God’s place in a humanist society (19) [Locul lui Dumnezeu într-o societate umanistă]

I assume that it’s no surprise to any constant reader of this blog that, from a religious point of view, I saw Brighton as being a sort of ‘spiritual flea market’ – all choices available for the weirdest of ‘consumers’ (see here or here).

One such choice is this so-called Religious Society of Friends, a self-proclaimed Christian (?!) movement, whose members are better known as Quakers.

I haven’t personally met any believer, and even if I had done so, I should refrain from judging that person. Which won’t prevent me from dimissing this heresy, made up of a concoction of beliefs as far from Christ’s message as any other ‘man-made’ religions.

Fed up with the disarray and countless moral flaws within the Church of England (CoE), as well as with the brutality of the English Civil War in Oliver Cromwell’s troubled times, these ‘friends’ came up with some simple and appealing ideas.

Humans need no priest between them and the Lord, no ordained and paid clergy, neither an ‘established Church’, the founder of the sect (George Fox) said.

Guided by ‘inner voices’ (Orthodox Holy Fathers give a precise diagnosis reagarding whose voices are these), Fox claimed that, instead of ‘organised religion’, what matters is the ‘inner light’ that believers in Christ can find in themselves.

They may speak on His behalf, however, they surely don’t know Christ, as they don’t revere – like most Protestant denominations – the Mother of God (Theotokos) whose birth we are celebrating today.

There’s no proper understanding of Salvation without understanding the Theotokos’ unique role in God’s plans. No one can be ‘attracted’ to Christ and remain ‘indifferent’ to His Mother.

Anyway, I could’t have anything against these people – only the Lord will judge each of us. At least these ‘friends’ are pacifists (refusing to take arms and swear oaths), their ‘services’ consist of mostly silent meetings, and some of their ancestors were victims of cruel acts perpetrated by other self-entitled Christians.

To the extent they are living by their convictions (although there is no Quaker ‘creed’ at all; there are only some books used for guidance) , they seem to be harmless, unlike many aggressive sects.

What I find worthy of considerations are the troubled times that would determine George Fox to channel his frustrations towards creating this sect.

When Fox began preaching (1647), there had been 581 years since 1066 (Norman Invasion of England), and 593 since the Great Schism. In its death throes today, the CoE was already in a grave condition back then.

The Church of England could have been shredded to pieces – because of the many English Dissenters – had it not been for the Civil War, for Cromwell’s iron grip on power, and for the fact that most of these sects would eventually move (forcibly or by their choice) to the New World.

Not that I’d agree with the harsh methods used against them, but we must acknowledge the fact that, some 350 years ago, English Dissenters could be easily silenced by the state religion.

Today, any dissenter within the CoE would be granted protection by the secular and politically correct state. It often happens that this ‘church’ changes for the sake of the dissenter.

In the meantime, from the outside of this ailing organisation, Anglicans in the UK are steadily being out numbered by Muslims, while all religious people would be soon a minority in a country where irreligiousness is valued positively, and religion is frowned upon.

Social and political turmoil, festering in a swamp of consumerism, make up the ideal habitat of false prophets like George Fox.

Most people today prefer to dive deeper into the mire, using these false prophets as evidence for their “there’s-no-God-but-my-own-will” creed. Few take comfort in the deceitful peace and meanings of sects, which keep mushrooming like in 17 century England.

Even fewer throw themselves into the arms of the Mother of God, knowing what path (the Royal Path of Orthodoxy) to take towards her.

As long as even our Saviour nestled in her arms, that should be the safest place to put one’s soul in these mad times. 
.
[For all the episodes of this series, and all the posts on this blog go to/Pentru toate episoadele din această serie şi toate postările de pe acest blog mergi la: Contents/Cuprins]

God’s place in a humanist society (17) [Locul lui Dumnezeu într-o societate umanistă]

No matter how obsolete concepts like ‘God’ or ‘faith’ appear to be in today’s ultra-secular Britain, political leaders sometimes find themselves compelled to speak about religion.

Beautiful churches (like the one in the picture***) may be emptier and emptier (unless they are Catholic and frequented by Polish or other Eastern European emigrants), yet they are still visible. And what they stand for is also visible.

There are instances – most often created by the media, as religion is of no interest for most Britons – when prefabricated ‘religious hot topics’ are unavoidable for politicians.

