Author: arevans

Little known in the West, Mark’s writings have always been popular in the Christian East. They are included in the first volume of that classic collection of Orthodox spiritual texts The Philokalia; in the Byzantine period there was even a monastic adage, ‘Sell everything and buy Mark’. Reacting against the Messalians (an ascetic movement originating in fourth-century Syria), Mark insists in trenchant terms upon the completeness of baptism. He is speaking, of course, about sacramental baptism:

However far someone may advance in faith, however great the good he has attained … he never discovers, nor can he ever discover, anything more than what he has already received secretly through baptism…. Christ, being perfect God, has bestowed upon the baptized the perfect grace of the Spirit. We for our part cannot possibly add to that grace, but it is revealed and manifests itself increasingly, the more we fulfil the commandments …. Whatever, then, we offer to Christ after our regeneration was already hidden within us and came originally from Him.

Mark ends – for he is strongly Pauline in spirit – with a quotation from Romans 11:35 – 36: ‘Who has first given a gift to God, so as to receive a gift in return? For from Him… are all things.8

Baptism, according to the Monk’s teaching, confers upon us a total purification from all sin, both original and personal; it liberates us from all ‘slavery’, restoring the primal integrity of our free will as creatures formed in God’s image; and at the same time, through our immersion in the baptismal font, Christ and Holy Spirit take up their abode within us, entering into what Mark terms ‘the innermost and uncontaminated chamber of the heart, the innermost and untroubled shrine of the heart where the winds of evil spirits do not blow’.

At this point Mark makes a crucial distinction, summed up in the two Greek adverbs m u s t i k v V meaning ‘mystically’ or ‘secretly’, and e n e r g u v V , meaning ‘actively’. Initially, at sacramental baptism -and Mark seems to envisage primarily the situation of infant baptism – the indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit is given to us ‘secretly’, in such a way that we are not at first consciously aware of it. We only become ‘actively’ conscious of this presence if we acquire a living faith, expressed through our practice of the divine commandments. In this way baptism plants within us a hidden seed of perfection, but it rests with us – assisted always by God’s grace – to make that seed grow, so that it bears conscious and palpable fruit. While we cannot ‘add* to the completeness of baptism, God nevertheless awaits a response on our part; and if we fail to make that response, although the Spirit will still continue to be present ‘secretly’ in our heart, we shall not feel His presence ‘actively’ within us, nor experience His fruits with full conscious awareness.

Such is Mark’s map of the Christian pilgrimage. Our starling-point is the presence of baptismal grace within us ‘secretly’ and unconsciously; our end-point is the revelation of that grace ‘actively’, with what he terms ‘full assurance (p l h r o j o r i a ) and sensation (a i s q h s i V )’. As he states:

‘Everyone baptized in the Orthodox manner has received secretly the fullness of grace; but he gains assurance of this grace only to the extent that he actively observes the commandments.’

Our spiritual programme can therefore be summed up in the maxim ‘Become what you are’. We are already, from the moment of our sacramental baptism as infants , ‘Spirit-bearers’ in an implicit and unconscious manner. Our aim is therefore to acquire conscious experience – several times Mark uses the Greek term p e i r a – of Him who already dwells within us:

‘All these mysteries we have received at our baptism, but we are not aware of them. When, however, we condemn ourselves for our lack of faith, and sincerely express our belief in Christ by performing all the commandments, then we shall acquire experience within ourselves of all the things that I have mentioned; and we shall confess that holy baptism is indeed complete and that the grace of Christ is invisibly hidden within us; but it awaits our obedience and our fulfilment of the commandments.’

We are now in position to assess the answers which Mark offers to our three questions.

