Well, you had no choice. It became of issue.
- [117:32]
A
I was like, wow, there's this weird theme in a lot of the questions we've got. I was like, just, just, just stack them all in. And on the other side, I know that there was for a little while, I don't remember how long it was, but there was a metropolis in Greece that actually venerated Thomas Aquinas as a saint for a while. But that did not last. It did not last. But I mean, there were even, you know, hymns written to him and, and a feast day and all that kind of stuff. It did not last. So one could quite reasonably say that the church tried it and said no.
- [118:04]
But there was a.
- [118:04]
B
Definitely giving a shot, just. It wasn't working out.
- [118:06]
A
Yeah, I mean, there was definitely an interest in Aquinas. I'm sorry, should I just say Thomas? Anyways, that guy, there was definitely an interest in him amongst some Orthodox for a while. But I think that, like Steve says. Okay. I think, you know, there could be things that could be learned. I mean, I agree there's things that could be learned. I learned stuff from all kinds of sources that are not. That don't necessarily have an Orthodox label on them. But venerating saints is not just about learning something from them. It's about having a feast day, you know, having their hymns, having icons, all of these kinds of things. And at least in the Orthodox Church, canonization of a saint, part of what's going on there, not the only thing, but part of what's going on there is that this person is being held up as an exemplar of the Orthodox faith. Faith and someone who is not an Orthodox Christian. It's really hard for us to hold them up as an exemplar.
- [119:05]
How could we. That doesn't make any sense.
- [119:08]
B
Right.
- [119:08]
A
Like Steve, you wouldn't say that I'm an exemplar for a good Roman Catholic because I'm not a Roman Catholic. So I can't even be a. I can't be a good one because I'm not one at all. I mean, maybe someone could learn something from me. A Catholic could learn something from me, potentially. But I should not be honored as a good Roman Catholic because I'm not one. And so it's funny, you know, the Orthodox have a much less.
- [119:37]
Defined method for recognizing canonizing saints than the Roman Catholics do, where there's a whole sort of system, stages and titles that kind of accrue to different stages. We don't have that. And yet it does seem that we are more conservative about.
- [119:54]
Who gets canonized, who gets held up as a saint.
- [120:00]
It's just a problematic thing, you know, to attempt that.
- [120:07]
There's at least one example that I know of, and it's somewhat controversial one, too, because some people say that's not how it happened. But my best understanding of Saint Isaac of Syria is that canonically he never belongs to.
- [120:18]
What we regard in that period as being the Orthodox Church, that he canonically belonged to the Church of the east, which was full of Nestorians, although there's no indication that he himself was one theologically, but that, you know, where he was a bishop, where he was a monk, was not a territory where there was an Orthodox presence. I know it's controversial. There are people who say that's not true. He definitely was, and that's not the point that I'm making. But. But even if it is true that he did not canonically belong to the Orthodox Church, and of course now we do venerate him as an Orthodox saint, that is a very rare kind of thing.
- [120:57]
And.
- [120:59]
To do that with the Roman Catholic Church would just be freighted with all kinds of difficulties. So I. I don't see it happening. And I don't think, you know, if it's for the point of diplomacy or whatever, I don't think that's good diplomacy. You know, I don't think that's good diplomacy. We need to get on. We need to be on the same page with regards to dogma and practice. And, you know, truly, we. We have to believe that we are one. One Christian faith in all of the important particulars before we can restore communion, you know, before we can do any of that kind of stuff. So. So I'm happy that the Roman Catholic Church has decided to recognize a number of Orthodox saints, but it's just not going to work. The other way. It's just not. It's not because we're not mean. It's not because we're mean. Oh, maybe we are mean, but it's not because we're mean. It's because of what our understanding of the role that a saint plays in the life of the church, that they are. These are the best Orthodox Christians. And if someone's not even an orthodox Christian, then we can hardly add them to the list of the best.
- [122:08]
It would be like saying that.
- [122:12]
The Queen of England, as awesome and lovely as she was, that she's a really good American, she's just not an American.
- [122:21]
And that's okay.
- [122:23]
So I don't know. What do you have to say about any of that, Father? Well.
- [122:29]
B
Yeah, part of it is that's not something you just do.
- [122:33]
A
Yeah, I know.
- [122:35]
B
That's something the Roman Catholics just do, but it's really popes who do that. It's not the Roman Catholics. I don't think they get a vote. Like, that's something the last few popes have just done. And it's nonsensical. I'm just going to say it. Okay. Joan of Arc being a Roman Catholic saint is nonsensical.
- [122:58]
Oh, man, we're gonna get all kinds of clergy garbage. She was executed as a heretic, condemned as a heretic, and turned over to the civil authority for execution by the Roman Catholic church.
- [123:12]
Then in 1915, she was canonized as a saint. Then at Vatican 2, they said Saints Margaret and Catherine, who appeared to her in visions, never existed.
- [123:22]
A
It. Yeah. That's kind of amazing.
- [123:26]
B
Yes. So the official papal acts just don't care about whether these things make sense or not. Uh, making St. Gregory Palomas the patron saint of Europe, as a recent pope did, makes no sense from a Roman Catholic perspective.
- [123:41]
Right? It doesn't make a sense with his doctrine. It doesn't. Right. Uh, St. Cyril and Methodius.
- [123:48]
Right.
- [123:51]
It does not make sense from the perspective of Roman Catholic doctrine. But the pope can do what he wants in terms of canonizing saints. There's a cause to canonize Martin Luther in the Roman Catholic Church right now. I don't really know that, but there is.