Be it an irreligious society like the British one has become for the past decades, members of the ruling class – in a country where the head of state (Monarch) is the formal head of a religious institution (Church of England) – sometimes have to explain themselves.

After hiding his papist leanings while in office – a Catholic Prime Minister (PM) would have been such a heresy in Protestant Britan, wouldn’t it? – Tony Bliar’s (this is no spelling mistake :-) started parading his belief.

He has been quite vigorously speaking in defence of his faith and of religion in general for the past years. However, from an Orhodox Christianity perspective, his twisted understanding of Christianity is utterly irrelevant.

His confession “I have always been more interested in religion than politics” (in his book: A Journey) can hardly do anything else but offer more loads of anti-religion ammunition for hardline British atheists.

Then, the son of Church of Scotland minister, Gordon Clown (no mistake here either :-) also claimed that religion is at the center of his Government. He praised Catholic for “being UK’s conscience” but stopped short of becoming a Catholic. At least until now.

These days David Chameleon (-:) is in charge at Downing Street 10. Even before the last elections, he diplomatically tried to distance himself from the (apparent) religiousness of his predecessors:

“My own faith is there, it's not always the rock that perhaps it should be. I've a sort of fairly classic Church of England faith, a faith that grows hotter and colder by moments.”

That’s quite a confession of faith, yet here are some other chameleonic addings:

“I think that it’s perfectly possible to live a good life without having faith, by which I mean a positive and altruistic life, but I think the teachings of Jesus, just as the teachings of other religions, are a good guide to help us through.”

Help us through what?! Chameleon, Bliar & Clown see religion as a mere instrument, meant to help us trough (even through a political career), and ‘Jesus’ is no more than a character – a teacher as good as the founders of other religions.

“I suppose I sort of started life believing that one’s individual faith was important, but actually the institutions of the church were less important. I do think that organised religion can get things wrong, but the Church of England and the other churches do play a very important role in society,” he adds.

Organised religion can get things wrong, while personal religion not?! I don’t understand. But the fact that I don’t understand doesn’t mean that I blame Chameleon, nor the other two PMs before him, of anything.

This is the way in which self-described religious people in a humanist society understand religion. They happen to be political leaders, and their outlook on life and religion is not worse, nor better than that of most Britons.

It would be pointless to accuse them of knowing nothing about Our Lord Jesus Christ, as long as even the ‘institutions of organised religion’ in the UK (Church of England, Church of Scotland, Catholic Church etc) know so little about Him.

What I find culpable is their chameleonism. They find it necessary to include references to religion in their public discourse, skilfully trying not too seem ‘too religious’ in their effort of proving that they are not altogether religiously indifferent.

From this perspective, Ed Miliband, the current Labour Party leader, appears worthy of praise for his honesty. He puts it bluntly:  “I don’t believe in God personally.”

His subsequent explanation doesn’t water down his atheist stance: “Different people have different religious views in this country. The great thing is that, whether we have faith or not, we are by and large very tolerant of people whatever their view.”

There’s no doubt that Britain is one of the tolerant countries in the world, nevertheless, Ed Milliband seems to forget that during the glorious years of New Labour rule (1997-2010) more and more British Christians complained of being discriminated.

Two other important political leaders of today’s UK claim to be atheists. One is former Foreign minister David Miliband. The other is deputy PM Nick Clegg.

Both have been accused of a ‘lesser insincerity’ – one has already sent and the other considers sending their children to faith schools.

Only fanatical atheists could blame them for making pragmatic choices. Over and over again, studies show that faith schools are the best in Britain, and even Ed Milliband thinks that these institutions do “a fantastic job” in educating children.

The Lord and none else could know what will happen to Britain with such leaders. Blair claimed to have known Him and to have constantly prayed to Him, while Chameleon says (meaning to emphasize the idea of not being like Bliar) that he has “no direct line to God.”

What matters is that, to a great extent, Britain’s elected leaders (+ the Royal Family) are as irreligious as most of the nation. Neither the elite, nor the electorate could steer the other party in another direction.

*** NOTĂ: The pictured church is the Catholic Cathedral of Westminster, London, the first Catholic place of worship built (1895-1903) in England after the English Reformation. The credit for this photo, taken in February 2011, belongs to my reader Mihai Gociu.