1. It is abundantly clear that Mark allows for an indwelling presence of the Spirit that is unconscious yet nonetheless real. Such, in his view, is precisely the position of those who have been baptized in infancy. They receive a genuine indwelling of the Paraclete, and this ‘secret’ indwelling will never be altogether lost, however careless or sinful their subsequent lives may be; as Mark puts it, ‘Grace never ceases to help us in a secret way. l2 At the same time Mark regards this ‘secret’ presence as no more than an initial starting-point; and he clearly affirms that the vocation of every baptised Christian without exception is to advance from this to a conscious awareness of the Spirit.
2. In Mark’s view, this conscious awareness of Spirit experienced ‘actively’ and ‘with full assurance and sensation’ is in no sense a new grace, distinct from the grace conferred in water baptism, but it is nothing else than the full ‘revelation’ of the baptismal grace conferred upon us at the outset. The baptized Christian ‘never discovers, nor can he ever discover, anything more than what he has already received secretly through baptism’. Everything is contained implicitly in the initial charisma of baptism.
3. As to the outward experiences which accompany this conscious awareness of the indwelling Spirit, Mark is reticent. He does not speak about visions, dreams, trances and ecstasy.

Nowhere have I found in his writings anything that could be interpreted as a reference to speaking with tongues. His allusions to tears are infrequent; so far from exalting the gift of tears, he warns us, ‘Do not grow conceited if you shed tears when you pray.’13 He does indeed believe that our aim is to experience consciously the energies of the Spirit’ and to reach the state above nature’, where the intellect (n o u V ) ‘discovers the fruits of the Holy Spirit of which the Apostle spoke: love, joy, peace and the rest’ (cf. Gal. 5:22).14 But he does not specify what precise form these ‘energies’ and ‘fruits’ are to take.

When interpreting an author such as Mark, it is helpful to make a distinction between ‘experience’ (in the singular) and ‘experiences’ (in the plural). There are surely many Christians who feel able to say in all humility, ‘I know God personally’, without being able to point to any single event such as a vision, a voice, or a concentrated ‘conversion crisis’ of the kind undergone by St. Paul, St. Augustine, Pascal or John Wesley. Personal experience of the Spirit permeates their whole life, existing as a total awareness, without necessarily being crystallized in the form of particular ‘experiences’. When Mark and other Greek Fathers refer to our conscious awareness of the ‘energies’ or ‘fruits’ of the Spirit, they may well have in view an all-embracing ‘experience’ of this kind, rather than any specific and separate ‘experiences’.

The thin, frail man sat huddled over an open book as the candlelight flickered upon the page. The book was opened to Isaiah 43:1–2, “Fear not: for I have redeemed thee, I have called thee by thy name; thou art mine. When thou passest through the waters, I will be with thee; and through the rivers, they shall not overflow thee: when thou walkest through the fire, thou shalt not be burned; neither shall the flame kindle upon thee.” 

Looking up from the passage, Thomas Bilney gazed long and hard into the yellow flame atop his candle. He cautiously reached out his finger toward the flame, but the hot fire defied his approach. Quickly, he pulled back in alarm and dismay. If he could not touch the candle’s small fire, how would he have the courage to face the ravenous flames of the stake tomorrow morning?

This question plagued the soul of Bilney, for he had always been a quiet, shy man, hardly one to be considered a “mighty man of valor.” In fact, he had been just the opposite. He had even faced the stake once before and had renounced the truth in order to spare his life! He shuddered as he remembered the awful guilt that had crushed his heart since that day of denial. The man leaned back and closed his eyes, remembering the steps that had brought him a second time to the fire.

Thomas Bilney was born in Norwich, England. It was the very same city in which he now sat awaiting the dawn of his final morning on earth. During those days of boyhood and early manhood, Bilney had groped in the darkness of human reason.

A bright lad, he was sent to the University of Cambridge. There he filled his mind with knowledge, but his heart was empty of true wisdom. He made splendid advancement in the arts and sciences but could not satisfy his hunger for truth. Bilney wrote of those days, “I spent all that I had upon these ignorant physicians.” Confessions, vigils, fastings, and penance had only brought temporary relief to his troubled heart.

One spring day in 1519, the scholar heard of a new book edited by a man named Erasmus. It was a Greek text of the New Testament set side by side with a new Latin translation by Erasmus. Bilney was drawn to the new book out of his scholastic love for the ancient languages. 