- [124:05]
A
Wow.
- [124:06]
B
Wow.
- [124:08]
So they may canonize all our saints. Who knows? And nobody can stop the Pope from doing that if he decides to.
- [124:19]
But in the Orthodox Church, you don't just do that. Right now, there is a big exception to the whole point Father Andrew made, and that's martyrs.
- [124:31]
Because there are people who end up dying for Christ who aren't even Christians. Let Alone Orthodox Christians who are considered martyrs by the church. Right. Because their martyrdom is a baptism with their own blood into Christ. Right. So I don't see why that would be only pagans.
- [124:51]
Anyone who dies for Christ can be seen as a martyr. That opens the door. So I can see a world in the future.
- [125:01]
Right. Where let's say Germany.
- [125:06]
Over several centuries from now is an Orthodox country.
- [125:11]
A
Right.
- [125:13]
B
And the Holy Synod of Germany goes back through German history, not Martin Luther, mind you, but.
- [125:21]
Particular German saints who were canonized in the Roman Catholic Church back in the day, especially martyrs.
- [125:28]
And says, you know what, this person was not technically part of the institutional Orthodox Church at the time, but because of their martyrdom or something else. Right. The German Orthodox Church, that Holy Synod of Bishops recognized them as saints and then, you know, that would happen.
- [125:46]
A
Oh, you know, actually it occurs, it occurs to me when you mention that.
- [125:51]
B
It'S not exactly Lithuania coming back again.
- [125:53]
A
What's that? No, no, it's not Lithuania coming back again. Oh, that's a, it's a neighbor. Not a next door neighbor. But. And I don't know what to do with this. I don't have to do anything with it. But the, the Czech and Slovak Orthodox Church, they canonized Jan Hus.
- [126:08]
B
Oh yeah.
- [126:09]
A
They actually venerate him as a, as a saint, which is interesting. You know, he was never part of.
- [126:15]
B
The Orthodox and we don't have to do anything with that.
- [126:17]
A
Yeah, I don't have to, I don't have that.
- [126:19]
B
Those bishops did.
- [126:19]
A
Right.
- [126:20]
B
And I'm, I'm not a Czech or a part of that church or in.
- [126:25]
A
Czech Republic or Slovakia, like, you know.
- [126:27]
B
Yeah. And I'm not a bishop, so it's none of my business, you know.
- [126:30]
A
Yeah, but it's, I mean, it's an interesting thing. You know, there's sometimes that the church kind of says, well, we're going to do this because this makes sense for our community.
- [126:37]
B
And so that could happen in the future. Now I know just like when I talk about Mass, potential mass Jewish conversions in the future, someone's going to go out there and say that, that Father Stephen says German Roman Catholic martyrs are saints or something based on what I just said. But you know.
- [126:55]
Nuance goes to die on the Internet. So there is, there is a possibility of that in the future. But that will be from the self understanding of a potential future autocephalous Orthodox Church.
- [127:07]
A
Yeah.
- [127:08]
B
And her Synod of Bishops. And that will be part of the reevaluation and baptism of the culture of that place.
- [127:16]
A
And those people all right, well, we did 21 questions, so there you go. Congratulations. Blackjack. Exactly. So that is our show.
- [127:25]
B
Gambling now on Lord of Spirit, that.
- [127:26]
A
Is, you don't have to put money on blackjack. You just play for fun. It's a thing. I mean, it's kind of a lame.
- [127:32]
B
Cards, dancing, what next?
- [127:33]
A
It's kind of a lame game.
- [127:34]
B
But to play what will we praise next?
- [127:39]
A
That's right.
- [127:39]
B
Going to the cinema, Smoke, drink or.
- [127:41]
A
Chew or date girls that do. Yes, that is our show for today. Thank you very much for listening everybody. This was not a live episode. This is a rare pre recorded episode. We'd like to hear from you though. You can email us at Lord of Spirits at Ancient, you can message us our Facebook page or as all these people did, you can leave us a voicemail@speakpipe.com LordOfSpirits and if you have basic questions, basic questions about Orthodox Christianity or you need help to find a parish, go to orthodoxintro.org and join us for.
- [128:14]
B
Our live broadcast on the second and fourth Thursdays of the month at 7pm Eastern, 4pm Pacific. How many times do I have to try to tell you that I. I'm sorry for the things I've done?
- [128:23]
A
If you're on Facebook, follow our page, join our discussion group and please give us a rating. Review in the appropriate places. And don't forget to share this show with one of your friends.
- [128:35]
B
And finally, be sure to go to ancient faith.com stroke support and help make sure we and lots of other AFR podcasters stay on the air. But when I start to try to tell you, that's when you have to tell me. Hey, this kind of trouble's only just begun.
- [128:47]
A
Thank you, good night. God bless you.
- [128:53]
B
You've been listening to the Lord of.
- [128:55]
A
Spirits with Orthodox Christian priests, Father Andrew.
- [128:58]
B
Stephen Damick and Father Stephen DeYoung, a listener supported presentation of Ancient Faith Radio. And I beheld and I heard the.
- [129:06]
A
Voice of many angels round about the throne and the beasts and the elders.
- [129:10]
B
And the number of them was 10,000.
- [129:12]
A
Times 10,000 and thousands of thousands, saying.
- [129:15]
B
With a loud voice, worthy is the Lamb that was slain to receive power.
- [129:20]
A
And riches and wisdom and strength and honor and glory and Blessing. Revelation, chapter 5, verses 11 through 12.