[For all the episodes of this series, and all the posts on this blog go to/Pentru toate episoadele din această serie şi toate postările de pe acest blog mergi la: Contents/Cuprins]

A royal irrelevance [O irelevanţă regală]

Is an event about which over two billion people (from all over, even the remotes corners of the world) talk about these days really relevant?

There’s no doubt that a massive hysteria has engulfed the country (a funny approach to it in The Independent) for the past months, but let’s assume this is not necessarily something bad. 

As long as Americans feed on the ‘presidential myth’ (resuscitated by Obamania in 2008), why shouldn’t the Brits have their own ‘royal myth’ revived?

Nevertheless, I dare ask: will this royal wedding boast British national pride, will it help weave back the national fabric torn by decades of multiculturalism? Will it change anything for the better for this nation? 

Is Great Britain’s Monarchy “a public relations stunt for British capitalism,” as the Trotskyists from The Socialist Worker claim?

To what extent is the Royal Family an asset or a burdening liability? Will the royal subjects feel duped when the news of a royal divorce will break? 

Would anyone invoke the cost of the ceremony – tens of millions of pounds, taken from HM Treasury’s (the taxpayers’) coffers, not from Her Majesty’s purse – if the country were to sink deeper into the economic crisis it has endured for the past years?

There’s hardly any doubt that a royal ceremony is an astonishing thing to watch – worth exploiting as a ‘great show’. Yet how relevant it actually is for today’s Britain?

May the Lord – Whose name was often invoked by Anglican wedding ceremony – bless Prince William and his wife Catherine! ...but I’m afraid no blessing ever comes from such ‘great shows’.

Especially if the ‘blessing’ was given by a dying institution (the Church of England) which is so far from truly knowing the Lord Whom the last Orthodox kings of England (before 1066) were serving.

[For all the posts on this blog go to/Pentru toate postările de pe acest blog mergi la: Contents/Cuprins]

[EN] No comment / [RO] Fără comentarii (5) – Sunday of Orthodoxy / Duminica Ortodoxiei

[EN] On the Sunday of Orthodoxy (spent at work – in the 12th day before closing this chapter of my life :-), I am posting other images that are speaking clearer than words. [RO] De Duminica Ortodoxiei (petrecută la muncă – în a 12-a zi înainte de a încheia acest capitol din viaţa mea :-), postez alte imagini care vorbesc mai clar decât cuvintele.
.

[EN] The 1st picture is the ‘bare’ altar of an Anglican church (in Lewes, East Sussex), while the 2nd shows the iconostasis of the Orthodox church in Edinburgh. [RO] În prima imagine este altarul ‘gol’ al unei biserici anglicane (în Lewes, East Sussex), iar a doua arată iconostasul din biserica ortodoxă din Edinburgh.
.

[For all the episodes of this series, and all the posts on this blog go to/Pentru toate episoadele din această serie şi toate postările de pe acest blog mergi la: Contents/Cuprins]

God’s place in a humanist society (12) [Locul lui Dumnezeu într-o societate umanistă]

According to my knowledge, there are parts of Scotland where “I go to church” means “I’m going out for a drink” (because many places of worship have become pubs for the past years), thus it shouldn’t be a great surprise to learn about a church turned into a… grocery store.

This is what happened to the former Westbourne Methodist Church from Bournemouth (Dorset, England), which is now a Tesco Express, part of a giant retail corporation undergoing a controversial expansion in Britain, as well as in several other parts of the world.

The faces of saints are still there, on the original stained glass windows, nevertheless, the interiour of the building is dedicated to other gods (food, sweets, alcohol, cigarettes, lottery tickets etc), this article from The Daily Mail reports.

The former minister of the church was helpless in stopping Tesco taking over Christ, and I bet there are countless fanatical atheists in the UK who are once more thrilled to see the ‘defeat’ of a God Whose mere existence they deny.

On the other hand, here’s what a local interviewed by the reporter says: “I suppose it represents people’s priorities nowadays – the convenience of being able to buy their bread a few miles closer is more important than prayer and religion.”

What else could I add that this is another example of sad truth about the UK? Anyway, if I were to end my article with a fickle beam of hope, I should add that the same Bournemouth is a place where a Romanian Orthodox Church was consecrated in 2007.

A former Church of England church declared ‘redundant’ in 2001 had the chance to be ‘revived’ by an Orthodox community, unlike the Westbourne Methodist Church which was brought back to life only for consumerist purposes.