The ancient Greek language was fast becoming the talk of all Europe. Bilney finally found a copy of this specific book by Erasmus in a local shop. But just as he reached for the book, he drew back in fear. He was well aware that the authorities at Cambridge forbade any Greek and Hebrew Bibles, calling them “the sources of all heresies.” But Bilney’s curiosity overcame his fear. He purchased the volume of the Greek New Testament and tucked it under his scholastic gown.

Back in his room, Bilney pulled out the volume and began to read. Hour after hour passed as he poured over the words of Holy Scripture. In the pages of that book, Bilney found what he had long sought. He was particularly struck by a passage from Paul’s first epistle to Timothy: “This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief” (I Timothy 1:15).

That night, Bilney was converted to Christ. Fasts, vigils, pilgrimages, purchases of indulgence all had failed. On the cross of Calvary, Christ Jesus had done what Thomas Bilney could not do for himself. Bilney had heard the voice of Jesus of Nazareth.

Soon, the eager young disciple found kindred spirits at Cambridge. Over a period of several years, a few young men began to meet and discuss the Scriptures at a place in Cambridge called the White Horse Inn. Here gathered men such as John Lambert, Matthew Parker, John Rogers, Miles Coverdale, John Frith, and William Tyndale. They were men of various interests and backgrounds, but they all were united in their love for the Novum Testamentum, and they became known as “the Scripture men.” 

Bilney was personally responsible for the conversion of Hugh Latimer, a splendid scholar who joined the little group at the inn in 1524. All these men knew and loved Bilney as their friend. He was quiet, unassuming, and patient. The more rugged spirits of bold men such as Parker, Rogers, and Tyndale were strongly drawn to the gentle Bilney, and they called him by the affectionate name “Little Bilney.” His short stature and frail body matched this name well.

In 1527, Thomas Bilney was arrested and threatened with death if he would not recant his faith in Christ. A stronger man like Luther or Knox would have stood firm, but “Little Bilney” had wilted under the fierce threats and had renounced his errors. Immediately after his recantation, Bilney was oppressed with a deep sense of guilt and unworthiness. Like the Apostle Peter, Bilney had denied his Lord and had gone out and wept bitterly.

For over a year, Bilney languished under these doubts and fears. He doubted whether or not God had accepted him. He feared that he had committed the unpardonable sin. He was overwhelmed with the thought that, as he had been ashamed of Jesus, so the Son of Man would one day denounce him before the Father. By degrees, Bilney recovered and resolved that he would intentionally get arrested again. This occurred in Norwich in 1531. 

Now, for a second time, he faced the fire. What would the morrow bring? Would his courage fail again? Would “Little Bilney” again deny his Lord? His mind was filled with doubt as he considered his own frailty, yet he was encouraged as he thought of the Lord visiting Peter on the shore of Galilee. Like Peter, perhaps the Lord had given him another opportunity to seal with his blood the testimony of Christ.

As Bilney thought about these things, he heard the sound of steps outside his cell. He looked up to find his friend Matthew Parker, one from the White Horse Inn group. Parker would one day become the future Archbishop of Canterbury under Queen Elizabeth I. His good friend Parker, knowing the frailty and timidity of “Little Bilney,” had come to strengthen him. But the well-meaning visitor and friend found that his words were unnecessary because Someone Else was already there with Bilney.

The man who had failed once would not fail a second time. Pointing to the open Bible before him, Thomas Bilney slowly recited these words to Parker: “when thou walkest through the fire, thou shalt not be burned; neither shall the flame kindle upon thee.” Then, with a steady hand, Bilney stretched out his finger again into the flame of the small candle. Matthew Parker watched in amazement as his timid friend resolutely held his finger perfectly still as the flame burned the flesh from the finger. This was not a presumptuous test of God, but a firm act of reliance upon the truth of Scripture! 

