When the Homily is about Immunology

Saints and Relics and Icons…OH MY!
At least as venerable as my IPA here

Scathing article on Orthodoxy (Part 2)

Obviously tonight’s beverage of choice is an IPA. Specifically it hails from a small brewer in Oregon called Firehouse 5 (I could find no web presence) I’ll be honest, it pales in comparison to the Pyramid, which for my money is the finest India Pale Ale I’ve ever had. If you think you know of one better, I’d bet happy to let you buy me a pint for tasting. But one thing that does strike my fancy about this mediocre ale is a word found upon the bottle label: Venerable.

Frankly this brew, which lacks body and is profoundly hopless for an IPA, will not be receiving my veneration, but many other things will and do – beer not typically among them. (now bourbon or scotch, well…) The author of the essay, which has brought us together tonight, is obviously not terribly fond of the way we Orthodox kiss, bow, and even prostrate ourselves before Holy things.

The author would say “Holy things” are objects that we believe (imagine that…he’s telling us what we believe!) are imbued with “God stuff.” Weird, huh? God stuff? Perhaps this wording is born of a western rational mind trying to grasp Christian (eastern) mystery? You betcha…much of the condescending language almost certainly originates from a western mental filtration system. Heaven knows how the author would understand the Real Presence of the Lord in Eucharist, but typically when I hear memorial meal proponents bitch and moan about us real presence folks they seem to need proof of the “change” such that I should be able to take samples from the communion cup to my lab and extract human-God DNA. Whether there is divine DNA in that which we partake of just isn’t the sort of question we ask, not because it is taboo per se, but rather because it's just stupid. So much like science and science-minded people: western theologians readily see the theologically eqiuvalent genetic makeup of Rosaceae Rosa multiflora, but fail to see the beauty of the Rose (or Icon, Relic, Holy Place, etc…) before them. The author is often “analyzing” Orthodox practice through western eyeglasses…indeed through lenses that “make sense” in modern American culture, but would be utterly incomprehensible to some other cultures (both modern and ancient.)

You know, I will say this about this beer, it would work well for hot summer days - having a bit more bite than most simple pilsners or lagers, but not too much to make it more attuned to evening or cold weather days. YMMV, friend. Okay, well…“Magical Sanctity” is one of those phrases the author invents to describe some aspects of what we do, especially regarding saints, relics, and icons. He makes a host of historical claims centered around that controversial figure Saint Constantine (I can see you are little surprised that I call him saint, and I can hear you saying “but he did this, or he did that.” Well, whatever happened to that whole “judge not, lest you be judged” thingy? How in the world can we feel so comfortable and at ease with “accurately” judging a man whose been dead for 1700 years who we never met? The Church met him. By the way, I have no idea what the author meant when he said Constantine “first tolerated and then established Christianity”? Yes he legalized it, but he did not make it the official Roman Religion…we still had one more pagan emperor to go yet. Okay, anyway, let’s move on.) Touting that tired old protestant line: Constantine paganized the Church, he says we didn’t undertake pilgrimages to Holy Places, venerate much of anything, pray to saints, didn’t care much for relics, and in general I suppose didn’t do anything different from what protestants do today. Well…it’s really not all that clear is it? Is it? History is so funny that way...it's almost like physics: every hisotrian's historical account and accompanying evidence has an equal and oppposite account and accompanying evidence. Keep this in mind.

Now friend, we are just sitting here sharing a fine (or semi-fine) ale, so you’ll excuse me if I don’t have a slideshow, a power point presentation, or a host or references immediately available. We are friends; take my often fallible (but in this case verifiable) word on these things that I’ll be briefly mentioning. First, the Jews have a very rich history of pilgrimages to a number of different Old Testament Holy Sites (not to mention the Temple itself – ever see the Orthodox Jews at the Wailing Wall today? Perhaps they too have apostatized…or maybe such visits – pilgrimages – simply fit naturally into the scope of our mutual religious heritage? ), it doesn’t seem unreasonable to see that mind carried over into Christianity – though certainly it would not be very popularized until being identified as a Christian was no longer a potential inspiration for beating, torture, or even death.

We may also kill two birds with one stone here: where did the pre-Constantinian Church frequently have her Liturgies celebrated? Yes, over the tombs of martyrs (see the symbolism in St. John’s Revelation also – where are the martyrs in heaven? Under the Altar! It widely believed that St. John may have had this recorded vision DURING Liturgy) in the catacombs – where coincidently enough one can also find numerous prayer inscriptions offered to (gasp) Saints! And, if we read about Saint Polycarp’s martyrdom we see a tremendous amount of reverence being give to his body (bones?) which they say they treated “as precious gold.” All of which predates Saint Constantine’s reign.

What of Eucharist? The author says that they didn’t perceive anything “magical” in it. I wish we could discuss this in person, because I really want to know what he means! If we affirm the Real Presence, is THAT magical? If we affirm that you could get sick from it and even die if you partake unworthily, is THAT magical? If we call it the “medicine of immortality and the antidote to prevent us from dying” is THAT magical? What does he mean by magical? I think it’s pretty magical….gloriously and thankfully so.

The author breezes quickly past those particularly strange verses in which “magical” (dare I say?!?!) clothes are sent out by St. Paul and they heal people – was it imbued with God-stuff? Some sort of crazy “magical” sanctity? Or when the bones of Elisha resurrect a man! Or when St. Peter’s shadow apparently “magically” heals people. Or when the Israelites gaze upon a bronze (going by memory here, was it bronze?) serpent and are healed? Or how about when the gospel writer apparently affirms the belief that an angel stirring the pool waters in Jerusalem renders such waters with healing power? And there are many many many more “magical” things in the Bible – even talking donkeys – like in Shrek (I have a hard time reading that portion of the OT and not hearing Eddie Murphy.) Okay, now, please, let us not be afraid of things that appear “magical”, because let’s face it, we serve a magical God in a magical world. And it is wonderful.

All this talk of magic reminds me: A God-Man, somehow remaining FULLY God and yet impossibly (wouldn’t you think?) remaining FULLY man? Is this not magical? What does this tell us about the author’s complaint about losing the distinction between God and man in Orthodox soteriology? Didn't God kinda do that Himself? (Assuming that distinction was "lost", which I don't - which is certainly not to say that I understand it - it is all quite magical!) What does it mean then to “be in Christ?” The author's whole “chain of being” section loses my interest because it lacks any sense of incarnational thinking. What do we do in Baptism? Do not we also “partake of the Divine Nature”? Even in the Eucharist itself? Are we not the IMAGE and LIKENESS of God? Was St. Irenaios, and all the others who say exactly the same thing, wrong in saying that “God became man so that we may become god?” Now really, which belief system is truly “authentic Christianity?”

Ummm…much more to say, but my beer is gone. Image and Likeness, take a moment tomorrow (no doubt today by the time I post this) to look in the mirror…you see before you the very first Icon. Painted not by Saint Luke, but God Himself. Pssss….it pre-dates Constantine.

I’ll be back…why not get a refill?