[For all the episodes of this series, and all the posts on this blog go to/Pentru toate episoadele din această serie şi toate postările de pe acest blog mergi la: Contents/Cuprins]

Ortodoxia în East Sussex (8) [Orthodoxy in East Sussex]

În vremea când mergeam eu în biserica lor (ianuarie – martie 2008), grecii (mulţi ciprioţi) din Brighton strângeau bani pentru un iconostas nou. Aproape după fiecare Sfântă Liturghie era reînnoit acest apel către donatori.

Probabil, mai-marii comunităţii ajunseseră la concluzia că, în locul iconostasului de provizorat (de după preluarea fostului lăcaş anglican, în 1985 – imaginile 2-3 ) s-ar cuveni unul permanent, care să reflecte tradiţia ortodoxă.

Până la urmă, în noiembrie 2008, iconostasul cel nou era gata. Eu n-am mai apucat să-l văd împodobit, dar mărturia fotografică (imaginile 4-6) despre cum arăta o am de la o româncă ce mi-a mai oferit nişte imagini superbe pentru blog.

Nu l-am văzut, nici că o să-l mai văd cândva. Era Ziua Americii – zi cu ghinion ar zice grecii, o naţiune destul de antiamericană?! – a anului 2010, că cineva a pus foc bisericii (prima imagine).

Pe la 14:45 au sosit pompierii şi au stins incendiul, cu nu mai puţin de şase autospeciale. Nimeni nu a fost rănit, dar interiorul bisericii, cu statut de monument istoric potrivit normelor în vigoare în UK, s-a făcut scrum.

Focul nu a cruţat iconostasul mult-visat de comunitate (o imagine grăitoare pe un blog al unei parohii catolice din Brighton şi încă una mai mică), nici o sală care era folosită drept şcoală de limba greacă pentru copii.

Relatările găsite online (aici, aici, aici, aici şi aici) vorbesc de “pagube de mii de lire”, însă sunt şi pierderi nemăsurabile, căci nu ştiu de şi-or mai putea face grecii un iconostas precum cel ars.

Nu ştiu ce s-o mai fi ales de indiciul primit de Sussex Police că, între 14:20 şi 14:35, un Renault Scenic albastru a fost zărit în apropierea bisercii. Or fi prins pe cineva?

.

Poate că am mai aruncat aluzii de-a lungul acestui serial sau prin comentarii, însă nu am scris şi nu voi scrie vreodată în detaliu despre dezbinările şi intrigile întâlnite în parohia greacă din Brighton. Nu se cuvine unui bineprimit oaspete.

Ar fi cam acelaşi tip de rele obiceiuri – părute drept grijulii faţă de cele sfinte, dar neduhovniceşti – care macină Biserica Ortodoxă peste tot în lume. Aş zice doar “să stăm cu frică, să luăm aminte!”

.

Nu o dată, Preasfânta Treime ne dă semne să nu ne îngrijim prea mult de cele exterioare – poate frumoase şi bune, dar nu esenţiale pentru mântuire; cele care se pot face cenuşă într-o clipită, de parcă n-au fost vreodată.

De la vlădică la opincă, prea des uităm de cele nepieritoare la care ne cheamă Hristos, pe care niciun foc nu ni le-ar lua. Şi ne irosim viaţa istovindu-ne pentru celelalte, trecătoarele.

[Pentru toate episoadele din această serie şi toate postările de pe acest blog mergi la/For all the episodes of this series, and all the posts on this blog go to: Contents/Cuprins]

The slow but certain death of Anglicanism [Moartea lentă, dar sigură a anglicanismului]

At the current rate of declining Sunday service attendance, the Church of England (CoE) is very unlikely to survive more than 30 years from now. Congregations will shrink and become extinct one by one, while church closures would accelerate to some 200 every year.

Donations can’t keep up with church closures, as the 16,200 buildings the CoE has to preserve are an incredible burden. There are not enough Anglicans left to keep Anglicanism alive. And there’s no sign that such people would ever be born.

As I wrote here, the decline in baptisms is even more worrying, since this ‘indicator’ refers to people, not to the fate of some beautiful but empty buildings. While the CoE had baptised 609 children of every 1,000 born in 1900, it baptised only 128 in 2006/2007.