We do not know whether Bilney felt the searing heat of that flame. However, we do know that God gave him in that moment the grace to bear it according to His gracious promise: “My strength is made perfect in weakness.”

On the morrow (August 19, 1531), Thomas Bilney did not waver from his purpose. A crowd had gathered in the streets as he walked resolutely toward the fire. Some thought that the weak, frail man would probably recant again. But as the fagots were piled around him, “Little Bilney” raised himself to his full height and said in a firm voice, “Good people, I am come hither to die.” After reciting Psalm 143, he took off his outer garments and was bound to the stake.

As the torch was applied to the wood, Bilney did not flinch. The flames burned high around his face, but a strong wind blew them away. Bilney stood firm as the wood was ignited a second time, and then a third. The third time, the fire burned in full strength. Whatever pain the noble martyr felt was bearable as evidenced as Bilney held his head high while the flames intensified around him. He cried out one brief phrase in Latin, “Jesu, credo!” (Jesus, I believe). 

With that dying prayer of faith, “Little Bilney” sunk downward into the fire, and the flames consumed all that was mortal. The weak was made strong, and with Bilney in that fire was “One like unto the Son of Man,” the Christ Who had promised “Fear not: for I have redeemed thee, I have called thee by thy name; thou art mine.” 

O God the Father, Creator of heaven and earth,
Have mercy upon us.
O God the Son, Redeemer of the world,
Have mercy upon us.
O God the Holy Spirit, Sanctifier of the faithful,
Have mercy upon us.
O holy, blessed, and glorious Trinity, one God,
Have mercy upon us.

Remember not, Lord Jesus, our offenses, nor the offenses of our forebears; neither reward us according to our sins.
Spare us, good Lord, spare your people, whom you have redeemed with your most precious blood, and by your mercy preserve us forever.
Spare us, good Lord.

From all evil and wickedness; from sin, from the works and assaults of the devil; from your wrath and everlasting condemnation,
Good Lord, deliver us.

From all blindness of heart; from pride, vanity, and hypocrisy; from envy, hatred, and malice; and from all lack of charity,

From all disordered and sinful affections; and from all the deceits of the world, the flesh, and the devil,

From all false doctrine, heresy, and schism; from hardness of heart, and contempt of your Word and commandments,
Good Lord, deliver us.

From lightning and tempest; from earthquake, fire, and flood; from plague, pestilence, and famine,

From all oppression, conspiracy, and rebellion; from violence, battle, and murder; and from dying suddenly and unprepared,
Good Lord, deliver us.

By the mystery of your holy incarnation; by your holy nativity and submission to the Law; by your baptism, fasting, and temptation,

By your agony and bloody sweat; by your Cross and passion; by your precious death and burial,

By your glorious resurrection and ascension; by the sending of the Holy Spirit; by your heavenly intercession; and by your coming again in power and great glory,
Good Lord, deliver us.

In all times of tribulation; in all times of prosperity; in the hour of death, and in the day of judgment,

We sinners beseech you to hear us, O Lord God: That it may please you to rule and govern your holy Church universal in the right way,
We beseech you to hear us, good Lord.

To illumine all Bishops, Priests, Elders and Deacons, with true knowledge and understanding of your Word; and that, both by their preaching and living, they may show it accordingly,

To send forth laborers into your harvest; to prosper their work by your Holy Spirit; to make your saving health known unto all nations; and to hasten the coming of your kingdom,

To give all your people increase of grace to hear your Word with humility, to receive it with pure affection, and to bring forth the fruit of the Spirit,

To bring into the way of truth all who have erred and are deceived,

To give us a heart to love and fear you, and diligently to keep your commandments,
We beseech you to hear us, good Lord.

To bless and keep all your people,

That it may please you to rule the hearts of our President, Joseph Biden, and all others
in authority, that they may do justice, and show mercy, and walk humbly before you,

To bless and guide all judges, giving them grace to execute justice, and to maintain truth,

To bless and keep our armed forces by sea, and land, and air, and to shield them in all dangers and adversities,

To bless and protect all who serve their communities by their labor and learning,

To give and preserve for us and for others the bountiful fruits of the earth, so that at the harvest we all may enjoy them,
We beseech you to hear us, good Lord.