This is how the disastrous state of the CoE can be described mathematically. Some 60-70% of the Anglicans in Britain have lost (or fought against!) even the formal liasons to their ‘church’, that is using its services for baptisms, weddings and funerals.

Nominal Catholics and Orthodox believers may still hold on to this appearance. And while it may not make of them better human beings, nor automatically assure their place in Heaven, maybe this appearance is somehow useful for the cohesiveness of the respective societies.

Undoubtedly, the spiritual explanation is that this so-called church has first lost touch with Christ before beginning to lose believers. Irrespective of how many good people were/are/will be among the Anglicans, this CoE is just an institution, not part of the One Church of Christ.

Like sharks circling around a sinking ship, the Catholics are invinting disaffected Anglicans to join what they claim is the ‘true’ church of Christ. Sadly, some will accept the offer, without ever knowing which is the Lord’s One Holy, Catholic, Apostolic Church.

Maybe that some will eventually come to the Orthodox Church, and let this slow death of Anglicanism be a lesson for all of us! Hardly anyone could consider today’s Anglicans guilty for a centuries old heresy which is beginning to show its most gruesome results today.

I say that assuming 30 years more to live for the CoE is hyperoptimistic, given the advance of atheism in the UK! But can anyone offer any guarantees that a similar process is not affecting also the true Church of Christ?

Obviously, the Church Itself won’t perish, but more and more souls will be lost, in a world where people don’t have at least this formal – thrice in a lifetime: birth, wedding, death – connection with Christ.

[For all the posts on this blog go to/Pentru toate postările de pe acest blog mergi la: Contents/Cuprins]

Are there ‘Christian values’ left in the UK? [Mai sunt ‘valori creştine’ rămase în UK?]

The former (that’s another typically British weirdness, isn’t it?) Archbishop of Canterbury, Lord Carey, believes that unless the immigration of non-Christians is capped, Britain “is going to be in deep trouble and this is going to foster social unrest.”

Like a whole bunch of other ‘wisemen’ in this country, Lord Carey is obsessed with the ‘danger’ of the UK having a population of 70 million by 2029. That’s at least as scary as carbon dioxide, isn’t it?

It is not only the sheer number of people what troubles the Lord’s sleep, but the prospect of them not understanding the Christian heritage (which some try to revive) of Britain. Here’s what he says:

“What I think we must call for is an understanding on the part of those who come into our country that they are coming into one which values parliamentary democracy, which is built upon our Christian heritage.”

A former ‘chief bishop’ of the Church of England (as the British Monarch remains this institution’s ‘head’) doesn’t even bother to think that foreigners should share the ‘Christian values’ of Britain, but a mere ‘heritage’.

Well, maybe not even the heritage itself matters as much as the parlimentary democracy – the idol born out of the Anglican heresy, as well as from a myriad of other heresies, of attempts to find a meaning of life, stepping astray of Christ’s only way.

Lord Carey may be full of good intentions, yet I can’t help noticing his hypocrisy, albeit rather typical of the Perfidious Albion. Why should immigrants try to understand a heritage which most contemporary Brits don’t want to know about?

Are there any Christian values left in the UK? Yes, they are – buried six feet under the ground, in graveyards, or cast in the stones of countless barren Christian monuments, which seem meaningless to passers-by.

They walk past restaurated churches or abbeys in ruins like Egyptian bedouins drive their camels near the Pyramids. Today’s inhabitants of the UK have nothing in common with the wacky people who erected those uselessly beautiful constructions.

Fewer and fewer Britons know anything not only about the Lord, but also the their once-so-precious parliamentary democracy. Fewer and fewer even care about this Christian heritage which is not worth treasuring.

Why would anyone cherish such a burdening heritage? Most Christian values – be them so disfigured by Protestant heresies – stand against the ‘(non)values’ bred by the parliamentary democracy, and against what most Brits find comfortable.

Christ’s Kingdom stands against the disintegration of traditional (normal!!!) families, and the promotion of ‘alternative’ ones, against mindless partying, widespread promiscuity, celebrity culture turned into surrogate religion for many, hedonistic shopping, abortionist impulses…

Ripped from the Body of the Church (long before separating from Rome) what became the Church of England and the Church of Scotland (+ a few others) gave birth to a British version of humanism, a new religion allowing everyone to make gods of themselves.

The supreme value of humanism is not the man, as it claims; it’s the “I do what I please”, the right to decide about everything, be it in an ordered (parliamentary) manner. Having become hoplessly anthropocentric for the past centuries, the Brits feel compelled to decide on His behalf.

Like any other civilised and irreligious nations, Britons can’t put their Maker in the center of their lives. Few things would be as absurd in their view as giving up their pride. They see themselves entitled to be in complete control of their lives.

Sadly, this is a suicidal path, which led to losing all control. From the waste of public money to divorces, abortions, poor performance of pupils, binge drinking, obesity – everything appears to be spiraling out of control in the UK.

Sadder still it’s the way one of the best tools of humanism (parliamentary democracy) has been used to relativize everything, to decide when human life starts, what marriage is, what countries should be bombed, and so forth...

There’s still plenty of common sense, wit, decency, and civility left among the Brits. Yet there’s growing ignorance about Who Jesus Christ is, and about the British democratic system. Today’s Brits don’t know where they come from, nor where they are going to.

Christ and His One Church are the only chance for all people, including the irreligious Brits. Parliamentary democracy could have been a good instrument for social surgery, to cure the ills of Britain. But no successful operations can be performed by those ignorant of their Maker.

[For all the posts on this blog go to/Pentru toate postările de pe acest blog mergi la: Contents/Cuprins]

Ortodoxia în Scoţia (7) [Orthodoxy in Scotland]

Primul lucru pe care l-am aflat despre Ortodoxia scoţiană, cu puţin înainte de a lua parte la prima Sfânta Liturghie, avea să aibă legătură cu…

....monstrul din Loch Ness – un personaj de care începusem un pic să fiu sătul, deşi eram doar în a patra mea zi pe tărâm scoţian.

Aşa cum, dintr-un capăt în altul al României, dai peste obiecte cu Dracula în orice prăvălioare cu suveniruri, şi în Scoţia nu lipseşte un astfel de ‘pseudo-simbol naţional’ (nu ştiu cum să-i zic exact).

Nu ştiu ce preţ or pune scoţienii pe un asemenea simbol, dar pesemne că turiştii sunt atraşi de monstrul acesta a cărui înfricoşătoare reputaţie are cu mult peste cei 75 de ani, de când a devenit un mit al secolului 20.

Mi se păreau deja obositoare povestioarele acestea un pic isterice, când primul prieten de aceeaşi credinţă pe care mi l-a adus Dumnezeu în Scoţia mi-a arătat ceea ce se pomeneşte a fi fost locul izvorul Sfântului Columba.

Acest loc care aminteşte de Sf. Columba se află la Invermoriston, aproape de Fort Augustus – localitate cu mai puţin de 650 de locuitori, unde se află o capelă ortodoxă, deşi se mai ţin Liturghii, din când în când, şi în alte locuri din Scottish Highlands.

.

Mica aşezare (cu nume oarecum pompos, care îţi creează aşteptări, nu?) purta odinioară numele Kilchumein, adică ‘chilia lui Cumein’, (scris şi Chumein sau Cumeine – vezi ultima imagine), un Sfânt ucenic al Sf. Columba.

După toate balivernele hiperbolizate de o lume flămândă de poveşti uşor de servit turiştilor – iar scoţienii sunt buni să vândă altfel de istorioare (vezi aici sau aici) – în sfârşit, am auzit o relatare credibilă.

Evident, n-ar fi credibilă pentru cei gata să creadă orice trăznaie (chipurile, dovedită ştiinţific!), dar să refuze Adevărul. Mie mi-a fost destul să ştiu că, până acum vreo 1,500 de ani, o fioroasă creatură acvatică îi teroriza într-adevăr pe locuitorii acestor meleaguri.

Balaurul avea să le dea pace oamenilor numai după ce Sf. Columba (venit din Irlanda şi pusnicind o vreme în insula Iona, din vestul Scoţiei) l-a supus, nu prin vreo luptă spectaculoasă, ci prin numele Mântuitorului nostru Iisus Hristos.

Tradiţia despre viaţa sfântului spune că, în timpul uneia din călătoriile misionare ale Sf. Columba a avut trebuinţă să traverseze Loch Ness, dar chiar când a ajuns pe malurile sale a întâlnit nişte oameni care îl îngropau pe un confrate de-al lor ucis de balaur.

.