To make wars to cease in all the world, and to give to all nations unity, peace, and concord,

That it may please you to show mercy on all prisoners and captives; refugees, the homeless, and the hungry; and all those who are desolate and oppressed,

To preserve all who are in danger by reason of their work or travel,
We beseech you to hear us, good Lord.

To strengthen the bonds of those in Holy Matrimony; to uphold the widowed and abandoned; and to comfort all whose homes are torn by strife,

To protect the unborn and their parents, and to preserve all women in childbirth;

To care for those who have lost children or face infertility, and to provide for young children and orphans,

To visit the lonely and those who grieve; to strengthen all who suffer in mind, body, or spirit; and to comfort with your presence those who are failing and infirm,

To support, help, and deliver all who are in danger, necessity, and tribulation,

To have mercy upon all people,
We beseech you to hear us, good Lord.

That it may please you to give us true repentance; to forgive us all our sin, negligence, and ignorance; and to endue us with the grace of your Holy Spirit to amend our lives according to your holy Word,

To forgive our enemies, persecutors, and slanderers, and to turn their hearts,

To strengthen those who stand; to encourage the faint-hearted; to raise up those who fall; and finally, to beat down Satan under our feet,
We beseech you to hear us, good Lord.

To grant to all the faithful departed eternal life and peace,

To grant that, in the fellowship of all the saints, we may attain to your heavenly kingdom,
We beseech you to hear us, good Lord.

Son of God, we beseech you to hear us.
O Lamb of God, you take away the sin of the world;
Have mercy upon us.
O Lamb of God, you take away the sin of the world;
Have mercy upon us.
O Lamb of God, you take away the sin of the world;
Grant us your peace.
O Christ, hear us.
Lord, have mercy upon us.
Christ, have mercy upon us.

Since we all agree that by the sacrament, Christ does really and truly in us perform his promise: why do we vainly trouble ourselves with so fierce contentions, whether by consubstantiation or else by transubstantiation. The sacrament itself is first possessed with Christ or no: a thing which no way can either further or hinder us howsoever it stand, because our participation of Christ in the Sacrament, depends on the cooperation of his omnipotent power, which makes it his body and blood unto us, whether with change or without alteration of the elements, such as they imagine, we need not greatly to care nor inquire after.

Richard Hooker

Anglican spirituality is catholic and ecumenical. We affirm our Roman Catholic, Orthodox, and Protestant brothers and sisters in Christ, in a way no other tradition does. We are Catholics with our Roman Catholic and Orthodox brothers and sisters, and we are Protestant with our Protestant brothers and sisters. We read theology from writers in all three of these traditions, as well as worshiping and theologizing with all Christians from every Christian era.

Charles Erlandson
NorthAmericanAnglican.com – Tract VII
June 20, 2020

For Anglicans the sacrament is only effectual in a worthy receiver i.e. one who possesses faith.

J. C. Ryle writes: Every one the priest baptizes has faith or at least confesses that they do, even infants possess faith – the faith of their parents who act as their surety. Therefore the prayers are based upon a judgment of charity otherwise known as presumptive faith.