Relatările potrivit cărora monstrul l-a înecat pe cel ucis (şi nici cadavrul nu i s-ar mai fi găsit, dacă oamenii care acum îl duceau la groapă nu ar fi încercat să-l salveze), nu l-au descurajat pe Sf. Columba. Şi nici pe ucenicul său, Lugbe, care a primit o ascultare pe care mulţi ar fi şovăit să o îndeplinească.

Sfântul i-a spus să traversere râul înotând şi să aducă o barcă de pe celălalt mal. “Nebunie curată”, şi-or fi zis cei care îşi plângeau prietenul mort, dar Lugbe nu s-a descurajat nici când balaurul s-a apropiat de el, gata să-l înghită.

De pe mal, Sf. Columba a ridicat mâna, imperturbabil. Făcând semnul Sfintei Cruci, i-a poruncit, în numele Domnului şi Dumnezeului său Iisus Hristos, să se întoarcă în adâncuri fără să-l tulbure pe Lugbe.

Creatura s-a supus, lucru ce i-a cuprins de uimire pe localnicii din neamul picţilor care îi mai văzuseră pe mulţi de-ai lor răpuşi de monstru. Graţie acestei minuni, Sf. Columba nu a avut prea mult de trudit, pentru a-L face cunoscut pe Dumnezeul Cel Adevărat prin Scottish Highlands.

La 14-15 veacuri de atunci, o bună parte din veniturile celor care locuiesc pe malurile Loch Ness depind în bună măsură de câte paie se pun pe vâlvătaia iscată de brand-ul Nessie – numele comercial dat creaturii din adâncuri.

.

Ca afacere, nu pot să zic că nu este simpatică. Oare numai atât să reţină urmaşii picţilor şi scoţilor – groaza strămoşilor lor, dar nu şi bucuria venirii din întuneric la Lumină?

Poate sunt prea sensibil, dar eu zic că este trist să vezi cum această Nessie nu a mai reţinut decât un ciot de mit, din care Sf. Columba (pe care l-am remarcat tot ca brand pe ici pe colo) lipseşte. Tot atâta legătură mai are Nessie cu Sf. Columba, cât Santa Claus cu Sf. Nicolae…

Cam tot la acelaşi nivel tinde să se reducă legătura dintre Church of Scotland şi Church of England cu Iisus Hristos, în numele Căruia pretind că mai vorbesc.

.

El nu este mai mult decât un personaj (încă pozitiv, dar nu pentru toţi britanicii aflaţi în plin proces de decreştinare!) sau concept (într-o ciorbă de concepte politic corecte).

M-am bucurat să văd că ortodocşii de pe aceste meleaguri încearcă încă să reînnoade legătura cu Sfinţii care au adus creştinismul în Scoţia şi că am putut (cât mi-a permis vocea mea măgărească) să cânt şi eu troparul Sf. Cumein, chiar de ziua lui.

[Pentru toate episoadele din această serie şi toate postările de pe acest blog mergi la/For all the episodes of this series, and all the posts on this blog go to: Contents/Cuprins]

God’s place in a humanist society (6) [Locul lui Dumnezeu într-o societate umanistă]

Here’s an interesting observation that I made during my wonderful stay in the UK, when my wallet was filled up with British pounds, not with bills of the Romanian Leu.

This 10 pound banknote (anyone interested – click here for a larger image) illustrates how torn apart today’s irreligious (and once Christian) Britain has become.

It’s a country with such a fascinating history, built up on Christian values which it stubbornly rejects these days – and this time it’s not I, the unworthy blogger, making such a remark this time, but an Anglican Bishop!

On the recto – (shown in an outdated image, as it is so common for monarchs, isn’t it?) the Queen who, among many titles, bears the one of Defender of the Faith, whilst she is also the formal head (Supreme Governor) of the Church of England…

On the verso – (someone who looks like) a grumpy old man, the forefather of the gods of our times (scientists, researchers, experts etc about whom I wrote before), the one whose theory is now an idol throughout the self-proclaimed civilised (?!) world…

The ‘defender’ and the ‘breaker’ of the faith on the same bill! Is it mere coincidence that they meet on a banknote? By no means, I tend to believe…

…especially if we were to take into consideration a Romanian proverb (I’m looking forward for anyone suggesting a British equivalent!) stating that money is the devil’s eye.

[For all the episodes of this series, and all the posts on this blog go to/Pentru toate episoadele din această serie şi toate postările de pe acest blog mergi la: Contents/Cuprins]