John Stott writes: The question may be asked why, if baptism does not by itself confer the graces it signifies (but rather a title to them), the Bible and Prayer Book sometimes speak as if they did? The answer is really quite simple. It is that neither the Bible nor the Prayer Book envisages the baptism of an unbeliever; they assume that the recipient is a true believer. And since ‘baptism and faith are but the outside and the inside of the same thing’ (James Denney), the blessings of the New Covenant are ascribed to baptism which really belong to faith. Jesus had said ‘he that believes and is baptized shall be saved’, implying that faith would precede baptism. So a profession of faith after hearing the gospel always preceded baptism in Acts. For instance, ‘they that received the word were baptized’ (2:41), ‘they believed Philip preaching… and were baptized’ (8:12), ‘Lydia gave heed to what was said by Paul. And when she was baptized…’ (16:14, 15), ‘believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved…’ (16:31-3). It is the same in the Prayer Book service. There is no baptism in the Church of England except the baptism of a professing believer, adult or infant. The adult candidate’s declaration of repentance, faith and surrender is followed by baptism and the declaration of regeneration. The same is true of an infant in the 1662 service, where it is not the godparents who speak for the child so much as the child who is represented as speaking through his sponsors. The child declares his or her repentance, faith and surrender, and desire for baptism. The child is then baptized and declared regenerate. So he is regenerate, in the same sense as he is a repentant believer in Jesus Christ, namely in the language of anticipatory faith or of sacraments.

Christification
Abide in Me
Our life is not a transubstantiation
The glory of God is a man fully alive
If any man be in Christ, he is a new creation
The gospel must be transformative
Alien righteousness
We are made righteous–made strong–but imperceptible
If we look at our progress, we are at once too self-absorbed
We look away to Christ, but we look
We do not lose our identity
We are not made strong, we are crucified…
but that we may strengthened with might through his Spirit in the inner man
And, apart from your grace, there is no health in us…
Lost in wonder, love and praise
The Lord will give strength to His people…
The LORD is my strength
Shine out of my life, Lord Jesus
Strong, but not independent of Him. But strong in the Lord and in the power of His might.
Open our lips and our mouth shall proclaim your praise
I need Jesus; the need I gladly own
My strength I will ascribe unto You. Ps 59:9 Made strong, but not so we can boast about it

Christ is the world’s true light,
Its Captain of salvation,
The Day-star clear and bright
Of every man and nation;
New life, new hope awakes,
Where’er men own his sway;
Freedom her bondage breaks,
And night is turned to day.

In Christ all races meet,
Their ancient feuds forgetting,
The whole round world complete,
From sunrise to its setting:
When Christ is throned as Lord,
Men shall forsake their fear,
To ploughshare bear the sword,
To pruning-hook the spear.

One Lord, in one great Name
Unite us all who own thee;
Cast out our pride and shame
That hinder to enthrone thee;
The world has waited long,
Has travailed long in pain;
To heal its ancient wrong,
Come, Prince of Peace, and reign. Amen.

George Wallace Briggs

But not the certainty.  For as you well know, for all the Scripture verses and passages that might possibly be taken in a Universalist way, there are many others that strongly imply what the Church as a whole has always taught against that speculation.  And who has the authority and the certain knowledge of the future to declare unequivocally that everyone, including the Devil and all his hosts, will repent and be saved in the end?  And of those who dare to declare this as a certainty, which of them will be willing to bear all the consequences if they are mistaken – especially if they’ve misled others to the extent of their living without repentance in this life because they got convinced they could just wait and repent in the next life?

Also, I’m very sorry that you don’t seem to understand how the issue of authority is indeed at the very heart of the matter.  For no matter what any of our speculations might be, no matter how well-thought out and well-intentioned they are, if they’re not informed by, aligned with, and centered in the received Tradition of our Orthodox Church, they simply can’t be correct!  This is especially true when the issue at hand is an important one, and when it has already been decided by the Church as a whole, with virtually every Saint and Church Father and holy elder in agreement.

Either our Church, Christ’s Body, has preserved Christ’s Truth in all its fullness, or our Lord has not protected His Body from “the gates of hell” as He promised He would.  And the Spirit of Truth, Whom Christ promised would lead His Church into all the Truth, must have failed to do that very thing.

Concerning the claim that some Christians in the early centuries were apparently Universalists, if we are faithful Orthodox Christians and not crypto-Protestants, we trust our Church to have made the correct decision in eventually rejecting Universalism, even if some unknown number of Christians believed it in the early centuries.  The historical record is that the Church as a whole rejected it; and after about the middle of the 6th century it rightly disappears, under the guidance of the Spirit of Truth Who was indeed leading the Church into all Truth – as all faithful Orthodox Christians believe.  

By that same guidance of the Holy Spirit of Truth, speaking in unknown tongues and the interpretation of tongues, though apparently endorsed by St. Paul himself (1 Cor. 14), as well as the office of the traveling prophets, also dissipated and disappeared, probably by about the beginning of the third century.  And also, the early belief, held by many rigorist Christians, that repentance and restoration to the Church were not possible even after deep repentance for those having committed the worst sins – adultery, apostasy, and murder – similarly was overturned by the Church as a whole, by the end of the 4thcentury.

You’re asking our Church to view our Orthodox Faith “through Universalist spectacles.”  When I attempt to do so, I see very serious and potentially disastrous pastoral and intellectual problems.

Really, with the Universalist claim, where is the incentive to take the Last Judgment seriously, if it’s believed that God absolutely will save everyone from hell the moment they finally repent?  And why are the prayers and hymns of our Church, as well as the Book of Psalms, filled to overflowing with calls and entreaties for the Lord to save us and have mercy on us, if He’s going to do that anyway the moment hell gets too hot for us and we finally repent then?

And what about for people who are in deep depression and struggling to resist suicidal thoughts?  If they’ve become convinced that Universalism is true, what would stop them, in a particularly excruciating moment of temptation, to give in to the temptation and take their own life in the expectation that they’ll be able to repent and be saved in the next life?  It seems clear that it’s not without deep pastoral wisdom, based in deep experience with spiritual warfare, that our Church, in order to provide an additional incentive for those dealing with suicidal thoughts to resist them, has traditionally denied a full Christian funeral to those taking their own life. 

In addition, how would it not be deleterious to people’s life in the Church if they get swayed by Hart’s rhetoric into doubting the wisdom and trustworthiness of the great Saints and Church Fathers through the centuries?  People might ask themselves, If the Fathers are wrong on this issue, what else might they be wrong about?  And I wonder, how can people venerate the Saints and Fathers and ask for their prayers with fullness of reverence, esteem, and confidence if they get convinced that the Fathers were wrong on such a crucial issue?

Concerning the Universalist logic itself, granted that it may very well be extremely well-intentioned, compelling, and driven by the highest of motivations, yet it remains another attempt to reduce the mysteries of the Faith to the level of human reasoning.  It’s another example, as we see with every heresy, of the human mind staggering at some aspect of the mystery of our Lord’s inscrutable Being and Providence.  

According to human reasoning and conceptualizing, it might very well be true that knowing that God is Pure, Divine Love is logically incompatiblewith the fact that there may well be rational beings, demons as well as human beings, created by Him yet existing in an eternal state of separation from Him because “men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil” (John 3:19).  Such a scenario may very well not seem to us to be something our All-Loving God could ever allow.  But we can only make such a judgment according to our own very limited definitions and concepts of what God’s love must be like.  

And the very foundations of our Faith are wrapped in logically inconsistent paradox and mystery.  How can Three be One?  How can One be Three?  How can God become man?  How can a man be God?  How can our Lord be completely inaccessible to humans, and yet simultaneously be completely accessible?  How can our salvation depend entirely upon our Lord and His saving work, and also entirely upon ourselves to freely accept that work for ourselves?  How can our Church contain the perfect fullness of Truth, yet consist of members who all fall short of being perfectly filled with Truth?  These are paradoxes, antinomies, mysteries, all of which defy human logic, with which they indeed are entirely inconsistent.

We can also be reminded of the Orthodox understanding of the difference between the apophatic and kataphatic traditions in our Orthodox theology.  As St. Dionysius the Aeropagite says so well, God is Love and yet He is also Not-Love, because His Love is both similar to human concepts of love, yet at the same time His Love is infinitely beyond our human concepts of love.

It’s indeed admirable that Universalists are so concerned to defend and protect the understanding of God as Complete and Total Love.  But in Orthodoxy, we know this already; we’re always saying, “for He is the Good God Who loves mankind.”  I’m reminded of how the erroneous and divisive Filioque clause was added to the Nicene Creed to try to reinforce the full Deity of the Son in the face of continuing Arianism in late 6th century Spain; but the Nicene Creed had already established His full Deity with the use of the word homoousios.  Similarly, the Universalist attempt to reinforce the fullness of God’s Love by removing the possibility of eternal separation from Him leads to divisiveness and confusion, and distrust of the Tradition as a whole.

And in the end, of course, despite all its emphasis on God’s Love, Universalism always boils down not to love, but to power.  As Hart says, “Insofar as we are able freely to will anything at all, therefore, it is precisely because He is making us to do so: as at once the source of all action and intentionality in rational natures and also the transcendental object of rational desire that elicits every act of mind and will towards any purposes whatsoever” (TASBS, p. 183; his emphasis).  Besides, this claim is false because it would make God the ultimate author of every evil intention, decision, and action that’s ever occurred, and we all know that He is not the originator of evil.

Universalism staggers at the idea that any human or demonic will could ever eternally override the will and desire of our All-Powerful God for every demon and every person to repent and be saved from hell.  But that’s part of the mystery – God, in His humble Love, allows this.  He always just knocks at the door of our heart (Rev. 3:20); He never pushes open that door.  It’s this humble dimension of the way God loves that Universalism doesn’t seem to understand.  

In addition, by the logic of Universalism, if it’s morally absurd, if it’s cruel, if indeed it’s evil for God to allow demons and humans to reject His love forever and hence to experience hell forever, then it must have been morally absurd and cruel and evil for Him to have created angels and humans in the first place with the capacity to reject His will for them in anything.  For every time we sin, we reject and override His will for us to live without sin; and every time we sin, we plunge ourselves into a certain kind of hell.  Pressing the logic of Universalism to a logical conclusion, how could a fully loving God allow even one of His creatures to experience any form or degree of hell even for a moment? – for that would be cruel, according to the humanistic logic of Universalism.

But in the end, who would ever think that any 21st century scholar, no matter how intellectually brilliant, is more trustworthy than St. Athanasius the Great, St. Cyril of Jerusalem, St. John Chrysostom, St. Gregory the Theologian, St. Basil the Great, St. Cyril of Alexandria, St. Vincent of Lerins, St. Augustine of Hippo, St. John of Damascus, St. Maximus the Confessor, St. Photius the Great, St. Symeon the New Theologian, St. Gregory Palamas, St. Nicholas Cabasilas, St. Nicodemus the Hagiorite, St. Silouan the Athonite, St. Paisius the Athonite, and countless other saints and elders?  

Is David Bentley Hart really living closer to God than they did?  Is he really more filled with God’s love and truth than they were?  Is it really possible that all those Saints were wrong about Universalism, and that you and David Bentley Hart are correct?  Do you really think the Head of His Church, Jesus Christ Himself, would have allowed His Church to go into error on this crucial point for all these centuries?  Has He really been waiting all this time for the truth to be finally discovered in the early 21stcentury by a handful of intellectuals? – with David Bentley Hart even daring to imply that all these Fathers and Saints were “moral idiots” for not believing in Universalism!

Of course, we’re all free to choose whom to trust, and whom to believe. May we all choose wisely!

St. Tikhon’s Orthodox Seminary

South Canaan, PA

When we say that what God does is incomparably more important than what we humans do, this should not be taken to mean that our salvation is partly God’s work and partly our own—for example that it is sixty per cent the work of God and forty per cent our work; or eighty or ninety percent God’s work and twenty or ten per cent our own. Any attempt to compare in this way the respective contributions of the divine and the human partners, assigning percentages to each, is utterly misguided. Instead of thinking in terms of shares, equally or unequally distributed, we should consider that the work of our salvation is totally and entirely an act of divine grace, and yet in that act of divine grace we humans remain totally and entirely free.

Met. Kallistos Ware
(How Are We Saved?, pp. 38-40)